|
|
Family tree▼ Facts and Events
| Marriage[1][2] |
Bef 1691 |
Based on birth of eldest known child |
Children
References
- ↑ Jackson, Francis. A history of the early settlement of Newton, county of Middlesex, Massachusetts, from 1639 to 1800: with a genealogical register of its inhabitants, prior to 1800. (Boston, Massachusetts: Stacy and Richardson, 1854)
p. 393.
Thomas Prentice, s/o Thomas and Rebecca, m. Elizaheth ---, and had John March 1691; Rebecca 22 Dec 1693; Thomas; Ebenezer 1706. He d. 11 Dec 1724.
- ↑ There are two Thomas and Elizabeth Prentices in Newtown: 1) Family:Thomas Prentice and Elizabeth Unknown (1) and 2) Family:Thomas Prentice and Elizabeth Jackson (1). The town records show births for both with no distinguishing identification to tell which couple the records apply to. In particular, Deliverance b. 19 May 1704, Ebenezer b. 1706, Ebenezer 3 Mar 1707 or 1708. None of these children are mentioned in the probate of father #2. The probate of father #1 mentions youngest son Ebenezer but does not have a list of all his children.
Traditionally, secondary literature has assigned Deliverance and Eben #2 to couple #2, leaving Eben #1 for couple #1. However, the lack of evidence and various other considerations suggests that both records for Ebenezer refer to the same person and both Deliverance and Ebenezer may belong to couple #1.
Those considerations are:
-We know from probate and deed that couple #1 had a son Ebenezer, but there is no evidence couple #2 did.
-The 1706 birth records is in the Newton town copy "with additions", meaning it was added by a committee in 1851, which means it was probably based on Jackson's History of Newton, a secondary source of perhaps less than optimum reliability.
-An Ebenezer born in 1706 wouldn't have needed a guardian in 1727/28 when the accounting was exhibited in court, but an Ebenezer born 3 Mar 1707/08 would have.
-Ebenezer born in 1707 or 1708 is too close to births of other children of couple #2.
-There are no death records for either Ebenezer or Deliverance.
-There is a large gap between Ebenezer in 1706 or 1708 and the previous known child, born sometime in 1690's, and Deliverance would fall into the gap easily. The fact that the Ebenezer of couple #1 is born after her clearly indicates that it is feasible that Deliverance is theirs as well.
Deliverance has been left with couple #2, even though it is thought she might belong to couple #1 because there is no evidence tying her to either couple, so placing her with couple #2 would be pure speculation. However, Ebenezer has only been placed with couple #1, using the birthdate normally associated with couple #2 because no evidence of any other Ebenezer than the son of couple #1 has been found.
- Part of the evidence that Ebenezer belongs in this family are deeds with brother John where they are identified as heirs of Thomas Prentice, i.e., Vol. 27, p. 322 and Vol. 28, p. 138. Both deeds are signed by the two brothers and also Elizabeth Prentice, identified as their mother. Interestingly, no brother Thomas participates. This suggests two possible errors in Binney, p. 251, namely that there was a brother Thomas in this family (the birth record in Newton was added by 1851 Committee and was not an authentic birth record), and that Ebenezer married an Elizabeth. If these two assertions were true, one might expect the deeds to include Thomas and perhaps Ebenezer's wife, which they don't. Indeed a hasty reading could have mistaken the participation of Ebenezer's mother Elizabeth as a wife. Since the original basis for these assertions is unknown, and no evidence has yet presented itself to support them, it seems possible they are incorrect?
|
|
