|
|
Facts and Events
References
- ↑ Arthaud, John Bradley and Ernest Hyde Helliwell III, "The Peter2 Luvey Family of Essex County, Massachusetts, Maine, and Vermont", in The New England Historical and Genealogical Register. (Boston: New England Historic Genealogical Society)
Vol. 154 (Oct 2000), pp. 387-412.
Love Parsons was b. about Mar 1861, d. 28 May 1709, Gloucester, Essex, Massachusetts. Married Peter Lurvey 16 April 1702 at Ipswich. May have been a relative of Phillip Parsons (ref: Dietrich, "Philip Parsons of Enfield, CT")
Note: does not give source for date of birth. It appears to be the date of birth Phillip Parsons
- ↑ Deaths, in Gloucester, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records of Gloucester, Massachusetts, to the End of the Year 1849. (Salem, Massachusetts.: Essex Institute, 1917)
p. 205.
LURVEY (Lervy, Louvy, Lurvy)
Love, May 28, 1709
- Deitrich, Harriet Hall, "Philip Parsons of Enfield, Conn., Grandson of Walter2 Fairfield of Denham, Mass.", in The American Genealogist (TAG). (Donald Lines Jacobus, et.al.)
Vol 66:4 (Oct 1991), pp. 193-196.
p. 196 - Philip and Anna Parsons (of Enfield, Connecticut) named their first daughter Love -- "perhaps Philip was related to the Love Parsons who married at Ipswich, Mass., 19 March 1701/2, Peter Lurvey."
- ↑ Love's origins are unknown. She is often listed as being a daughter of Jeffery and Sarah (Vinson) Parsons, of Gloucester, but there is no evidence to support such a conclusion. Reported dates for her birth range from 1676 through 1686, without explanation; her place of birth is usually reported as Gloucester, again without explanation.
What is known is that she married in 1702, in Ipswich. Given her marriage date, a reasonable time span for her date of birth would be between about 1672 (making her age 20 at date of marriage) and 1687 (making her about 15 at date of marriage). She was most likely living in Ipswich at the time of her marriage, raising serious questions about Gloucester as her place of birth.
Dietrach (see sources) suggests that she is related somehow to a Philip Parsons, born illegitimately and not recorded in vital records. The connection is tenuous but possible, and at the very least points to illegitimacy as a possible explanation for the lack of records.
|
|
