|
|
Parentage of Abraham Shaw [29 October 2023]
I'm far too new to werelate.org to want to actually edit anybody's page, but those interested in Abraham Shaw might want to look at M. L. Bierbrier's "The Origin of Abraham Shaw of Dedham," a three-page article in The American Genealogist 57, 1981, pages 85-87, which looks to me like a convincing disproof of the idea, first put forth by H. Minot Pitman in NEHGR in 1952, that this Abraham Shaw was the illegitimate son of Abraham Dobson and Jenet Shaw. Bierbrier supplies an alternate parentage which seems a lot more plausible for a man who appears to have been a landowner, albeit a small-time one.
The ASG's journal The Genealogist evidently published, in the 1990s, a much more substantial two-part article about Abraham Shaw's English origins. I've ordered a print copy of it, since it doesn't seem to be online. From the sites I can find that refer to it, it appears that The Genealogist's writer built on Bierbrier's account rather than Pitman's.--Pnh 17:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The Bierbrier article presents a good case that there is another candidate, but the connection to the emigrant is not really made by Bierbrier. His statement "The illegitmate Abraham Shaw must be a different man" is based on nothing that I can see, except that he has found a different candidate that lets him run away from an illegitimate birth? Does the transcript err in calling the deceased sister Sarah, when it might have been Susan, since how does Sarah have a sister Sarah? [Addendum: Bierbrier does provide a transcript showing Sarah's will bequeathing to a sister Sarah. Meanwhile the Genealogist article provides a brief abstract showing her bequeathing a sister Susanna. Presumably a typo by Bierbrier.] Or vice versa. Note that Pitman raised an issue with Abraham's alleged daughter Susanna too, that may have some bearing on this. I also note no children named Thomas or Elizabeth. The Genealogist article will be interesting, hope you can abstract any evidence it might have. --Jrich 22:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I updated the page to reflect the 1981 research, for the reasons outlined in the notes I made on the source. As for Abraham and Bridget not naming any children Thomas or Elizabeth as might be expected, I note that their children's names might reflect the religious sensibilities of the time. Thomas and Elizabeth are biblical names, but don't evoke the same sentiments as Mary, Martha, Grace, Joseph and John.--DataAnalyst 15:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for updating this. The Genealogist article wasn't available on americanancestors.org in 2015 and this is a good addition.
- I put the discredited source back, as it is still a source people will find, and I feel it is better to leave with a notation that it is discredited than to erase it. Further added text on the sale by Abraham and Bridget in 1635 as this is the proof, without which, as convincing as this is, it would only be circumstantial.
- Discussion may belong elsewhere, so briefly stated here: dislike separate notes discussing source or its interpretation, as two items must be jointly maintained (appears as one item when displayed but maintenance is done in edit mode where it is presented as two items). Prefer to add the discussion in the source box to keep the related information all in one place. I think the display is largely the same but less likely to be confusing to subsequent editor. Hope you don't find this annoying.
- It appears Abraham's childrens' names are mostly based on his siblings and half-siblings. --Jrich 18:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
|
|
