|
|
Identity of wife [11 March 2018]
Source:Mayflower Descendant, p. 14:89, Memorandum 1659, "I William Collyare have given to my soninlaw Daniell Cole all my right and title..." Even if his mother was a Collier, that would not explain soninlaw. Source:NEHGR, p. 102:50 (1948), gives wife of Daniel Cole as Ruth Chester, but notes that Josiah Paine identifies her as Ruth Collier with no further discussion either way. Source:NEHGR, p. 162:215 (2008), identifies Ruth (Cole) Young as the daughter of Daniel and Ruth (Collier) Cole.
I see zero sources either on this page or on Ruth Chester's page. In fact, the only concrete fact given on Ruth's page is the death as wife of Daniel Cole. How is it known, or suspected, other than unsupported assertions, that Daniel Cole's wife was Ruth Chester? The alternate name of Ruth Collier that used to be on Ruth's page was removed. Was there any evidence to explain why that seemed correct?
--Jrich 12:13, 31 December 2011 (EST)
- Source:Cole, David Charles. Cole Family in America (1633-2003), p. 34, comments:
- "While Curtis, Austin [Note:volume 6 on Stephen Hopkins, only in third edition], and others have come to accept that Daniel's wife was Ruth Chester, no original document has been found referring to her as Ruth Chester before her marriage and the name does not appear in any of the records of Plymouth Colony.
- "The cause of much of the confusion and the convention of ascribing her to the Chester family is Gustave Paine's work "Daniel Cole and Ruth Chester". (39) It is a poorly referenced series of notes, not carefully researched. Regrettably, Austin and others now use it as a source without confirming Paine's claim of a Chester family connection. Other researchers who respect Austin and his work have now begun to accept "Ruth Chester". It is a careless and undocumented conclusion."
- Note: this work also rejects Ruth Collier on the grounds that William Collier is not known to have a daughter Ruth [presumably referring to Source:TAG, p. 49:215 and p. 51:58, although Ruth's age at death calculates to a birth about 1-2 years after the last baptism, and it is not in conflict, perhaps just not found, as are some of the children whose existence is only known by burial records], and offers three possibilities to explain the soninlaw reference:
- that it was a different Daniel Cole referred as soninlaw [i.e., Person:Daniel Cole (12), but he was a grandson, not a soninlaw, and only about age 9 at the time, this seems unlikely]
- if being brother to a daughter makes you a son, then being brother-in-law to a daughter makes you a son-in-law [Daniel's brother Job married William's daughter Rebecca]
- that having been an apprentice of William Collier's, it merely signified a close relationship, perhaps even a guardianship from England
- This work also rejects Ruth Chandler, who appears to be Edmond Chandler's youngest child, hence born after 1638 and too young to marry about 1643, and who is referred to as "Ruth Chaundler" in her father's will of 1662. --Jrich 13:53, 31 December 2011 (EST)
What is the source for the 1659 bequest from William Collier to son-in-law Daniel Cole?
William died without will; his estate was administered in 1671. Source: Anderson's profile of William Collier (membership required)
Anderson lists no 1659 deed or reference to a son-in-law Daniel Cole.
On 29 Oct 1671 "the court ordered that 'Daniel Cole' was to have all such particulars out of the estate of 'William Collyare' that are extant" (Anderson, GMB 1, p 447, citing PCR 5:80).
No relationship is named.
Thanks.
Jillaine 12:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
As cited, the item came from Source:Mayflower Descendant, p. 14:89. It is part of a series of deed abstracts called "Plymouth Colony Deeds". You can view it here. --Jrich 15:41, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
- recorded p. 29 of 1659 --Jrich 16:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jrich! Well, that IS very interesting. He clearly calls him son-in-law. What do we do with THAT? Jillaine 22:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
|
|
