Family talk:Joseph White and Lucy Unknown (2)

basis for estimate? [1 October 2014]

The cited source gives no estimated marriage, and in 1757 Joseph would not be of legal age. Further his first child is born in 1764, so "Bef 1764" might be better, being a "not wrong" estimate.

Apparently Joseph White is not a descendant of John White, as he is ironically not numbered, and is covered by Almira White only because his son married Elizabeth Ward, who appears to be a descendant. This merely a way to say, perhaps the normally reliable Almira White did not do such a good job here. Lucy's death is found in Phillipston VRs on 22 Jan 1816, not 1815, and the published records note that church records give her age at death as 75, not 82. A scan of the birth records show no other couple having a wife named Lucy, so there is no reason to think the death record of widow Lucy White in 1816 is anybody other than Joseph's widow. This puts her birth about 1741, not 1733, further supporting the idea that a marriage in 1757 is too early. The difference between a birth about 1733 versus about 1741 would be critical when attempting to identify Lucy. The church records are not online to verify, but the vital records are: bottom line, left page and it says 1816. Maybe the 1815 was copied from the line above?

Here a link to a tidbit about the reward for Joseph White. --Jrich 00:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to enter your corrections to Ms. Alimira and the other info - but since I am in the middle of actively editing these pages, please just give me 24hrs or so to get the rest of the family members in, so that we don't simultaneously edit and lose work. I am taking a little break from my usual folks and simply doing some source entry and linking while I happen to have these sources in front of me. My guesstimate on the marriage date was just that (husband's birthyear plus 20) to get the family page temporarily into the time/place ballpark until a better date came along (like yours). I usually put "guesstimate" or something of the sort in the description field. I must have missed that one.

I wonder if the family ever did collect their reward? These types of human interest stories that give some depth to these pages are great. It's good to be reminded that these people were more than just their list of dates and places. Thanks for sharing the link. --Cos1776 01:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Estimating marriage at age 25 is probably a better rule for men. They couldn't own land until 21, so it was the exception to marry before that. Happened of course, but the majority did not. Women were of legal age at 18, and 20 works better for them. --Jrich 04:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)