Person:Samuel Tidd (2)

Watchers
m. 14 Apr 1650
  1. Hannah Tidd1652 - 1735/36
  2. John Tidd1654/55 - 1743
  3. Mary Tidd1656 - 1732
  4. Samuel Tidd1658/59 - 1699
  5. Joseph Tidd1660/61 - 1660/61
  6. Joseph Tidd1661/62 - 1730
  7. Rebecca TiddAbt 1665 - 1750
  8. Daniel TiddAbt 1668 - 1696
Facts and Events
Name[2] Samuel Tidd
Gender Male
Birth[1] 16 Jan 1658/59 Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States
Death[2][3][4] 9 May 1699 Lexington, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States
References
  1. Johnson, Edward F. Woburn Records of Births, Deaths, and Marriages . (Woburn, Massachusetts: Andrews, Cutler & Co., 1890-1919)
    1:259.

    Tidd, Samuel, s. of John, Jan. 16, 1659.
    [p. 1:7 says years are given as modern equivalents, so we should expect this to be 16 Jan 1658/59.]

  2. 2.0 2.1 Hudson, Charles, and Lexington Historical Society (Massachusetts). History of the town of Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, from its first settlement to 1868. (Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Houghton Mifflin, 1913)
    697.

    Samuel Tidd, s/o John Tidd and Rebecca Wood, b. 16 Jan 1658-9, d. 9 May 1699. Heirs were brothers John and Joseph; sisters Hannah wife of Joseph Smith, Mary wife of Joseph Simonds, and Rebecca wife of Thomas Blodgett; two children of deceased brother Daniel.

  3. Brown, Francis H. Lexington epitaphs : a copy of epitaphs in the old burying-grounds of Lexington, Massachusetts. (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Historical Society, 1989)
    157.

    HERE LYES ye BODY OF
    SAMUEL TEED AGED
    11 [sic, see note ] year DIED May 9
    1699.

  4. Some people show the death date as 9 May 1690. It is presumed they were confused by Hudson's comment, "He was in the ill-fated expedition to Canada in 1690". It does not say he was killed in the expedition, only that he was in it. The gravestone inscription as reported by Brown appears to have the age wrong, it should say 41. Unfortunately the Find A Grave photo does not allow us to read the tombstone to verify this. Hudson seems to cite this very gravestone in reporting the date as 9 May 1699, so he must have read it differently than Brown. Additionally, since Hudson mentions probate documents, it is presumed that he had adequate confirmation that this death date actually belonged to this Samuel before reporting it. For example, the list of heirs mentions Daniel as deceased, an event that occurred 29 Nov 1696.