Person talk:Thomas Shaw (2)

Not son of Abraham [23 June 2009]

There is no reason to believe this Thomas is a son of Family:Abraham Shaw and Bridget Best (1).

Source:Savage, James. A Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England, p. 4:66 says: "SHAW, Thomas, Charlestown, perhaps had w[ife] Mary, adm[itted] of the ch. July 1645; had John, b. 4 Mar. 1648, whose bapt. would fail to be found in the ch. rec. hav. large gap aft. 1642; rem. 1656 to New London, and in 1658 was of Stonington, made freem. 1666, in the town list of 1669 call. sen. wh[ich] permits us to suppose he had s. of the name. The governm. of Conn. in 1675 gr[anted] to his w[ife] a hundr. acres, so that we may presume he was late[ly] d[eceased]." Nothing said here connects Thomas with Abraham Shaw, or even makes it appear they were ever in the same location at the same time.

No son Thomas is listed amongst the baptisms in Halifax, Yorkshire, England where Abraham lived (see NEHGR, p. 48:346), and his birth in 1622 barely fits in a gap between documented children Grace and Martha (and the birth clearly could not be in Charlestown since first mention in New England according to Savage appears to be 1645, and Abraham Shaw did not immigrate until about 1636 if he is a son of Abraham). No Thomas is mentioned in Abraham's will of 1638 (see NEHGR, p. 2:180).

I have remove Thomas from this family. --Jrich 10:02, 23 June 2009 (EDT)