
9249. unknown (F)
"MOORE, or MORE, ...(9249i_d[1]) JOHN, Sudbury, 1643, perhaps he who came in the "Planter", 1635, aged 24, from London, may have been of ar. co. 1638, by w. (9249i_d) Elizabeth had Mary; [[vol. 3, p. 229]] Lydia, b. 24 June 1643; Jacob, 28 Apr. 1645; perhaps Joseph; and Elizabeth; m. sec. w. Nov. 1654, Ann, d. of John Smith. Mary m. 8 Sept. 1661, Richard Ward; and Lydia m. 1664, Samuel Wright."
-- James Savage, "A Genealogical Dictionary of The First Settlers of New England, Before 1692" c/o http://www.usgennet.org/usa/topic/newengland/savage/
"TARNE, TERNEY, or TARNEY, ...(9249iii[1][2]) MILES, Boston 1638, leather-dresser, had w. Sarah, wh. join our ch. 14 Apr. 1639; but he was not rem. bef. 8 Oct. 1642, and freem. 10 May foll. Of ch. I kn. only Hannah, b. Oct. 1638, bapt, 21 Apr. foll. nam. in the will of Thomas Oliver, Mar. 1652, with beq. of L5; and Deliverance, bapt. 19 Sept. 1641, eight days old, when the town rec. says she was b. 30 of that mo. but that Sarah wh. m. 7 Sept. 1654, Edward Bobbet of Taunton, must have been older, perhaps brot. from Eng. He had 2d w. in Oct. 1668, (9249iii[1]) Elizabeth wh. had been wid. Rice, as I infer from deed of mortg. to trust. of the first ch. by Michael (wh. is the same as Miles) T. and Elizabeth his w. and (9249i_a) Joshua Rice, their s."
-- James Savage, op. cit.
"RICE, ...(9249iii[1][2]) JOSHUA, Boston 1663, shoemaker, s. of Robert, by w. Bathshua, had Joshua, b. 3 May 1664. "
-- James Savage, op. cit.
"RICE, ...(9249iii) ROBERT, Boston, spelled Roys, Rois, and Royce, in dif. rec. freem. 1 Apr. 1634, had prob. come 1631, as he is No. 137 on the list of ch. mem. by w. (9249iii[1]) Elizabeth had (9249iii_a) Joshua, b. 14, bapt. 16 Apr. 1637; (9249iii_b) Nathaniel, bapt. 24 Mar. tho. town rec. says b. 1 Apr. 1639; and (9249iii_c) Patience, b. 1 Apr. 1642, bur. next week; Nathaniel d. young. His wid. m. I presume, (9249iii[1][2]) Michael Tarne, for they call. Joshua R. their s. when in 1668 the three unit. to mortg. est. Perhaps there were both Rice and Roise. See Roise."
-- James Savage, op. cit.
"Twice in the 20th century nationally recognized research genealogists have attempted to determine the parents and ancestors of Edmund Rice. Mary Lovering Holman described the negative result of her search for records in the parishes near Stanstead and Sudbury, Suffolk County, England in "English Notes on Edmund Rice … ", The American Genealogist, Volume 10 (1933/34), pp. 133 - 137. Mrs. Holman is considered by many to be one of the best research genealogists in the 20th century. In 1997 the Edmund Rice (1638) Association commissioned Dr. Joanna Martin, a nationally recognized research genealogist who lives in England only a few miles from Stanstead and Sudbury to search again for records of Edmund Rice's parents. Dr. Martin reported in 1999 that she found no record that identified Edmund's parents or ancestral line...
"From Mrs. Holman's paper we have an excellent record of one Henry Rice's marriage to Elizabeth Frost in November 1605 at Stanstead. Mrs. Holman also documents the baptism of Edmund's first child on 23 August 1619 at Stanstead...
"Until someone can cite such a record, the association must state emphatically that Edmund Rice's parents and ancestry are not known and that Edmund Rice's descendants can not claim royal ancestry."
-- 23 Aug. 2007 http://www.edmund-rice.org/ancestor.htm
"The New England Rices belong predominantly to two large families. The Edmund Rice family (Group 1) is the larger of the two and also has the most members in our project of any group. The other is the Robert Royce family (Group 3 -- STEVENS LINE). These two families have been, and still are, frequently confused, since the name variants "Rice" and "Royce" appear widely in both families. However, the two are genetically distinct and have no common genealogy."
-- http://www.edmund-rice.org/haplotype.htm
Edmund's haplogroup and haplotype is as follows. Others with this haplogroup and 12-marker haplotype match are descended from Wiltshire and Norway, so this Rice line could very well be Norman; but it also might be Danish. It is probably not Anglo-Saxon. Of Professor Ken Nordtvedt's modal haplotypes, Edmund's most closely resemble I1a Norse (differing by two repeats), having its greatest gradient in Sweden. It is least like I1a Anglo-Saxon (differing by five repeats). According to the ancestry.com classification, Edmund's DNA is closest to ## 44 & 48 (Norse Viking, Norman or Danish) and farthest from ##47 & 50 (Danish, Norse Viking, Anglo-Saxon or Flemish).
|
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
GATA |
YCA |
YCA |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
DYS |
CDY |
CDY |
DYS |
DYS |
||||
|
(4626) Edmund Rice b. 1594 Stanstead, Suffolk, England d. 1654) Hg I1a* ySearch ID# H4BBT SRC: Edmund Rice Association http://www.edmund-rice.org/haplotype.htm |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13 |
23 |
14 |
10 |
14 |
14 |
11 |
14 |
11 |
12 |
11 |
28 |
15 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
11 |
23 |
16 |
18 |
28 |
12 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
10 |
11 |
19 |
21 |
14 |
14 |
17 |
20 |
38 |
39 |
12 |
10 |
||||

"WHALE, ...(9251ii[1]) PHILEMON, Sudbury 1646, freem. 10 May 1648, m. 7 Nov. 1649, Sarah Cakebread, d. of Thomas, wh. d. 28 Dec. 1656; and he m. 9 Nov. foll. Elizabeth Griffin, perhaps d. of Hugh; but whether he had issue by either w. is unkn. and he d. 21 Feb. 1676."
-- James Savage, op. cit.
"FROST, ...(9251iii) WILLIAM, Fairfield, came from Nottingham, Eng. says Lechford in 'Plain Dealing,' a. 1646. His will, of 6 Jan. in that yr. print. in Trumbull's Col. Rec. I. 465, names s. Daniel, and Abraham; ds. Elizabeth w. of John Grey, Mary Riley, and Lydia, w. of Henry Grey, and her ch. Mary, and Jacob; speaks of his est. in Eng. wh. he devis. to M. Riley, and her ch. and of sev. gr.ch. Frosts and Greys."
-- James Savage, op. cit.

"Anne Scott may have come from the village of Bradfield St. George, about 10 miles northeast of Glemsford, though documented proof of her origin is lacking. Apparently they chose to be married at Hartest, about midway between.. We have not located any wills for this generation."
-- BarbPretz@sbeglobal.net http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=barbpretz&id=I1050



"(37003) Richard Scott probably was born in Glemsford, where he lived and died. Reference [John Brooks] Threlfall's book "Fifty Great Migration Colonists...", [(1992) Heritage Books p. 102]. However, the dates and statements are very confusing- It is said that Richard married a second time, after his first wife's death, but since his first wife was buried Aug 23, 1556, I find it a little odd that he would marry a second wife (also named Joan) on Oct 8, 1556. In his will, supposedly dated two days after his burial, he calls himself a clothier, and asks to be buried in the churchyard at Glemsford. He leaves 40s. to "wife's son Andrew Jeames", which is the basis for saying that he married a second time. I dunno- he may have married only once, a widow..."
-- Linda smit8698@bellsouth.net c/o http://worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=linda50&id=I3792


|
"Name: John Strutt
Place: Suffolk Date: 1538-1544 Volume: 8 Page: 91 Bundle: 988" |     |
Name: Thomas Strutt
Place: Cambridge Date: 1515-1518 Volume: 5 Page: 103 Bundle: 418" |

"(74004) Richard Scott was named executor of his father's will, so he probably was of age then. He inherited lands in Glemsford, Boxsted, Cavendish, Somerton, and Hawkeden, all parishes near
Glemsford. He apparently settled on the Boxsted property, for that is where he lived when he made his will, in which he bequeathed his house and lands in Boxsted and Somerton. There is no burial record for him in the Boxsted parish register, nor in Glemsford. Said lands, and house in Boxsted were left to his eldest son (74004ii) Thomas, and the will provided that Thomas pay various amounts to the other children. There was no mention of a wife in the will. Proved May 6, 1560."
-- Linda smit8698@bellsouth.net c/o http://worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=linda50&id=I3791
= siblings