DOCSLIB.ORG

Land Sales in Nipmuc Country.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Land Sales in Nipmuc Country.Pdf Land Sales in Nipmuc Country, 1643-1724 Compiled by Jenny Hale Pulsipher for John Wompas Digital Archive, 2018. This is not a comprehensive listing. It represents information encountered in the course of my research on Swindler Sachem. Sachem involved (if noted in deed) Consent of elders or traditional land owners mentioned Woman involved Massachusetts Bay Colony (MBC) government actions Date and Land Description Seller Buyer Signed (S), Witnessed (W), Price Source Acknowledged (A), ConFirmed (C), Recorded (R) 1643 Nashacowam Thomas King £12 No [Nashoonan, existing MBC General Court grants Shawanon, Sholan] deed; liberty to establish a township, Connole, named Lancaster, 18 May 142 1653; Thomas Noyes hired by town to lay out bounds. 8 Oct. 1644 Webomscom [We Gov. John S: Nodowahunt [uncle of We Sundry goods, Connole, Bucksham, chief Winthrop Bucksham], Itaguatiis, Alhumpis with additional 143-145 10 miles round about the hills sachem of Tantiusques, [Allumps, alias Hyems and James], payments on 20 where the black lead mine is with consent of all the Sagamore Moas, all “sachems of Jan. 1644/45 located Indians at Tantiusques] Quinnebaug,” Cassacinamon the (10 belts of and Nodowahunt “governor and Chief Councelor wampampeeg, among the Pequots.” many blankets and coats of W: Sundanch, Day, King, Smith trucking cloth and sundry A: 11 Nov. 1644 by WeBucksham other goods); 16 and Washcomos (son of Nov. 1658 (10 WeBucksham) to John Winthrop Jr. yards trucking 1 cloth); 1 March C: 20 Jan. 1644/45 by Washcomos 1658/59 to Amos Richardson, agent for John Winthrop Jr. (JWJr); 16 Nov. 1658 by Washcomos to JWJr.; 1 March 1658/59 by Washcomos to JWJr 22 May 1650 Connole, 149; MD, MBC General Court grants 7:194- 3200 acres in the vicinity of 195; MCR, LaKe Quinsigamond to Thomas 4:2:111- Dudley, esq of Boston and 112 Increase Nowell of Charleston [see 6 May and 28 July 1657, 18 April 1664, 9 June 1665]. 6 May 1657 MD, 3:69- 70 MBC General Court empowers a committee to lay out to his heirs the land granted to Increase Nowell in May 1650, provided they pay £10 to the treasurer of the colony [see 22 May 1650, 6 May, 18 April 1664, 9 June 1665]. 6 May 1657 MCR, 4, part MBC General Court confirms a 1:227, 296 grant to John Alcocke of 842 acres of upland and meadow, plus 200 acres, so long as it hinders no former grant. 28 July 1657 Peter, Josias Hoddin, John Alcocke of W: Sam Hooker, Tho Holland Divers causes SD, 3:144 and Solomon, residents Roxbury and 1042 acres in the vicinity of of Indian town of Whip A: before Humphrey Atherton 28 considerations 2 Lake Quinsigamond “formerly Sufferage, in the name July 1657 granted by the General Court of Annamucke Nasqua and Confirmed by the General [squa ending suggests R: 3 May 1658 Court May 1657" this person might be female] and other residents of town of Whip Sufferage [Marlboro] 12 Nov. 1659 MCR, 4, part 1:397 MBC General Court grants 500 acres to Mr. John Norton as a reward for his writing a tract in opposition to QuaKers [see 20 Sept. 1670]. 31 May 1660 Connole, 146 MBC General Court grants six miles square for an English plantation at Quabaug [Brookfield] [see 10 Nov. 1665]. 16 Oct. 1660 Connole, 146 MBC General Court grants 8 miles square of land for an English plantation fifteen miles from Medfield bordering to the east on Nipmug Great Pond [see 20 April 1662]. 20 April 1662 Annawassanauk alias Moses Paine and S: Anaussanuk (mark), Divers good and SD 6:288, John, and Peter Brackett of Qushaammitt (mark), Namsconont valuable 9:57 Tract of land 8 miles square, Quashaamnitt alias Braintree, for the (mark), Great John (mark) considerations, fifteen miles from Medfield, William of Blue Hills, use of town of especially £24 bounded to the east by a small Great John Mendham W: John Elliot Sr, John Elliot Jr, 3 river about 3 miles east of Namsconont alias [assigned to Daniel Weld Sr Nipmug Great Pond Peter, and town 12 May [Mendham]. Upannbohqueen alias 1670] A: before Samuell Symonds 12 May Jacob of Natick 1670 18 April 1664 Parnell Nowell, widow Nath. Treada[cut “valuable MD, 3:69- and Exectrx to Increase off], Jno. Haynes, consideration” 70 Parcel of 3080 acres on east Nowell Jos. Haynes side of southern end of Lake Quinsigamond, 2 small islands near lake’s outlet, 20 acres of meadow, totalling 3200 acres [see 22 May 1650, 6 May 1657] 19 Oct. 1664 MCR, 4, part 2:139 MA General Court grants 250 acres to Thomas Noyes [see 23 May 1666]. 9 June 1665 Abigganosh alias John Haynes, S: Abiganosh alias Quoquanquisitt “For a valluable MD, Quoquanquansitt alias Josiah Haynes, alias Jno. Sagamore, Natoqus alias consideration in 7:194-195 Purchase of the Native right to John Sagamore Thomas Noyes of Daniel, Winamkissemim, hand unto us the 3200 acres of land granted [Sagamore John of Sudbury, Animatohu alias Jethro payd by John by the MBC General Court to Pakachoog), Natoqus Nathaniel Haynes” etc. Increase Nowell in 1650. Deed alias Daniel, Tredaway of W: Thomas Plympton, John Ffoy, is to protect purchasers from Winamkissenim, Watertown Wm Taylor “any incombermt, trouble Animatohu alias Jethro molestatton of us or any under of Natick A: Abiganosh and Winnakisenim us, or any other Indians laying before Daniel Gookin at his house any just claime thereto” [see 22 July 1665; Natoqus alias Daniel 22 May 1650] acknowledged same 22 July 1685 R: Thomas Danforth, 9. 11. 1679 10 Nov. 1665 Shattoockquis alias Ensign Thomas S: Shattoockquis, Mettawomppe 300 fathoms Connole, Shadookis of Quabaug, Cooper of wampum 146 6 miles square at Quabaug “Wekabaug Chieftan,” Springfield, in W: several Englishmen 4 [Brookfield] [see 31 May 1660] “sole and proper behalf of town owner." Mettawomppe received portion of price 23 May 1666 MCR, 4, part 2:307 Thomas Noyes reports to the MBC General Court that he has laid out the 250-acre grant given to him in the year 1664 “neere a place called by the Indians Quansigamong Pond, lying & being southerly of Lancaster bounds, & north westerly of the said Quansigamong Pond, nere adjoyning to the lands formerly laid out to Tho Noyes, John Heines, & others, begining neere the north end & head of the said pond” [see 19 Oct. 1664]. 26 June 1668 Josiah Wampatuck and Thomas Joy and S: Josuah Wampatuck, George Deed of gift, SD, 5:463- George Wampe of Josiah Hobart Wampe "for great good 64 Three and a half miles square Mattakecis Indian will and respect, lying between two rivers in plantation, with W: wootisoe enquin, mathias to loving friends Nipmuck country, called consent of Andrew “a wampe, Joseph Baster, Wm Pearse Thomas Joy and Tohkecommumwackuck, Indian knowne by that scri: Josiah Hubart of "excepting unto ourselves the English name, & Hingham, and Indians there inhabiting 100 Pawmhoset another A: before Richard Bellingham many curtesies acres of upland on the hill or Indian cheife men of given" old planting Ground by the the place herein R: at request of Samuel Joy 27 June Indians called Tohke-com- mentioned” 1668 mum-wackake” 5 20 Oct. 1668 MCR, 4, part MBC General Court approves 2:408-409 plantation 19 miles west of Marlboro near Quansigamond Pond, appoints committee (Daniel GooKin, Thomas Prentice, Daniel Henchman, Lt. Richard Beers) to "carry on Quansiggamond" [Worcester] [see 13 July 1674, 6 Feb. 1677/78]. 20 Sept. 1670 Mary Noyes of Ephraim Curtis of S: Mary Noyes and a seal £45 MD, 4:72- Sudbury, relict widow Sudbury, Planter 74 Two parcels of land, each and executrix of W: Andrew Belcher, Sr., [Andrew?] containing 250 acres more or Thomas Noyes of same Belcher less, one being “the grant of place the honored Generall Court” A: before Thomas Danforth 21 Sept. to Thomas Noyes, “lying & 1670 being in the Wilderness, neere unto a place called R: 21 Sept 1670 by Thomas Quansigamong pond." The Danforth other parcell is the grant of the General Court to Rev. Jon Norton "and is lying on the west side of the above named pond" [see 19 Oct. 1664, 23 May 1666, and 12 Nov. 1659]. 20 Nov. 1671 John Wampus of Thomas Stedman S: John Wampus [I, mark of 3 dots, Deed of gift for SD, 8:421 Boston ... Indian and of New London W] “great affection 100 acres of upland and Seaman in Colony of and love which I meadow, being part of 14 Connecticut W: Edmund Jaxson, Wm Lytherland, have and bear miles square “appertaining John Ferneside unto my well unto me” “as my proper right beloved friend” and inheritance" [inserted: "or A: by John Wampus June 9, 1764 and also divers 6 one third part thereof"]. [1674] before Edward Tyng, asst causes and Located between Marlborough considerations and Mendon, plus ten acres of R: by FreeGrace Bendall: 12 June meadow within 1 mile of 100 1674 acres of upland, to be next adjoyning to farm Wampus intends to reserve for himself 13 July 1674 John alias Daniel Gookin of S: Solomon alias Wooannaskchu, £12 to be paid MD, Honnawannonit or Cambridge and John alias Hoannawamut within three 8:317-318 Quansigamog Plantation Quiquonassitt Daniel months of deed, [Worcester] near Sagamore of Henchman of W: Onnamog sagamore of plus 2 coats and Quansigamond Pond, on each Pakachoge, & Solomon Boston, brewer, Occonomessett, Namphow 4 yds of tradiing side of the road leading alias Woonaskochatt in behalf of sagamore of Wamesett, Joseph cloth valued at towards Connecticut [see 20 Sagamore of Tataossit, themselves, and Thatcher of Chabanakoncoie, 26 shillings Oct. 1668] “together with the Maj.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wininger Family History
    WININGER FAMILY HISTORY Descendants of David Wininger (born 1768) and Martha (Potter) Wininger of Scott County, Virginia BY ROBERT CASEY AND HAROLD CASEY 2003 WININGER FAMILY HISTORY Second Edition Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 87-71662 International Standard Book Number: 0-9619051-0-7 First Edition (Shelton, Pace and Wininger Families): Copyright - 2003 by Robert Brooks Casey. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be duplicated or reproduced in any manner without written permission of the authors. This book may be reproduced in single quantities for research purposes, however, no part of this book may be included in a published book or in a published periodical without written permission of the authors. Published in the United States by: Genealogical Information Systems, Inc. 4705 Eby Lane, Austin, TX 78731 Additional copies can be ordered from: Robert B. Casey 4705 Eby Lane Austin, TX 78731 WININGER FAMILY HISTORY 6-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................6-1-6-8 Early Wininger Families ............6-9-6-10 Andrew Wininger (31) ............6-10 - 6-11 David Wininger (32) .............6-11 - 6-20 Catherine (Wininger) Haynes (32.1) ..........6-21 James S. Haynes (32.1.1) ............6-21 - 6-24 David W. Haynes (32.1.2) ...........6-24 - 6-32 Lucinda (Haynes) Wininger (32.1.3).........6-32 - 6-39 John Haynes (32.1.4) .............6-39 - 6-42 Elizabeth (Haynes) Davidson (32.1.5) ........6-42 - 6-52 Samuel W. Haynes (32.1.7) ...........6-52 - 6-53 Mary (Haynes) Smith (32.1.8) ..........6-53 - 6-56 Elijah Jasper Wininger (32.2) ...........6-57 Samuel G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exchange of Body Parts in the Pequot War
    meanes to "A knitt them togeather": The Exchange of Body Parts in the Pequot War Andrew Lipman was IN the early seventeenth century, when New England still very new, Indians and colonists exchanged many things: furs, beads, pots, cloth, scalps, hands, and heads. The first exchanges of body parts a came during the 1637 Pequot War, punitive campaign fought by English colonists and their native allies against the Pequot people. the war and other native Throughout Mohegans, Narragansetts, peoples one gave parts of slain Pequots to their English partners. At point deliv so eries of trophies were frequent that colonists stopped keeping track of to individual parts, referring instead the "still many Pequods' heads and Most accounts of the war hands" that "came almost daily." secondary as only mention trophies in passing, seeing them just another grisly were aspect of this notoriously violent conflict.1 But these incidents a in at the Andrew Lipman is graduate student the History Department were at a University of Pennsylvania. Earlier versions of this article presented graduate student conference at the McNeil Center for Early American Studies in October 2005 and the annual conference of the South Central Society for Eighteenth-Century comments Studies in February 2006. For their and encouragement, the author thanks James H. Merrell, David Murray, Daniel K. Richter, Peter Silver, Robert Blair St. sets George, and Michael Zuckerman, along with both of conference participants and two the anonymous readers for the William and Mary Quarterly. 1 to John Winthrop, The History ofNew England from 1630 1649, ed. James 1: Savage (1825; repr., New York, 1972), 237 ("still many Pequods' heads"); John Mason, A Brief History of the Pequot War: Especially Of the memorable Taking of their Fort atMistick in Connecticut In 1637 (Boston, 1736), 17 ("came almost daily").
    [Show full text]
  • Gookin's History of the Christian Indians
    AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE DOINGS AND SUFFERINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN INDIANS IN NEW ENGLAND, IN THE YEARS 1675, 1676, 1677 IMPARTIALLY DRAWN BY ONE WELL ACQUAINTED WITH THAT AFFAIR, A ND PRESENTED UNTO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE CORPORATION RESIDING IN LONDON, APPOINTED BY THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY FOR PROMOTING THE GOSPEL AMONG THE INDIANS IN AMERICA. PRELIMINARY NOTICE. IN preparing the following brief sketch of the principal incidents in the life of the author of “The History of the Christian Indians,” the Publishing Committee have consulted the original authorities cited by the -American biographical writers, and such other sources of information as were known to them, for the purpose of insuring greater accuracy; but the account is almost wholly confined to the period of his residence in New England, and is necessarily given in the most concise manner. They trust, that more ample justice will yet be done to his memory by the biographer and the historian. DANIEL GOOKIN was born in England, about A. D. 1612. As he is termed “a Kentish soldier” by one of his contemporaries, who was himself from the County of Kent, 1 it has been inferred, with good reason, that Gookin was a native of that county. In what year he emigrated to America, does not clearly appear; but he is supposed to have first settled in the southern colony of Virginia, from whence he removed to New England. Cotton Mather, in his memoir of Thompson, a nonconformist divine of Virginia, has the following quaint allusion to our author “A constellation of great converts there Shone round him, and his heavenly glory were.
    [Show full text]
  • (King Philip's War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial
    Connecticut Unscathed: Victory in The Great Narragansett War (King Philip’s War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Major Jason W. Warren, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: John F. Guilmartin Jr., Advisor Alan Gallay, Kristen Gremillion Peter Mansoor, Geoffrey Parker Copyright by Jason W. Warren 2011 Abstract King Philip’s War (1675-1676) was one of the bloodiest per capita in American history. Although hostile native groups damaged much of New England, Connecticut emerged unscathed from the conflict. Connecticut’s role has been obscured by historians’ focus on the disasters in the other colonies as well as a misplaced emphasis on “King Philip,” a chief sachem of the Wampanoag groups. Although Philip formed the initial hostile coalition and served as an important leader, he was later overshadowed by other sachems of stronger native groups such as the Narragansetts. Viewing the conflict through the lens of a ‘Great Narragansett War’ brings Connecticut’s role more clearly into focus, and indeed enables a more accurate narrative for the conflict. Connecticut achieved success where other colonies failed by establishing a policy of moderation towards the native groups living within its borders. This relationship set the stage for successful military operations. Local native groups, whether allied or neutral did not assist hostile Indians, denying them the critical intelligence necessary to coordinate attacks on Connecticut towns. The English colonists convinced allied Mohegan, Pequot, and Western Niantic warriors to support their military operations, giving Connecticut forces a decisive advantage in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from Foxwoods Visualizing the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Learning from Foxwoods Visualizing the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation bill anthes Since the passage in 1988 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which recognized the authority of Native American tribal groups to operate gaming facilities free from state and federal oversight and taxation, gam- bling has emerged as a major industry in Indian Country. Casinos offer poverty-stricken reservation communities confined to meager slices of marginal land unprecedented economic self-sufficiency and political power.1 As of 2004, 226 of 562 federally recognized tribal groups were in the gaming business, generating a total of $16.7 billion in gross annual revenues.2 During the past two decades the proceeds from tribally owned bingo halls, casinos, and the ancillary infrastructure of a new, reserva- tion-based tourist industry have underwritten educational programs, language and cultural revitalization, social services, and not a few suc- cessful Native land claims. However, while these have been boom years in many ways for some Native groups, these same two decades have also seen, on a global scale, the obliteration of trade and political barriers and the creation of frictionless markets and a geographically dispersed labor force, as the flattening forces of the marketplace have steadily eroded the authority of the nation as traditionally conceived. As many recent commentators have noted, deterritorialization and disorganization are endemic to late capitalism.3 These conditions have implications for Native cultures. Plains Cree artist, critic, and curator Gerald McMaster has asked, “As aboriginal people struggle to reclaim land and to hold onto their present land, do their cultural identities remain stable? When aboriginal government becomes a reality, how will the local cultural identities act as centers for nomadic subjects?”4 Foxwoods Casino, a vast and highly profitable gam- ing, resort, and entertainment complex on the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation in southwestern Connecticut, might serve as a test case for McMaster’s question.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm01251790-1863.Pdf (10.24Mb)
    u ^- ^ " ±i t I c Hon. JONATHAN E. FIELD, President. 1. —George Dwight. IJ. — K. M. Mason. 1. — Francis Briwiej'. ll.-S. .1. Beal. 2.— George A. Shaw. .12 — Israel W. Andrews. 2.—Thomas Wright. 12.-J. C. Allen. 3. — W. F. Johnson. i'i. — Mellen Chamberlain 3.—H. P. Wakefield. 13.—Nathan Crocker. i.—J. E. Crane. J 4.—Thomas Rice, .Ir. 4.—G. H. Gilbert. 14.—F. M. Johnson. 5.—J. H. Mitchell. 15.—William L. Slade. 5. —Hartley Williams. 15—H. M. Richards. 6.—J. C. Tucker. 16. —Asher Joslin. 6.—M. B. Whitney. 16.—Hosea Crane. " 7. —Benjamin Dean. 17.— Albert Nichols. 7.—E. O. Haven. 17.—Otis Gary. 8.—William D. Swan. 18.—Peter Harvey. 8.—William R. Hill. 18.—George Whitney. 9.—.]. I. Baker. 19.—Hen^^' Carter. 9.—R. H. Libby. 19.—Robert Crawford. ]0.—E. F. Jeiiki*. 10.-—Joseph Breck. 20. —Samuel A. Brown. .JOHN MORIS?5KV, Sevii^aiU-ut-Anns. S. N. GIFFORU, aerk. Wigatorn gaHei-y ^ P=l F ISSu/faT-fii Lit Coiranoittoralllj of llitss3t|ttsttts. MANUAL FOR THE USE OF THE G-ENERAL COURT: CONTAINING THE RULES AND ORDERS OF THE TWO BRANCHES, TOGETHER WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH, AND THAT OF THE UNITED STATES, A LIST OF THE EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT, STATE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR OFFICERS, COUNTY OFFICERS, AND OTHER STATISTICAL INFORMATION. Prepared, pursuant to Orders of the Legislature, BY S. N. GIFFORD and WM. S. ROBINSON. BOSTON: \yRIGHT & POTTER, STATE PRINTERS, No. 4 Spring Lane. 1863. CTommonbtaltfj of iBnssacf)useits.
    [Show full text]
  • William Bradford Makes His First Substantial
    Ed The Pequot Conspirator White William Bradford makes his first substantial ref- erence to the Pequots in his account of the 1628 Plymouth Plantation, in which he discusses the flourishing of the “wampumpeag” (wam- pum) trade: [S]trange it was to see the great alteration it made in a few years among the Indians themselves; for all the Indians of these parts and the Massachusetts had none or very little of it, but the sachems and some special persons that wore a little of it for ornament. Only it was made and kept among the Narragansetts and Pequots, which grew rich and potent by it, and these people were poor and beggarly and had no use of it. Neither did the English of this Plantation or any other in the land, till now that they had knowledge of it from the Dutch, so much as know what it was, much less that it was a com- modity of that worth and value.1 Reading these words, it might seem that Bradford’s understanding of Native Americans has broadened since his earlier accounts of “bar- barians . readier to fill their sides full of arrows than otherwise.”2 Could his 1620 view of them as undifferentiated, arrow-hurtling sav- ages have been superseded by one that allowed for the economically complex diversity of commodity-producing traders? If we take Brad- ford at his word, the answer is no. For “Indians”—the “poor and beg- garly” creatures Bradford has consistently described—remain present in this description but are now joined by a different type of being who have been granted proper names, are “rich and potent” compared to “Indians,” and are perhaps superior to the English in mastering the American Literature, Volume 81, Number 3, September 2009 DOI 10.1215/00029831-2009-022 © 2009 by Duke University Press Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/american-literature/article-pdf/81/3/439/392273/AL081-03-01WhiteFpp.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 440 American Literature economic lay of the land.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legacies of King Philip's War in the Massachusetts Bay Colony
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1987 The legacies of King Philip's War in the Massachusetts Bay Colony Michael J. Puglisi College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Puglisi, Michael J., "The legacies of King Philip's War in the Massachusetts Bay Colony" (1987). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539623769. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-f5eh-p644 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. For example: • Manuscript pages may have indistinct print. In such cases, the best available copy has been filmed. • Manuscripts may not always be complete. In such cases, a note will indicate that it is not possible to obtain missing pages. • Copyrighted material may have been removed from the manuscript. In such cases, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, and charts) are photographed by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is also filmed as one exposure and is available, for an additional charge, as a standard 35mm slide or as a 17”x 23” black and white photographic print.
    [Show full text]
  • The Narragansett Planters 49
    1933.] The Narragansett Planters 49 THE NARRAGANSETT PLANTERS BY WILLIAM DAVIS MILLER HE history and the tradition of the "Narra- T gansett Planters," that unusual group of stock and dairy farmers of southern Rhode Island, lie scattered throughout the documents and records of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and in the subse- quent state and county histories and in family genealo- gies, the brevity and inadequacy of the first being supplemented by the glowing details of the latter, in which imaginative effort and the exaggerative pride of family, it is to be feared, often guided the hand of the chronicler. Edward Channing may be considered as the only historian to have made a separate study of this community, and it is unfortunate that his monograph. The Narragansett Planters,^ A Study in Causes, can be accepted as but an introduction to the subject. It is interesting to note that Channing, believing as had so many others, that the unusual social and economic life of the Planters had been lived more in the minds of their descendants than in reality, intended by his monograph to expose the supposed myth and to demolish the fact that they had "existed in any real sense. "^ Although he came to scoff, he remained to acknowledge their existence, and to concede, albeit with certain reservations, that the * * Narragansett Society was unlike that of the rest of New England." 'Piiblinhed as Number Three of the Fourth Scries in the John» Hopkini Umtertitj/ Studies 111 Hittirieal and Political Science, Baltimore, 1886. "' l-Mward Channing^—came to me annoiincinn that he intended to demolish the fiction thiit they I'xistecl in any real Bense or that the Btnte uf society in soiithpni Rhode Inland iliiTcrpd much from that in other parts of New EnRland.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Magazine of HISTORY and BIOGRAPHY
    THE Pennsylvania Magazine OF HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY Governor John Blackwell: His Life in England and Ireland OHN BLACKWELL is best known to American readers as an early governor of Pennsylvania, the most recent account of his J governorship having been published in this Magazine in 1950. Little, however, has been written about his services to the Common- wealth government, first as one of Oliver Cromwell's trusted cavalry officers and, subsequently, as his Treasurer at War, a position of considerable importance and responsibility.1 John Blackwell was born in 1624,2 the eldest son of John Black- well, Sr., who exercised considerable influence on his son's upbringing and activities. John Blackwell, Sr., Grocer to King Charles I, was a wealthy London merchant who lived in the City and had a country house at Mortlake, on the outskirts of London.3 In 1640, when the 1 Nicholas B. Wainwright, "Governor John Blackwell," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (PMHB), LXXIV (1950), 457-472.I am indebted to Professor Wallace Notestein for advice and suggestions. 2 John Blackwell, Jr., was born Mar. 8, 1624. Miscellanea Heraldica et Genealogica, New Series, I (London, 1874), 177. 3 John Blackwell, Sr., was born at Watford, Herts., Aug. 25, 1594. He married his first wife Juliana (Gillian) in 1621; she died in 1640, and was buried at St. Thomas the Apostle, London, having borne him ten children. On Mar. 9, 1642, he married Martha Smithsby, by whom he had eight children. Ibid.y 177-178. For Blackwell arms, see J. Foster, ed., Grantees 121 122, W.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic History of the American Revolution?
    A (New) Economic History of the American Revolution? emma rothschild HEY were “merchants, lawyers, planters and preachers,” T Bernard Bailyn wrote of the individuals whose “ideas, be- liefs, fears and aspirations” are the subject of The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution.Theywere“heavilyen- gaged in their regular occupations”; they were individuals with economic lives.1 But their ideas and fears were not, for the most part, economic ideas, and Ideological Origins is—at first sight—an assertively uneconomic inquiry. Only at first sight. To look again, I would like to suggest, is to see that Ideological Origins can be the opportunity for a new sort of economic history of the American Revolution, or at least for a new history of economic life, in which life is taken to include ideas as well as interests. When Bailyn’s The New England Merchants in the Seventeenth Century was published in 1955, it was described in the Journal of Economic History as “good old-fashioned economic history”; an inquiry into “who the merchants were and how their interests and ideas grew,” with “provocative sidelights” on “politics and culture.”2 In Ideological Origins, after fifty years, there is the prospect of a new-fashioned economic history, of ideas, interests, and expectations. 1Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution, fiftieth an- niversary edition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017) v, xxi, xxiv, 13–14 (hereafter cited as Ideological Origins). 2Robert A. East, “New England Merchants in the Seventeenth Century,” Journal of Economic History 16 (1956): 74–76. The New England Quarterly, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • 1813 Charles E. Wiggin. 1888
    •^ •i * w ia I tMH^H'r* a 1 |K 1 m M­ m Hi i m ft ' - ¦ i 1* **n J J 3^ Z2*. (A - g ji 0 w v O z « U. 2 Q >• § 2 2 g I <O * miId I = n­n- o^ **5 M=i *k= \ m&: &&¦& i8i3 Charles E. Wiggin • ¦ ' - . iio or r < >. / C---£t .-a. \ ZV \ ' :.U:.U- 1888 /ivvlcj rt^l^ .^^l^v-fe-: « .°o°. mI £#^&Ml^lfe?i&v-^i^^fe;,;¦:¦/ o^lV ¦ N* GBO. F. CROOK PRINTER MUSIC HALL BOSTON >So^ 1 Biograpf)B BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION memorial is published by the family THISof Charles E. Wiggin, to show their love and respect for him who has left us. Itis designed for those who esteemed and appreciated one who was never happier than when engaged in some labor of love for his friends or for the unfortunate. Charles Edward Wiggin was born No­ vember 29, 1813, in a part of Newmarket, New Hampshire, then known as the New Fields, which has since been separated into a town called South Newmarket. He came to Boston August 31, 1828, when he was nearly fifteen years old. His first home after marriage (1840) was at 70 Prince Street; but after a few years he removed to the house on Sheafe Street, now numbered fifteen ;and there the family resided till the summer of 1876, when they removed to 9 Woodville Square, Roxbury, where Mr. Wiggin died. 6 He was the fifth of seven children, and was the last survivor of them all. There were two sisters: Deborah Barker, who married Daniel Rundlett Smith, of the same town ; and Ann Martin, who never married.
    [Show full text]