Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
In answer to Tim McCarthy's note, I would like to point out that the daughter Sarah Bemis (assuming she was still living in 1694) would hardly have been a "young maiden" at that time -- she was born in 1643! Her relative poverty would certainly not have been a barrier to marriage with John Bigelow, but that's not really the issue here. The fact is that John's will refers to all the property, both land and movable estate, that had belonged to his wife before their marriage. The only way for the daughter Sarah Bemis to have that kind of property would have been to (A) inherit it from someone other than her father or (B) marry into money and then be widowed in time to marry John Bigelow. Case (B) would imply that her name wasn't "Bemis" anymore and raises the following questions: since there is no record of Sarah marrying anybody at all in the vital records of Watertown, why should we be forced to assume TWO marriages to make the facts fit, and why would Bond say that John Bigelow had married Sarah BEMIS instead of Sarah (Bemis) Whatsit? Case (A) is harder to dispose of, but both (A) and (B) fail to explain the following point: since the daughter Sarah was definitely dead by 1712 (because she didn't receive any portion of her father's estate in the final distribution), where is the probate record for all that property she supposedly had?
|
Followups: |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/bigelow/messages/29.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|