Four generations of RICHARDSONs 1917

Four generations of RICHARDSONs 1917
William Richardson, Alice Josephine Richardson Dakin, Robert Worthington Richardson, Harry Bogart Richardson
Showing posts with label Concord MA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Concord MA. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

They Might Have Arrived on an Alien Space Ship, But They Owned Land in 1656 -- However, What Was the Date?

When I discovered that had the Massachusetts Land Office Records found in  County Courthouses throughout Massachusetts, 1620-1986 available online, I wanted to look for my Thomas Dakin/Dakeynes/Dacon who was one of the persons who got "first division lands" in Concord [now part of Sudbury], after he was dropped off by an alien space ship [for some reason he hasn't been found on any of the ship manifests before the 1650s when he was in Concord getting first and second division lands.]

Deed Grantee Index for Middlesex County, 1639-1799, A-G

The actual records aren't searchable, however, the above entry in the Grantee Index clearly shows where to look for the actual record for Thomas Dakeynes: volume 2, page 105.  The Grantor Index gives the same information, ironically Thomas Dakeynes is both the grantor and grantee in these indexes. very nicely not only uploaded the index but they uploaded the books too.  So going to volume 2, page 105 produced the deed referenced here.

Middlesex County, Massachusetts Deeds, volume 2, pages 104, 105

The Dakin deed is the one on the lower right corner of the above pages, shown below:

Thomas Dakeynes/Dakin/Dacon, husbandman, and his wife Sarah sold land, that they previously bought from widow Elizabeth Barrow, to John Hayward who signed an indenture (agreement) dated 9th day 11th month 1656.  The index gives a date almost three years later in 1659.  Looking closely at the deed, it clearly shows both in the text of the deed that it was the "9th day, 11th month 1656" and in the notation in the margin: "9.11.1656"
I have not transcribed the deed [very hard to read, will work on that later] but it looks like there is another sale of this land to Samuel and Josiah Dillard on 14th of 2nd month 1658.

So where did the date of 12 August 1659 come from?  It appears that was the date that they recorded the deed in the county of Middlesex.  If you look at both this deed and the one above it, the person who  recorded the deed was Thos Danforth.  The deed on top was agreed to 22 April 1657, but entered and recorded in 1659, by Thomas Danforth.

Since they lived in Concord which is part of Middlesex County, the county seat of Middlesex (now and then) is Cambridge -- probably about 16 miles away.  Historically, looking at Newberry Library's historic county maps, Concord was in Middlesex County which was established in 1643 as one of the original Massachusetts counties.  People did not live near the county office, in this case it is about 16 miles away on modern roads (then, not by modern highways with easily driven cars) -- long walk or horseback ride.  Maybe they didn't see a need to record it until it there was yet another sale of the land.  Maybe everyone involved went to Cambridge and recorded it 12 August 1659.

Another question would be: when was the index created?
This index goes from 1639 to 1799.  Was it created in 1800 or in some year long after that?  My reason for asking this question has to do with the change from the Julian to Gregorian Calendar in many Protestant countries (including England and its colonies) in 1752.  In the Julian Calendar New Year's Day was not the first of January.  Instead New Years Day was the 25th of March:  Annunciation Day (nine months prior to Christmas in the Christian churches, the day that Angel Gabriel told the Virgin Mary about her new upcoming role as the mother of Jesus).  With the adoption of the Gregorian Calendar, the 1st of January became New Years Day.

Thinking about the question of when was this index created, I wondered: how was the index creator reading "9th day, 11th month"?  In 1800, the 11th month was November, but in 1656, the 11th month was January.

Looking closely at the recording date by Thos Danforth:

I transcribed this last sentence:
"Entered and Recorded  12th (8 mo  59    By Thos Danforth Record."

In the Julian Calendar, 8th month would be October, and if I read this correctly, then the date should be 12 October 1659.

If the person creating the grantor and grantee index which goes through 1799, was thinking of the difference between the calendars of 1659 and their current year, would the date have been recorded as 12 October instead of 12 August 1659?

I can't get into the mind of the person with the wonderful handwriting who created the index.  But it would be nice to be able to ask that question!  [Personally I wish that Danforth who entered and recorded the deed had equally as good handwriting!]


If you want more information on the change between the Julian and Gregorian calendars --- the why, how and when--- check out The 1752 Calendar Change on the Connecticut State Library website.   Since the Protestant countries switched many years after the Catholic Countries, there was an adjustment needed which involved eliminating 11 days in 1752.  The Connecticut Library site points out as examples of what happened with the change:

The changeover involved a series of steps:
• December 31, 1750 was followed by January 1, 1750 (under the "Old Style" calendar, December was the 10th month and January the 11th)
• March 24, 1750 was followed by March 25, 1751 (March 25 was the first day of the "Old Style" year)
• December 31, 1751 was followed by January 1, 1752 (the switch from March 25 to January 1 as the first day of the year)
• September 2, 1752 was followed by September 14, 1752 (drop of 11 days to conform to the Gregorian calendar)

The link to this post is

©Erica Dakin Voolich 2013

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

A Wonderful Discovery in the Concord Library

While in Concord MA to find my 6 G'grandfather's tombstone, I spent the morning in the special collections at the Concord Public Library with another DAKIN family researcher.  The Librarian was very helpful even though they didn't have early Concord First Church records in the Library as we had hoped.

We did find one gem from Rhode Island vital records:

"Vol. VII from private record of Rev. Stephen Gano, M.D., pastor of 1st Baptist Church in Providence
Paul Dakin & Lucy Gifford m. 23 Nov. 1786"

This was in the folder with genealogical notes by an unnamed researcher, donated by Mrs.H. B. Yamagata of Lakewood NJ.  She is the person who published Albert Dakin's book on the DAKIN family after the author died.

Now, this was surprising since the marriage date for them was known, it is in Albert Dakin's book, Descendants of THOMAS DAKIN of Concord Mass. (1948) but no place was given in the book.  Others have published they were married in Hudson NY where they raised their family.  Well, now we know they were married in Rhode Island by a Baptish pastor, six years after Paul have been disowned by the Quakers in the Oblong which I wrote about in this blog.

As one question is answered, another one is raised:  who were her parents?
Were they John GIFFORD and Lucianna HATCH as had been presumed but not proven?
How did Paul and Lucy end up getting married in Rhode Island?  The potential parents of Lucy were from Sandwich and Falmouth MA.  Paul was born in Pawling NY.

I need to see if I can get a copy of this record from Rhode Island Vital Records.  It  might contain some clues!

Tombstone Tuesday: Simon DAKIN

Buried in Main St Burial Ground, Concord MA is my 6G'grandfather Simon Dakin.

It was so bright that it was actually easier to read with a shadow on it even though it make it look like it had legs!

1739 IN Ye 76

Simon DAKIN was born in Concord in 1663, son of Thomas DAKIN who was one of the persons who had first division lands.  He did not live in Concord his whole life, he went with others from Boston to South Carolina in December 1695.  They found a settlement originally called Newington and then re-named Dorchester (after Dorchester MA).  The settlement was not a success and Simon returned to Concord around 1700 to 1702.