Little Harvey Burnell was the second child of Joseph Burnell, Jr.(1756-1841) and Martha Gilbert (1761-1837). Harvey Burnell is a first cousin, at least 6 times removed depending on the generation of you, dear reader, but this inscription on the headstone is so poignant that it needs to be shared.
The first child born to Joseph and Martha Burnell was a girl, Elizabeth Burnell, born 24 February 1783 in Massachusetts, likely Chesterfield. They had been married for just over a year, and the anticipation of a large family was probably on their minds quite a lot. Of course, in those days a son was always the most desired, especially for a first child. They likely loved little Elizabeth dearly, but were anxious for a son to carry on the family name and inherit.
Little Harvey Burnell’s birth would have been eagerly awaited, and he appeared in this world on 18 June 1785 in Chesterfield, Hampshire, Massachusetts. Martha was 23, and Joseph 28, when they added to their family. Oh, the excitement there must have been, and how proud the parents! Joseph was a first-born son himself, so would have known what to expect for this new little one. Harvey was likely quite doted upon, and would be groomed for the future of the family to be placed in his hands as he got older. Like all parents, Joseph and Martha probably were filled with big hopes and dreams for this first-born son.
Those tiny little hands, though, were sadly not to become big hands that could guide the family and fulfill its dreams. Little Harvey only lived to be 13 months old. We don’t know if he was a sickly child or if an accident or sudden illness took him from his loving family. Whichever of these events, little Harvey left this world the next summer, on 21 July 1786 in Chesterfield. He was buried in Center Cemetery in Chesterfield, where over 20 of his ancestors and relatives are buried. The hopes, the dreams, and his future with the family were buried along with the little boy.
Headstone of Harvey Burnell, Center Cemetery, Chesterfield, Hampshire, Massachusetts. Posted with kind permission of FAG photographer.
The inscription on the headstone reads:
Harvey
Son of Joseph
& Martha
Burnell
DIED
July 21 1786
Æ 13 Mon.
Make no depen-
dence on smiling
infants.
For anyone, but especially a parent who has lost a child, the last line of the inscription is likely to bring tears, and renewed heartache.
Martha and Joseph were probably more subdued with the next pregnancy, making no dependence on their dreams for this next child. This new Burnell was born on 23 March 1787, also in Chesterfield, and the babe was male; they named him Harvey Burnell. He thankfully was able to weather the perils of childhood in that century, and lived to be 47. Martha and Joseph were then blessed with their (probably) hoped-for household of children: Chester Burnell, born 1788; Asenath Burnell, b. 1791; Eli Burnell b. 1792, Newton Burnell b. 1794, Baxter Burnell b. 1797; Nancy B. Burnell b. 1798; Francis Burnell b. 1801; and Levi Burnell, b. 1803. They had a total of 9 sons, 8 surviving into adulthood, plus 2 daughters.
Martha and Joseph were, after all, able to depend on the faces of those smiling infants, long into their later years.
Notes, Sources, and References:
Massachusetts, Town and Vital Records 1620-1988. These Ancestry.com records are typed (so transcribed from the original) and call the family “Burnal.” Harvey’s death is listed as found in Book 2, Page 2.
Please contact us if you would like higher resolution images. Click to enlarge images.
We would love to read your thoughts and comments about this post (see form below), and thank you for your time! All comments are moderated, however, due to the high intelligence and persistence of spammers/hackers who really should be putting their smarts to use for the public good instead of spamming our little blog.
Original content copyright 2013-2015 by Heritage Ramblings Blog and pmm.
Family history is meant to be shared, but the original content of this site may NOT be used for any commercial purposes unless explicit written permission is received from both the blog owner and author. Blogs or websites with ads and/or any income-generating components are included under “commercial purposes,” as are the large genealogy database websites. Sites that republish original HeritageRamblings.net content as their own are in violation of copyright as well, and use of full content is not permitted.Descendants and researchers MAY download images and posts to share with their families, and use the information on their family trees or in family history books with a small number of reprints. Please make sure to credit and cite the information properly.Please contact us if you have any questions about copyright of our blog material.
We last left our Hessian ancestor, Henrich Horn, after he was captured by George Washington’s forces at the Battle of Trenton on 26 December 1776. The von Knyphausen Regiment, of which he was a part, had been unable to join the remaining Hessian regiments in town, and moved south along Assunpink Creek where they were captured. Once Henrich’s unit was surrounded and they had stacked their muskets, they were probably terrified as to what would happen next.
Would they be brutally massacred, like so many vanquished forces in a battle? Injured and stripped of possessions, clothing, etc.? (This would have been a concern, since many of the Americans needed coats, hats, even shoes.) What kind of prison would they be put in- the British had notoriously hellish prisons, so the Germans probably feared for their lives with not knowing what the poor, under-equipped Continental Army would provide. And how would they get to where they would be held? The storm was still brutal, it was frigidly cold, and they were terribly exhausted since they had been on duty almost continuously for more than three days, and after coming off strenuous battles before they had marched to Trenton.
George Washington had heard the firing along Assunpink Creek and rode toward the von Knyphausen Regiment as they were being surrounded. He came across some Hessians who were assisting Major von Dechow, Henrich’s commanding officer who had been mortally wounded, into a church. Washington spoke with his enemy, and then an aide returned from the bridge to inform Washington that the last Hessian regiment had been captured. Washington shook the hand of the aide as he said, “…this is a glorious day for our country.”
“The Capture of the Hessians at Trenton” by John Turnbull, via Wikipedia, public domain. George Washington is at the center on the chestnut horse, and the wounded officer being held up is the Hessian commander, Col. Rall. Lying behind Rall’s hand is severely wounded Lt. James Monroe, whose life was saved by the physician holding him when he clamped the severed artery of our future fifth President. (Click to enlarge.)
It is said that George Washington also visited the dying Col. Rall, Hessian Brigade Commander. Rall requested that Washington allow his men to keep their possessions, then died that evening.
It was not such a glorious day for the Hessians. Henrich and his fellow soldiers would have seen the elegant, commanding, General Washington- their great foe for the last eight months- astride his chestnut horse as they waited to learn their fate as prisoners of war.
Those remaining of the von Knyphausen Regiment were marched about three-quarters of a mile down to the old South Trenton Ferry on the Delaware River. They must have been somewhat relieved to realize that maybe they were to survive this battle.
The commander of the Continental Army had a big decision to make- should they hold at Trenton? Washington’s troops had been marching and fighting for over 36 hours straight at that point, and needed rest. Or should they capitalize on their element of surprise and attack another British/Hessian post? The inclement weather would have made that difficult, and his fatigued army might lose all it had gained. Or should they retreat back across the Delaware to safer Pennsylvania, with plunder and prisoners? The last was decided upon as the most prudent action.
Meanwhile, the Continental Army was inspecting the town, looking for the famous plunder of the Hessians- they were reputed to always take much plunder as they travelled. (In fact, some writers claim that Rall’s return to town to take the Hessian guns was more about getting his own possessions and plunder. Some sources report that there were 20 wagonloads of plunder hidden at Trenton.) The rebels happened to find 40 hogsheads of rum (a cask that holds about 63 gallons). Washington ordered the rum to be destroyed, but he likely only heard about it after quite a few hogsheads had been tapped and the contents ‘claimed’ by the American troops. The troops celebrated their hard-won victory as they “drank too freely to admit of Discipline or Defence,” per one of their officers. They paraded around in the pointed brass caps of the Hessians, and had a good time despite the cold and exhaustion.
Being inebriated might have kept the American troops warmer on that frigid day, but it did make getting them back across the Delaware challenging. They also had 848 Hessian prisoners to move, as well.
“Passage of the Delaware” by Thomas Sully, 1819. In the MFA-Boston, public domain via Wikipedia. Although this is probably on the way to Trenton, the trip back to Pennsylvania would have looked similar. (Click to enlarge.)
The Americans sent the Hessians over the frigid, ice-clogged Delaware before the majority of their own men crossed. Although the width of the river was only about the equivalent of four city blocks, the continued poor conditions and exhaustion of all the men, rebel or Hessian, made it twice the ordeal as the crossing had been on the way to Trenton.
American soldiers assisted with the escort of Hessians over the river, using flat-bottomed boats or scows. Our Henrich Horn might have been in one of these boats, since the von Knyphausen Regiment was the first to have been marched down to the ferry. One Continental soldier later reported that in the scow they were all knee deep in both snow and rain, and he said of the Hessians: “some of the poor fellows were so cold that their underjaws quivered like an aspen leaf.”
The icy river was still clogged with ice floes, and ice formed on the boats themselves. The additional surface area from the ice caused the heavily-laden boats to be carried downstream in the strong current, as well as increase the weight and make it harder to row or pole across. To remove the ice and keep the boats crossing the shortest distance, the experienced New England boatmen would pound on the boat and stamp their feet. They motioned for the Hessians to jump up and down with them. (Wonder if our Henrich was on one of these boats instead?) The Americans got quite a chuckle out of the sight- the impeccably uniformed Hessians (though battle-worn) had a tight cue/queue (braid or tightly wrapped ponytail) of hair that stuck straight out the back. The jumping made the queue bounce up and down as well. The Americans were quite amused- and probably proud- to see that they had reduced their formerly terrifying Hessian enemy to looking very silly at that point.
Some of the transport boats were carried down the river by the swift current, and there was too much ice along the shore for the boats to land. One group of Hessian prisoners had to abandon their boat and walk for seventy feet through the icy water. Breaking through the ice, they were finally able to go ashore in Pennsylvania. Was our Henrich in this group instead? We will probably never know what he endured after being taken a prisoner during his transport, but whichever scenario, it must have been frightening and miserable.
The Americans had all the same problems with their crossing, although it was even worse for many. Some of the Americans were so drunk from Hessian rum that they missed when leaping into the boats, and landed instead in the icy river. Others walked out on the thick ice near shore, but then it broke, dropping them into the creek and soaking them, their gun, and ammunition. Most of the Americans had to wait patiently while the Hessians were ferried across, but it was cold and had started to rain. Many were injured or sick, and exhaustion clouded their joy in victory. The snow was melting somewhat from the rain and slightly warmer daytime temperature, and thus they had to march through pools of water/slush, many of them without shoes. The artillerymen had it tough too- in addition to themselves, they had to get heavy guns through the melting snow and mud, despite many of the guns having damaged carriages, wheels, or axles from the firefight.
Our modern-day Google maps tell us that it is 14 miles and 20 minutes via car on the highway from Trenton, New Jersey to Newtown, Pennsylvania, the home base of the Continentals. Google also claims it is an 11.3 mile walk north along the river and then west to get to Newtown from Trenton, and the walk will take 3 hours and 46 minutes today. But how long would it have taken our cold and wet soldiers, both Hessian and American, to make that trip over slushy and frozen ground, through snow drifts, with frozen limbs, fever, dysentery, battle wounds, soaking wet clothes, and feet torn up due to lack of shoes? Think of how far they each had already marched in the previous 2 days, run in battle in Trenton, and the strength needed to fight with bayonets since their ammunition was not working well in the wet weather, plus the exertion of getting heavy boats across the ice-filled Delaware (twice for the Americans). Add in carrying heavy muskets, ammunition, and moving heavy artillery (would the Hessians have been used to help?) on the march to Pennsylvania, and we can only imagine the state of all these weary men as they finally reached camp.
The Americans were probably still elated with their victory, and they were relatively safe in their own camp in Newtown. But the Hessians had to worry- what would happen to them next? They were now in the midst of their enemy- a people they had fought, brutalized, plundered, and murdered as they moved through the country before their capture at Trenton. They surely knew how hated the Hessians were to the American people, even those loyal to the Crown who had been indiscriminately attacked as well by Hessian and British forces. To add to their fear, the Hessians had been told by the British that the Americans treated their POWs terribly, with no regard to the conventions of war. The Hessians could not accept the American people wanting ‘liberty’ from a righteous king, and felt they were greedy as they had so much more than a common Hessian family had in Germany, yet wanted more. Although there were quite a lot of Germans who had immigrated to the colonies before the war, the Hessians would stand out and could not easily escape due to their language and cultural differences. How would this enemy now treat them as prisoners?
The officers had been separated from their men, who were thrown into a hurriedly prepared, makeshift, “dreadful prison,” per Johannes Reuber, a captured Hessian common soldier. Food was dropped to them through a hole in the roof, and the Hessians felt they were being treated as animals.
Heinrich Horn and his fellow POWs likely did not rest well that night, despite their utter exhaustion.
More to come on Henrich Horn…
Notes, Sources, and References:
Washington’s Crossing by David Hackett, 2004. Winner of the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for History, this tells the story of the crossing of the Delaware and the Battle of Trenton, mostly from the American point of view. This is an excellent book, and very well-written.
The Hessians and the other German Auxiliaries of Great Britain in the Revolutionary Warby Edward J. Lowell. Harper and Brothers Publishers, New York, 1884.
The Hessians. Mercenaries from Hessen-Kassel in the American Revolution, by Rodney Atwood, Cambridge University Press, 1980.
The Hessians and Other German Auxiliaries of Great Britain in the Revolutionary War, by Edward J. Lowell, Harper & Brother, New York, 1884 Republished by Forgotten Books, 2012.
10. A Generous and Merciful Enemy. Life for German Prisoners of War during the American Revolution, by Daniel Krebs. University of Oklahoma Press, 2013.
Please contact us if you would like higher resolution images. Click to enlarge images.
We would love to read your thoughts and comments about this post (see form below), and thank you for your time! All comments are moderated, however, due to the high intelligence and persistence of spammers/hackers who really should be putting their smarts to use for the public good instead of spamming our little blog.
Original content copyright 2013-2015 by Heritage Ramblings Blog and pmm.
Family history is meant to be shared, but the original content of this site may NOT be used for any commercial purposes unless explicit written permission is received from both the blog owner and author. Blogs or websites with ads and/or any income-generating components are included under “commercial purposes,” as are the large genealogy database websites. Sites that republish original HeritageRamblings.net content as their own are in violation of copyright as well, and use of full content is not permitted.Descendants and researchers MAY download images and posts to share with their families, and use the information on their family trees or in family history books with a small number of reprints. Please make sure to credit and cite the information properly.Please contact us if you have any questions about copyright of our blog material.
Two hundred thirty-nine years ago, in 1776, our McMurray ancestor Henry Horn was not having a good Christmas holiday.
The holiday had started out all right, comparatively- he and his fellow soldiers were warm and dry despite the raw, frigid, and stormy weather, with some of the men comfortably billeted in the homes of the locals in Trenton, New Jersey. Although far from home, the excitement of war was likely high in the young men- Henry was just 16 or 18- and a merry time was had by all. Christmas Eve was especially joyous- Germans celebrated Christmas Eve rather than the actual day. Our young Henry was really named Heinrich Horn and German, so likely celebrated in the same ways as his fellow soldiers.
If you are a follower of the blog, you may have read previous posts about Heinrich that reveal he was actually a Hessian soldier, not an American patriot in his early military years. Well-trained and very competent mercenaries, the Hessians were feared and loathed by the Americans, both military and civilian alike.
Battle of Trenton and Vicinity, 26 December 1776, via Wikipedia, public domain. (Click to enlarge.)
Heinrich Horn was a private in the 5th Company of the von Knyphausen Fusilier (light infantry) Regiment, which had been formed on 11 January 1776 in Ziegenhain, Germany. Technically they were, “German Auxiliaries” rather than “mercenaries,” as their ruler had sold their services as whole regiments to the British Crown.
After crossing the ocean and participating in many battles against the American rebels, Henrich had arrived in the small New Jersey town of Trenton on December 14 with 2 other regiments. Trenton was to be the winter quarters of about 1,500 Hessians, 50 Hessian chasseurs (also known as Jägers, a rifle-armed light infantry similar to Army Rangers; Jäger means “hunter” in German, as does “chasseur” in French, the predominant language of the educated of the day) and a contingent of about 20 British Dragoons (infantry mounted on horses). Although the town of about 100 homes was not fortified, the Hessian brigade commander Colonel Johann Rall did not think it would be necessary- traditionally, troops did not move in such terrible winter weather, and he felt his forces so superior to those of the colonists that he denied many requests for fortification. Rall had been more interested in drinking and gathering spoils of war than military strategy. He was also was blinded by the contempt he had for the rebels, with their lack of organization and equipment, and their continued losses; Rall thought the War would be finished soon and easily.
Hessian sketch of the Battle of Trenton, 1776. Click to enlarge, and note the von Knyphausen Regiment’s quarters separate from the other two regiments. Map via Wikimedia, public domain.
The Americans had been attacking and harassing the Hessians for days. The Hessians and British in Trenton were exhausted from constant patrols and skirmishes at Trenton, and especially after coming off larger battles like White Plains and Ft. Washington. Many were sick or recovering from wounds. They slept in their uniforms with all their equipment. Each night, one regiment was on duty, ready to respond at a moment’s notice to any attack.
While the Hessian soldiers tried to get some rest in their ‘alert sleep’ in Trenton, George Washington and his ragtag group of Continentals- truly ‘ragtag’ as some had only rags for shoes or clothing- were crossing the Delaware to surprise the Hessians on December 25th. The men and artillery were across the Delaware by about 4 am on December 26th; they then had to march nine miles to Trenton in a driving nor’easter. The cold and exhausted American troops could be tracked by the blood in the snow from their bleeding feet and broken shoes, according to one contemporary account. But march they did.
Some of Trenton’s outermost Hessian guards had sheltered in a small guard house due to the severe weather and how quiet it was that night, with no American troops seen during any of the night’s patrols. The 24 Hessians inside tried to get a bit of rest, as they felt there would not be an attack in a frigid, blinding snowstorm. Once they relaxed their patrols, however, the Americans just happened to arrive near the outpost and attacked. Although they put up a good fight, the Americans were much more than just a raiding party, and the Hessians retreated to town, giving the alarm, “Der Feind!” (“The Enemy!”) The American forces attacked from the north and west, and large artillery began firing into the town from the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware River.
The alarm was sounded and Hessian drums awakened the men and sent the German regiments flying to form up and hold their ground. Col. Rall was still in bed, but his under officer was afraid to wake him. After sending men to support the pickets, the adjutant returned to headquarters, where his commander was hanging out his window, asking, “What’s the matter?” He was still “in his cups” from drinking the night before, and had not even heard the guns. (Legend has that all the German troops were sleeping off their celebration, but that is not true, since they had celebrated on the eve of the 24th and would have been sober by the morning of the 26th.) Col. Rall, an experienced military man, however, seemed disoriented and had difficulty forming a plan of defense. The Hessians mistakenly thought they were surrounded on both the left and right, but at that point, the Hessians actually still held the Assunpink Creek bridge, and could have escaped in that direction. (That likely would have changed American history.)
Heinrich’s Knyphausen Regiment formed up at the lower end of Queen Street, and prepared to meet the enemy. They were to be reserves as Rall’s Regiment and the von Lossberg Regiment marched up Queen (now Greene) Street. The American heavy artillery, however, along with rebel fire from houses along the street (and some fire by townspeople, including a woman who shot a Hessian captain), stopped Rall’s advance and killed half of the Hessians firing their own cannons, which were then taken by the Continentals. Col. Rall regrouped with his regiment and the von Lossberg Regiment in an apple orchard, and attempted to take the American artillery at the top of the hill north of town. George Washington, atop the hill, saw the advance, however, and was able to ward it off by swift troop movements.
Rall received more bad news- the guns of his own regiment had been taken in town. He turned his men toward the center of town to retake the guns and regain the all-important honor of his regiment. They bravely marched up King (now Warren) Street and were able to retake their cannon despite fire from all sides. The Americans then rushed to the guns with unbelievable determination, but Capt. William Washington (the cousin of George Washington) and Lt. James Monroe (our future U.S. President) of the Virginia Infantry were severely wounded. One of the sergeants took command of the Continentals and charged forward, and the last of the Hessians ran from their guns. The Americans then used the Hessian artillery to fire on the Hessian troops. In addition to the point-blank firing of cannon within the town, close-fighting had broken out throughout; civilians too were firing at the Hessians but also dying in the melee. Even seasoned military men commented afterward that it was one of the worst scenes of carnage they had ever seen.
The Hessians began to retreat, as the Americans had targeted and killed a number of their commanding officers, and they were confused as to tactics but knew the battle was all but lost. Additionally, the Hessian muskets were not firing due to the driving snow and sleet- some scholars estimate only 1 in 20 German guns fired on that fateful day. Many Hessians took refuge in a church or basement of houses in the town. The remainder retreated east to the orchard, with the Americans following. The Continental German regiment members called out to the Hessians in their native language to stack their arms and surrender, and one of Washington’s men rode up and offered them terms of surrender. The two Hessian regiments, those of Rall and von Lossberg, then lowered their colors and surrendered.
Heinrich Horn’s unit, the von Knyphausen Regiment, meanwhile, was still armed. They had marched to join up with Rall and his regiment at the beginning of the battle, but apparently in the chaos, an order was misunderstood: they marched southeast instead. Many of the weapons of Heinrich and his regiment would not fire either- it must have been a terrifying moment, even for such seasoned troops. Once they became aware of the poor prospects for the other two Hessian regiments, they moved toward the bridge at Assunpink Creek to escape to alarm British troops in nearby towns. There were 300 men and 2 guns in the regiment, but as they neared the bridge that had been held by the Hessians for most of the fight, they realized it was then in the hands of the Americans. The Americans had also surrounded the southern end of the town from that point.
Henrich’s commander, Major Friedrich von Dechow, turned the regiment and headed up the creek, looking for a place that was more narrow and could be forded more easily. Unfortunately the guns got bogged down in soft ground, and the troops lost time trying to free them. Americans followed closely behind and fired, and the Hessians were fired upon from the opposite bank of the creek.
Henrich and his comrades continued to march up the creek, looking for another place to ford. American soldiers jumped into the creek and attacked them, and American troops ran out of the town and attacked the regiment from the rear and both sides. Once they realized they were about to be surrounded, some of the Hessians jumped into the bitterly cold and icy creek to try to escape, but many were shot. About 50 Hessians of Heinrich’s regiment escaped via the creek and made it to Princeton, New Jersey, a distance of about 13 miles that took them 10 hours in icy temperatures with wet clothes, but our Heinrich Horn was not one of them. Major von Dechow was mortally wounded, plus was still suffering from wounds received in a previous battle. He recommended surrender, and was carried off the field. Although his officers did not want to surrender, when the Continental Army had them completely surrounded, there was no choice.
All hope was lost for a Hessian victory, and the von Knyphausen Fussiliers were the last Of Col. Rall’s Brigade to stack their arms as they were captured by the American rebels.
Our Heinrich Horn became an American POW on 26 December 1776.
The battle had only lasted about 45 minutes.
“The Capture of the Hessians at Trenton” by John Turnbull, via Wikipedia, public domain.
Heinrich and the other Germans were transported across the Delaware River by noon of that same day, and marched on to Philadelphia in the cold, snow, and ice. There were even German women and children, wives, children, and camp followers, who were captured by the Continental Army, although some had escaped early in the attack.
The Continental Army and militias did not have enough food or supplies for themselves, what’s less the large number of POWs they had captured. Our Heinrich Horn, like others of his regiment, must have been very cold, very tired, and very hungry, as well as despondent as to his situation. The Hessians had a reputation for treating their prisoners of war better than the British, but how would the Americans treat Heinrich and his companions? The once-merry Christmas holiday had become a nightmare for the almost 1000 Hessians troops captured that day.
As some of von Knyphausen’s Regiment had escaped earlier to the south, the Continentals pursued and captured 200 more men and their arms, ammunition, plus all of the victuals (food), clothing, bedding, and horses. These supplies were much needed by our armies, and may have made Heinrich’s capture a bit more tolerable if they were shared.
The Battle of Trenton was a turning point in the Revolutionary War. Until December 26, 1776, the rebels had not been very successful against the well-trained and well-equipped British and Hessian forces. Although Trenton was a small battle that strategically was not terribly significant, the fact that the Americans could defeat such an Army gave new life to the hope of freedom for the American colonies.
More to come about the life of Heinrich Horn.
[Editor’s Note: This post was edited 2 January 2016 with more detailed information.]
Notes, Sources, and References:
Washington’s Crossing by David Hackett, 2004. Winner of the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for History, this tells the story of the crossing of the Delaware and the Battle of Trenton, mostly from the American point of view. This is an excellent book, and very well-written.
The Hessians and the other German Auxiliaries of Great Britain in the Revolutionary Warby Edward J. Lowell. Harper and Brothers Publishers, New York, 1884.
Please contact us if you would like higher resolution images. Click to enlarge images.
We would love to read your thoughts and comments about this post (see form below), and thank you for your time! All comments are moderated, however, due to the high intelligence and persistence of spammers/hackers who really should be putting their smarts to use for the public good instead of spamming our little blog.
Original content copyright 2013-2015 by Heritage Ramblings Blog and pmm.
Family history is meant to be shared, but the original content of this site may NOT be used for any commercial purposes unless explicit written permission is received from both the blog owner and author. Blogs or websites with ads and/or any income-generating components are included under “commercial purposes,” as are the large genealogy database websites. Sites that republish original HeritageRamblings.net content as their own are in violation of copyright as well, and use of full content is not permitted.Descendants and researchers MAY download images and posts to share with their families, and use the information on their family trees or in family history books with a small number of reprints. Please make sure to credit and cite the information properly.Please contact us if you have any questions about copyright of our blog material.
The Romeo & Juliet story has been passed down through the centuries in various forms, and has been lived in real life by many. Think back, if you will, to four previous posts detailing the bitter feud between the families of Mary (Bliss) Parsons and Sarah (Lyman) Bridgman. Sarah accused Mary of being a witch as far back as the 1650s. The feud had gone on even before that time, but could there be two people in the future who would mend those fences, as Romeo and Juliet did for the Montagues and Capulets??
One of the children of Mary (Bliss) Parsons- the accused witch- and her husband Cornet Joseph Parsons was John Parsons (1650-1728). He married Sarah Clarke (1659-1728) and a daughter was born in Northampton, Massachusetts on 5 July 1681 that they named after her paternal grandmother. Although she probably did not remember her grandfather Joseph, who died in 1683, young Mary probably would have known her grandmother well as she was 31 years old in 1712 when Mary (Bliss) Parsons passed away while living in Springfield.
Family Tree of Mary Parsons. (Click to enlarge.)
Meanwhile, Sarah (Lyman) Bridgman- the witch accuser- and her husband, James Bridgman, had only one son (and three daughters), out of eight children born to them who survived into adulthood. (This was part of the jealousy between Sarah and Mary (Bliss) Parsons- Mary had 9 children survive out of the 13 she had, 5 of them sons.) Their son John Bridgman chose Mary Sheldon (1654-1728) as his wife, and they had at least 11 children, possibly 14 per some sources; of these, Ebenezer Bridgman (1685-1760) is of interest to our story today.
Family Tree of Ebenezer Bridgman. (Click to enlarge.)
Ebenezer Bridgman was born in Northampton too, still a very small hamlet on the frontier in February 1685. He likely saw young Mary Parsons on the street, in the fields, and in the meeting house. All the witch stories would probably have been heard by every family member, young or old. It would be so interesting to have a glimpse of their thoughts, and how they reconciled their business within the town, with neighbors, and possibly with members of the feuding family!
What parts did young Mary Parsons and Ebenezer Bridgman play in the local gossip that swirled through Northampton in 1702, when Mary (Bliss) Parsons was again called a witch? Young Peletiah Glover, another of Mary’s grandchildren, was told that his mother was half a witch and his grandmother a full witch who had killed several people. Did young Mary rush to protect her cousin? Did Ebenezer stay out of it, or try to shield Peletiah and the Parsons family from the mean words of some of the townspeople? There is no way to know the details of what happened 213 years ago, unfortunately.
One day in 1709, however, the feud came to an end as the walls between families tumbled down:
14 June 1709- Ebenezer Bridgman and Mary Parson, Marriages, Massachusetts Town & Vital Records, Northampton, page 110. (Note second line; click to enlarge.)
Had the families known there was flirting going on instead of feuding?
Was there a big row when the young people stated their intentions?
(Although Puritans generally married at a slightly higher average age than the rest of the population, Mary was 27 and Ebenezer 24 at their nuptials- she was a bit older than usual, and was older than Ebenezer, too.)
Did everyone show up at the civil service for the marriage? Even Mary (Bliss) Parsons?
(Puritans did not believe in the church sanctifying a marriage- they felt it was a civil contract.)
Did the families pitch in together to help the newlyweds begin their new home?
All great questions to ponder, but sadly that is all we can do, as there has been nothing found to tell us more- no letters, diaries, etc. When telling the Mary (Bliss) Parsons witchcraft story, many historians do not even include the fact of a later unifying marriage between grandchildren of the feuding families.
Our ‘witch’ Mary would have bounced her grand-daughter Mary’s little babe Elizabeth Bridgman on her knee, and sung to the child the old lullabies Mary had heard as a child herself in England. Mary was in her mid-eighties by this time, and somewhat reduced in function and confused; her sons had needed to take over her financial affairs. Still, what thoughts might have gone through her mind, knowing that this precious great-granddaughter on her knee had the blood of the late Sarah (Lyman) Bridgman flowing through her rosy red cheeks? Were her thoughts of how the blood of the two families was now forever mixed, the family branches forever intertwined, after all the anguish of her own life? Did Mary think it was a sweet reconciliation, or did she gloat in the victory of her long life and so many children, grandchildren, and another great-grandchild to carry on her blood, while Sarah was already long gone, and had so few?
Elizabeth Bridgman was the first of four children to be born to Mary and Ebenezer Bridgman, but the only one who could have been held by her great-grandmother- Mary (Bliss) Parsons died in January of 1712. She would have been able to see her granddaughter big with a second child, however, as Joseph Bridgman was born two months later, in March. Mary (Parsons) Bridgman then carried on her own grandmother’s tradition of twins- Mary (Bliss) Parsons had at least one set of twins, likely two. The Bridgman twins Ebenezer and Mary were born 10 July 1714. Little Ebenezer would only live four months; we have no further information as to whether or not his sister Mary survived to adulthood.
Maybe the feud had been mellowing for quite some time, and the Bridgman family had softened. After all was said and done (in court and out), the new Bridgman family named two of their children after Mary (Parsons) Bridgman’s grandparents, the founders of the Parsons line in America: Joseph and Mary.
I doubt that Puritans frequently went to plays- not an industrious activity, although as time went on in the Americas, the younger generations of the faith were not as devout as their parents. Even if they had not seen the play Romeo & Juliet, they may have read or heard of it. Wonder if Mary Parsons and Ebenezer Bridgman felt the connection or parallels, but with hopefully better results in mind than in the play?
Please contact us if you would like higher resolution images. Click to enlarge images.
We would love to read your thoughts and comments about this post (see form below), and thank you for your time! All comments are moderated, however, due to the high intelligence and persistence of spammers/hackers who really should be putting their smarts to use for the public good instead of spamming our little blog.
Original content copyright 2013-2015 by Heritage Ramblings Blog and pmm.
Family history is meant to be shared, but the original content of this site may NOT be used for any commercial purposes unless explicit written permission is received from both the blog owner and author. Blogs or websites with ads and/or any income-generating components are included under “commercial purposes,” as are the large genealogy database websites. Sites that republish original HeritageRamblings.net content as their own are in violation of copyright as well, and use of full content is not permitted.Descendants and researchers MAY download images and posts to share with their families, and use the information on their family trees or in family history books with a small number of reprints. Please make sure to credit and cite the information properly.Please contact us if you have any questions about copyright of our blog material.
Pilgrims and Puritans always seemed so far removed from everything in life except Thanksgiving dinner- that was my thought in years past. The last few months, however, have revealed a much closer relationship than ever imagined. Some of our Burnell ancestors actually travelled on The Mayflower, though it was her third voyage to the colonies, not that first fateful voyage that gave us the holiday we celebrate today and the famous ‘Plymouth Rock.’ Also, we have quite a lot of Puritans in our Burnell ancestors of New England, and it is fascinating to be learning their stories.
Of course, finding this family heritage meant research into the daily lives of the Puritans. They were not the dour people we often envision. They did allow laughter and play, but everything they did was for the glory of God.
The Puritans wished to purify the English church, and rid it of any facets of Catholicism, such as priests, sacraments, ceremonies, etc. They did have much political power in England after the First English Civil War in 1642-6, but then were unhappy with the limited changes of the Reformation, and many left England. While the Mayflower pilgrims could be classified as being “Separatists” who wanted to start their own churches, likely our ancestors were “non-separating Puritans” since they followed John Winthrop and like-minded others. They did not want to leave the Church of England, but wanted to practice their religion in a more pure way. Thus, although we learned in grade school that the Pilgrims and Puritans came to the colonies for freedom of religion, technically it was so that THEY could practice THEIR religion freely; they would not tolerate others to question nor practice in any way other than that proscribed by the bible as interpreted by their ministers. (They persecuted and even executed heretics and Quakers like Anne Hutchinson.)
The Puritans believed in strict interpretation of the bible, and made their laws, which became the plantation/colony laws, accordingly. Their ultimate goal in this life was to glorify God, in the hope of being with God and an everlasting glory in heaven. They did not believe, like the Catholics, that good works would help one get closer to heaven- the chosen were pre-ordained by God, but they must also live their life orderly and properly in order to fulfill that destiny. Man was made to glorify God while on this earth, in thought, deed, worship, raising children, and even in his business pursuits, they affirmed.
The Puritans believed very strongly in the Fifth Commandment: “Honor thy father and thy mother.” This law produced the strict hierarchy ordering their lives: God was the father of man, who must honor him; man was the ‘father’ to his wife, children, and any servants, thus they would honor him by being subservient and obedient to him. He, as their ‘father,’ was required to see to their education in both religion and practical matters, and it was his duty to see that his family followed the many rules of their society. Because all persons existing at that time were “descendants of Abraham’s seed,” the bible indicated that every person was thus responsible for every other person’s behavior, because all were related. This led to townspeople going to the courts to turn another in for infractions, neighbor against neighbor, but in the spirit of tending to that neighbor’s soul. (Theoretically, of course- some was done as spite as well.) It also led to the guilt and fear of a society such that when something bad happened, like a drought or massacre by the natives- they believed that if they all had done a better job of following the proscribed laws, the bad would not have happened.
Because of their strict interpretation of the bible, the Puritans (as well as members of other religions of the time) felt that Satan was always nearby, ready to take possession of any who were weak or not cautious, not pious. This fear of demons led to a constant fear of anything unexplained. These events were thus considered as Satan’s doing, or his work through possession, or witchcraft.
The Puritans did not call themselves by that name, but felt they were “Congregationalists.” Their congregational church was made up of individuals who had come together voluntarily to worship. Only those who were “visible saints” could join- they had to experience a “conversion” in which the Holy Spirit would come to them. A person desiring admission to the church would have to explain in detail the visit of the Holy Spirit, and church members would be free to accept or reject the applicant. Children were automatically included while they lived in a parent’s household, and sometimes servants as well. Young children were not brought to church, however- they had to be old enough, “so, as to be benefitted themselves and the Congregation not disturbed by ’em,” per Joseph Belcher. A child would have to experience their own conversion once an adult and out of the household, and apply for membership. Some references stated that our Joseph Parsons and his children had been admitted as church members, but Mary (Bliss) Parsons never did; others stated that she was a church member though regularly accused as a witch. A Puritan church was really made up of families, not individuals.
Education was very important to the Puritans, so that their children could read the bible for themselves. They were not taught to think for themselves, however- only to have the knowledge and understanding of the bible needed to follow the laws to be pious. New England laws proscribed the education of a child- all children, even if it was only a weekly catechism taught by a parent. The town selectmen would go to each home in the plantation (what they called their towns, rather than ‘colonies’ as we call them), and quiz the children on their catechism plus their understanding of it; a parent would be admonished if his children were not properly learning.
Generally both boys and girls attended schools, with some boys moving on to an apprenticeship after learning to read and write, and girls moving to service in various homes in order to learn the skills of housekeeping. Most children were farmed out to other homes in order that they did not become too close to parents, and so that they would learn respect, which might decrease in the teen years if they had stayed with doting parents. Some boys went on to higher education, including Harvard University, which was originally a Puritan institution that mostly produced new ministers for the faith.
While the Puritans did not allow the arts such as drama, they did allow music for the Psalms, but no musical instruments in the church service. They did love their children, although discipline, even very harsh discipline (which was to be a last resort, though that was not always followed), was the duty of a parent or master in order to help ‘save’ the pious life of a child. They loved each other too, within marriage, and were not prudish about sex in the married state; sex outside marriage, however, was severely punished and could be a capital crime. There still exists a very sweet set of correspondence between John Winthrop and his wife, as he was often away. They did take pains, however, to keep their love for each other within bounds, and couch it in terms of their actions glorifying God.
Love was actually desirable in a Puritan marriage. Puritans often married at a slightly older age than many of the time, often mid-20s. All were required to live in a ‘family’ situation by law- no wild singles living on their own without others to see to their soul. Thus children lived with their parents until married, or until a young male was able to afford a household with servants. Sometimes a couple would ‘fall in love,’ but often a person would determine it was time to marry, and then look around at the pool of eligible spouses. Meetings would occur, and if a person thought they could love a person, negotiations were begun. The father of each would negotiate how much they would contribute o the new household, with the groom’s family providing twice as much as the bride’s, in general. Puritans seldom married across class lines, and if all were in agreement at the settlement, the marriage would proceed. Marriage was not a religious ceremony in Puritan society but more a contract, thus the ceremony was performed by a civil magistrate. Unfortunately the words of wedding ceremonies do not exist today- it would be very interesting to know what each spouse promised. Second marriages were left more to the adults to negotiate. It was common to have large blended families since so many spouses died young- often one spouse was marrying for the second, third, or even fourth time, and the other had been married once or more. Women bore children into their forties sometimes, and may have been having children for over a quarter of a century- Mary (Bliss) Parsons, our family’s accused witch, was one of those.
Surprisingly, one can find divorce in Puritan families. Generally divorce was reserved for egregious wrongs- the lack of performing marital ‘duties’ of any kind, whether for physical or willful reasons; abandonment/disappearance (they travelled more than I realized, and may have not made it back from a trip, or just moved on); and sometimes even for verbal or physical abuse .
Understanding Puritan society helps us to understand their lives in a richer deeper, way.
This Thanksgiving Day, thinking of these ancestors and how hard their lives were in the frontier of the New World, yet how they worked to gain glory in each act, will be a part of my reflection of gratitude. Understanding their lives helps us to understand more of our own society and personalities, as well as religions.
There is much more to come about our Puritan and early New England ancestors!
Happy Thanksgiving to all.
Notes, Sources, and References:
The Puritan Family. Religion & Domestic Relations in Seventeenth Century New England by Edmund S. Morgan, the premier Puritan historian. Harper-Perennial, 1966 edition.
Please contact us if you would like higher resolution images. Click to enlarge images.
We would love to read your thoughts and comments about this post (see form below), and thank you for your time! All comments are moderated, however, due to the high intelligence and persistence of spammers/hackers who really should be putting their smarts to use for the public good instead of spamming our little blog.
Original content copyright 2013-2015 by Heritage Ramblings Blog and pmm.
Family history is meant to be shared, but the original content of this site may NOT be used for any commercial purposes unless explicit written permission is received from both the blog owner and author. Blogs or websites with ads and/or any income-generating components are included under “commercial purposes,” as are the large genealogy database websites. Sites that republish original HeritageRamblings.net content as their own are in violation of copyright as well, and use of full content is not permitted.Descendants and researchers MAY download images and posts to share with their families, and use the information on their family trees or in family history books with a small number of reprints. Please make sure to credit and cite the information properly.Please contact us if you have any questions about copyright of our blog material.
