image_pdfimage_print

Madness Monday: Clothes Make the Man- er, Woman!

Bicycle Dress Reform. The Pacific Unitarian, Vol. 6, No. 5, Page 129. March, 1898, San Francisco, California, via GoogleBooks.
Bicycle Dress Reform. The Pacific Unitarian, Vol. 6, No. 5, Page 129. March, 1898, San Francisco, California, via GoogleBooks.

Payne Family (Click for Family Tree)

For generations reformers tried to get women to trade in their restrictive Victorian clothing for looser garb. The madness of tight corsets that moved bones and internal organs, long dresses that carried the filth of streets filled with excrement of horses and chamber pot contents thrown out a window, big heavy hats that compressed women’s neck bones from the weight, multiple layers that overheated women in the days before air conditioning, etc., made movement for women challenging. No manner of  logic, cajoling, or even science was enough for the ‘modern’ woman to not follow the whims of fashion and the required-by-polite-society need for modesty.

Bicycles changed all that! Women would not ride very far if they could not breathe deeply due to a corset, or if their long skirt got caught in the spokes of the wheels. Those huge, heavy, unsymmetrical hats would definitely put them off balance too.

Bicycles were a great form of exercise, and a way for women to have a bit of freedom. The author of this piece suggests that the bicycle was the biggest influence on women deciding to wear clothes that offered more comfort and “larger freedom of action.” Her conclusion was that this change would bring to women a “life of higher opportunity and realization.” (Love that.)

There was most probably a wealth of causes for these changes, including the women’s suffrage movement. The bicycle surely did play a part, though there was one article in an old newspaper that stated women who rode bicycles were actually prostitutes going off to visit their customers! Casting aspersions on a woman’s reputation was definitely a way to keep most from taking advantage of newfound freedoms.

At least one of our ancestors, Lynette Payne, had the courage to ride a bicycle and she even wore bloomers! She is said to have been the first woman in Newton, Iowa, to ride the new contraption, and Lynette was a suffragist as well.

Lynette Payne, December 1909, wearing a purple and lavender silk dress.
Lynette Payne, December 1909, wearing a purple and lavender silk dress.

Lynette had grown up in liberal Berkeley, California, and many commented on her sophistication after she moved to small Newton, Iowa. Sure wish that we had more photos of Lynette in those early years- would really love to see her on her bicycle! Pure madness, indeed.

 

Notes, Sources, and References: 

  1. Bicycle Dress Reform. The Pacific Unitarian, Vol. 6, No. 5, Page 129. March, 1898, San Francisco, California, via GoogleBooks.
  2. Victorian clothing and its dangers are discussed in the BBC’s “Hidden Killers of the Victorian Home.” Thankful that corsets are no longer required…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy7iUoWi_-U
    The BBC also made “Hidden Killers” episodes for the Tudor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zSyjyLAWWM) and Edwardian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7kxUyvkXjw) eras. The Tudor episode discusses death by drowning (40% of Tudor deaths), including the weight of women’s clothing once wet that often led to drowning.
  3. Maureen Taylor, “The Photo Detective” has a number of books that show clothing from various eras to aid in photo identification, including two coloring books: Victorian Hats: A Coloring Book, and Coloring the Past: the 1860s. Her books are available on her website, MaureenTaylor.com, or on Amazon. She also has a blog at http://photodetective.blogspot.com. Maureen’s classes and webinars are wonderful as well if you are interested in old photos or vintage clothing.
  4. Family photo of Lynette (Payne) McMurray.

 

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 2013-2016 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.

Tuesday’s Tip: Be careful out there!

Surveillance camers via Wikipedia.org, CC BY-SA 3.0 license.
Surveillance camers via Wikipedia.org, CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

AncestryDNA is emailing customers with a new promo offer to refer a friend, who will get a 10% discount on their AncestryDNA kit. The person who does the referring will get a $10 Amazon gift card. Sounds like a great deal, right?

Before clicking the “Tell a friend” button, make sure you click the ‘Terms and Conditions’ link first:

http://refer.dna.ancestry.com/terms-and-conditions/55e0d3a363616e6796000009?o_xid=69620&o_lid=69620&o_sch=Email+-+Campaigns

Wow. They can use your first and last name, the actual words from your email to your friend, any information you provided in your profile, such as where you live, your age, your picture, etc. etc. for both you and your friend. Would your friend (or family) like giving away their personal information in this way? What if you are referred by someone but do not want to be- can they use this information without the ‘friend’s’ permission?

AncestryDNA can even use the email you sent to that family member for Ancestry publicity- “Let’s find out if grandpa was illegitimate after all.” They can use any of that information in any way for any publicity now and into the future without asking your permission- because you are GIVING them your permission by clicking the link and taking the offer. You could be watching tv one day and your info pop up in an Ancestry ad (the above grandpa might have a heart attack), or it could be in an ad in a publication in one of those countries where people like to collect such data for identity theft and fraud. Either are possible. (Yes, a lot of that info is already out there, but this connects people and places and etc. easily.)

So, 10% off a $99 test kit is $9.90. A $10 gift card from Amazon makes the deal basically a discount of $19.90, divided between two people. Those who use this program are selling the privacy of two people and future use of their information for publicity for the low, low price of $9.95 per person.

Is this amount worth it???

We won’t even get into the audacity of Ancestry for requiring this. Especially when they say, “protecting your privacy is at the core of what we do”…

Ancestry has a new Privacy Policy as well, so we should probably read through that in case there are surprises- http://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacyphilosophy.

We recently asked a cousin if they had taken a DNA test, and her reply was no, that she did not trust anyone to not take the resulting information and use it in nefarious ways. At first it seemed somewhat paranoid, but now… a slippery slope??

Google, Facebook, etc. mine our data and sell to the highest bidder. When things are free, like Google and Facebook, we know that “if you aren’t buying a product, YOU are the product.” (Read the Terms of Service for these websites and all that you use.) But when something is paid for, like an AncestryDNA kit or Ancestry subscription, we shouldn’t be the product.

So think twice before clicking a button on any website, and do your homework- AKA ‘due diligence’ in today’s jargon. Then make an informed decision.

Be careful out there.

Just sayin’.

 

Notes, Sources, and References: 

  1. AncestryDNA Refer a Friend Terms & Conditions (see #5): http://refer.dna.ancestry.com/terms-and-conditions/55e0d3a363616e6796000009?o_xid=69620&o_lid=69620&o_sch=Email+-+Campaigns
  2. Ancestry’s new privacy policy- http://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacyphilosophy
  3. Kuwait’s DNA program:
    The official stance- http://news.kuwaittimes.net/website/kuwait-to-enforce-dna-testing-law-on-citizens-expats-visitors-tests-wont-be-used-to-determine-genealogy-affect-freedoms/
    Another POV-
    http://www.sciencealert.com/kuwait-has-become-the-first-country-to-make-dna-testing-mandatory-for-all-residents

 

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.

Church Record Sunday: Essex County, Massachusetts Court Records for 1642

"The Life of Faith in Three Parts," 1670 by Richard Baxter(1615-1691) via https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Puritans#/media/File:The_life_of_faith_-_in_three_parts_(1670)_(14780420531).jpg
The Life of Faith in Three Parts,” 1670 by Richard Baxter(1615-1691) via
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Puritans#/media/File:The_life_of_faith_-_in_three_parts_(1670)_(14780420531).jpg

McMurray Family, Burnell Family (Click for Family Tree)

Still perusing the transcribed court records in the Essex Antiquarian from 1642-3 (see our first post, “Amanuensis Monday: Essex County, Massachusetts Court Records for 1642” at http://heritageramblings.net/2015/11/09/amanuensis-monday-essex-county-massachusetts-court-records-for-1642/), today we focus on religion. Although technically not ‘church records,’ at this time in the New England colonies, the church and state were inexorably linked, although not as deeply as they had been in England.

The English Anglican Church had continued the Catholic sacrament of baptism to remove original sin; it was required for salvation. The Puritans, however, believed that a pious life was more important than this sacrament, and wished to have less church hierarchy involved in daily life; infant baptism thus fell out of favor. Apparently, however, Essex, Massachusetts gained a new minister who reverted to requiring infant baptism for salvation, and this change was a problem for many.

Lady Deborah Moody was to appear in court for “not believing in infant baptism.” Lady Moody did not appear in court but it was said that she was “in a way of conviction before the elders.” Apparently the church elders were going to work with her to change her beliefs, but quite a number of residents were cited for similar “mis”-convictions:

“Mr. Cobbett taught things against his [the defendant, William Winter’s] own conscience, and for speaking against the ordinance of infant baptism… He is willing to see the light from speech of our elder Mr. Norris. To acknowledge his fault next lecture and ask Mr. Cobbet’s forgiveness.”

“Thomas Patience by a common fame, and upon vehement suspicion, not only of holding, but also of fomenting ye error that baptism of infants is no ordinance of God, and hindering his child from baptism.”

Not only was holding thoughts against infant baptism bad, but “argument in public” or “speaking contemptuously of it” were also prosecuted.

Religious services went long into the Sabbath, and the crowded churches were probably warm on humid summer days, and cold in the winter. The droning words of the sermon likely had a soporific effect, especially after six days of hard labor, but acting on those sleepy impulses was not acceptable:

Jeffrey Esty/Estie was “admonished for much sleeping on the Lord’s days in time of exercise.”

‘Exercise’ in this case is a religious observance or service, not ‘working out’ as we know it.

Roger Scott of Lynn was brought to court for “common sleeping at public exercise on Lord’s day, and for striking him who waked him.” (!!)

The Sabbath had restrictions on what could be done that day- absolutely no work:

The servant John Colever was presented to the court for “carrying a burden on the Lord’s day.” He did not appear, as he was out of the country.

During that same session, Joshua Downing was called for “carrying a burden upon an ass on ye Lord’s day about two years ago.” (No statute of limitations?) Richard Norman was “fined for slighting ordinances and carrying burden on Lord’s day.”

“Ordinances” were part of the church ritual in this case, not just the town laws. One William Robinson not only slighted, but was absent from ordinances, and was cited as well for “carrying a fowling piece on Lord’s day.” As a ‘fowling piece’ was a gun used to shoot birds, hopefully he had leftovers available for dinner.

The old village stocks in Chapeltown, Lancashire, England, via Wikimedia, CC by 2.5 license, author Austen Redman.
The old village stocks in Chapeltown, Lancashire, England, via Wikimedia, CC by 2.5 license, author Austen Redman.

We take our free speech for granted, and grew up learning that the colonists came to this country in order to find the freedom of speech and religion they did not have in England. That freedom apparently only went so far. One William Goult of Salem, was cited “for reproachful and unseemly speeches against the rule of ye church.”

Punishment for his freely spoken words was “to sit in stocks an hour and be severely whipped next lecture day.” Part of the public humiliation included that the feet protruding from the stocks were to be bare (how scandalous!), and the weather did not matter- these court cases occurred in winter, so that one hour of public indignity was probably pretty miserable. Assuredly the whipping on the next lecture day would have been worse. Both of these punishments are found in the bible.

 

Notes, Sources, and References: 

    1. The Essex Antiquarian. Salem, MA: The Essex Antiquarian, 13 vols. 1897-1909. (Online database: AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2006.) Volume 4, pages 123-126.

 

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.

Workday Wednesday: They just don’t make ’em like this anymore…

Broida Family (Click for Family Tree)

Rereading the obituary of Buster Broida/ Max Broida, it is sad to think that he ended up mostly alone, selling pari-mutuel tickets at the racetrack in between acting jobs, just to pay the bills. There was a brighter side of Hollywood, however, and Max likely saw some of that in the movies as he worked to make them. (Can you imagine being on the set of “The Wizard of Oz”?) Most of our other ancestors of the 20th century- those who went to the movies- saw this bright side too, and it definitely helped them get through the challenging years of the Depression and World War II. Mary Helbling McMurray talked of going to the movies with her girlfriends after work, and they loved these types of films.

What would these folks think of today’s music? There are now so many musical genres that they couldn’t have even imagined, with our electronic instruments, a looser moral code, and ‘unique’ combinations. (Christian gangsta rap???) Much of their music was considered risqué or not appropriate for refined young ladies and gentlemen in their time, too.

We also need to consider the context of their times- it was ‘shocking’ back then to see Shirley Temple dancing with a black servant, though made more ‘okay’ since she was a little girl and the darling of America. Glad that most of us are past that today. (Can’t believe it had to be ‘most of us’ instead of just the all-inclusive, “we.”)

Here is an earlier version featuring Fred Astaire, not a mix of many films:

I’ll bet Buster Brodie could ‘cut a rug.’ Take a look at how much rhythm he has in “Groovy Movie” as they dance the jitterbug. (Buster is the piano player.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbaNYWkQYYA

 

Notes, Sources, and References: 

  1. Slate article- http://www.slate.com/articles/video/video/2015/11/mashup_of_uptown_funk_and_hollywood_golden_era_movie_dancing_video.html
  2. 66 Old Movie Dance Scenes- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1F0lBnsnkE
  3.  Fred Astaire with “Uptown Funk.”- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb3VTnuuuRI
  4. “Groovy Movie”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbaNYWkQYYA

 

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.

Thankful Thursday: Thanksgiving Day has New Meaning This Year

Jennie Augusta Brownscombe, The First Thanksgiving at Plymouth, 1914, Pilgrim Hall Museum, Plymouth, Massachusetts. via Wikipedia, public domain.
Jennie Augusta Brownscombe, The First Thanksgiving at Plymouth, 1914, Pilgrim Hall Museum, Plymouth, Massachusetts. via Wikipedia, public domain.

McMurray Family, Burnell Family (Click for Family Tree)

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: 

  1. The Puritan Family. Religion & Domestic Relations in Seventeenth Century New England by Edmund S. Morgan, the premier Puritan historian. Harper-Perennial, 1966 edition.
  2. Wikipedia- Puritans – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritans

 

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.