Saturday, February 10, 2018

Questions You Always Wanted to Ask About Life in Colonial New England: Did they Bathe?

Mary Cassatt The Child's Bath
Ah, there is nothing better than a steaming hot shower or, more relaxing than a long soak in a tub full of hot water. We view a lack of hot water on par with a constitutional crisis, a lack of running water is unimaginable. A day or two without the ability to bathe reduces us to a stinking, nasty haired mess, unfit for public consumption. What then was life like for our ancestor who lived without running water hot or cold. How did they bathe? Did they bathe? How bad did they smell? I imagine they stunk pretty bad.  

Our ancestors faced multiple obstacles in the pursuit of bathing, if indeed they did pursue a bath. The early New England homes were only one or two rooms, full of large families and servants. The lived in a world almost devoid of privacy. Who wants to strip down in front of an audience, well back then anyway. Eventually houses expanded, but the heating did not. A New England bed chamber might be little warmer than the outside temperature in the dead of winter. Not much incentive remove any clothing, not to mention all your apparel. 

The next stumbling block is the lack of an adequate tub. Not everyone had a waterproof container large enough to accommodate a fully grown adult and if they did it was likely the washtub for doing laundry. The tub would have to be moved into the house for the bather. Then, adequate hot water would have to be heated to ensure at least a lukewarm experience. A bath required a lot of work and logistics, so how often did it happen? Did our Colonial ancestors even want to take a bath? It seems that many did not. 

The Romans, loved to bathe. They built large public baths so that everyone, rich or poor could be clean, at least once a week any way.  In the Middle Ages, bathing, as in fully immersing ones body in water, was almost unheard of. The Native Americans, first encountered by our English immigrant ancestors, bathed regularly, albeit in rivers, steams, lakes and other bodies of water. They found our ancestors a smelly bunch. Indeed, our earliest American ancestors may have gone their whole lives with a decent bath. In 1872 Mary Baker Eddy wrote a book, Science and Health, in which she said that "washing should be only to keep the body clean," and indicated that a less than daily scrubbing was all that was necessary. When bathing in tubs finally became acceptable, it was done once a week, on a Saturday. 

So what did these people do. The most common method of cleaning oneself was with a rag and a bit of water. Washing one's hands and face before eating was popular. The housewife might even have a basin of warm water ready before serving her meals. She might have a bar of soap, but it was used for laundry not for washing human skin. So the average person, when wanting to clean up a bit, gave themselves a sponge bath. 


Under clothes were laundered frequently. Made of linen they lay next to the skin. The other clothes, dresses and breeches were usually made of heavy wool, which could only be brushed but not washed. Wealthy people had several sets of clothes, but those on the poorer end of the spectrum might have only the one. They wore their clothes until they fell apart. Many a will included distribution of articles of clothing, described as my best dress, or my best suit of clothes. Because these items were never laundered, only aired out, they took probably smelled  pretty bad after a while. 


How did women keep clean while on their menstrual cycle? You were hoping I'd ask, right? Can you imagine dealing with that mess without all our current 'feminine hygiene products,' I can't.   Some historians put forward the idea that women just bleed into their clothes, but this does not ring true to me. Imagine walking around with blood running down your legs and into your shoes seems too gross to be real. I have to believe that they used something to absorb the blood. Rags seem to be the answer. Since women didn't wear 'underwear' I'm not sure how they remained in place, but I could probably make a guess. Imagine going through that every month. However, I think for most women back then, once they were married, a period was not as frequent an event as it is for today's women who can control their ability to conceive. Once a menstruating women got married she quickly found herself pregnant. After she gave birth she might nurse the baby for a year or more, her period would not resume until the baby was weaned. The next pregnancy put an end to her cycle again. Most women gave birth every two or so years, so between the pregnancies and the nursing there were very few menstrual cycles.


Of lice and men. Yes, you read it right. Lice were a bane of the colonial housewife. Just as contagious as today, those nasty, itchy creatures inhabited the heads of our ancestors. Lice combs, just as today, were used to scrape the nits from the hair. It is suggested that wigs became popular as a way to shave your head, and avoid lice, who did not live in wigs.  These pesky creatures afflicted people of all social classes, and along with fleas and bed bugs were a bane to be born. 


Go swimming! One way to get clean, sort of, was to go swimming. This was easier to do the further south you lived, but people did swim, not necessarily to get clean, but it was a by-product of the act. This was likely an activity enjoyed by men, so for a brief moment they smelled slightly better than the women folk. 

In conclusion, our ancestors made some attempt to be clean but fell well short of modern standards of hygiene. We could likely smell them coming and going with a bit of gagging when they got too close. That being said, these people lived in an intensely smelly world. Smoke from the chimney, rancid oil from lamps, farm animals and dung, privies, and chamber pots, food odors and midden heaps all contributed to the miasma of smell in which they lived. 

For a peek into the lives of our New England ancestors, read my book, Weave a Web of Witchcraft. Set in Springfield, Massachusetts in the year 1651, it follows the story of Hugh and Mary Parsons who were accused and tried as witches. More than just a story of witchcraft, the book describes daily life in Puritan Massachusetts and the struggle to survive. 









Sunday, February 4, 2018

Questions You Always Wanted to Ask About Life in Colonial New England: What did they eat?

Pottage: It's Whats for Dinner

 Did you grow up in one of those families that had 'Meatloaf Mondays','Taco Tuesdays,' and so on through the week culminating in the Sunday roast. You need what day of the week it was by what appeared on the dinner table. People of a certain age will remember homemade pizza from a box and if you were feeling really exotic you had Chinese, which came in various cans. Today we food from every nation. It is nothing to whip up a Chicken Tikka Masala or Thai noodle soup. Still, we find ourselves bored when we eat 'the same food' to often. 

Pottage! from emaze.com
Do you ever wonder what our ancestors ate, those long ago migrants to a new land? They landed on a shore teeming with waterfowl and wild turkeys. The woods were home to deer. The rivers ran with salmon and shad. The coastline abounded with clams and mussels, oysters and lobster lay just off shore.  Their were bogs full of cranberries and blueberry bushes with their sweet purple berries. Their Native American neighbors introduced them to pumpkins. A veritable smorgasbord was laid out before them. So what did they eat? Pottage. 

What is pottage you ask. Pottage was a mixture of dried grain, vegetables, herbs and if available some meat, boiled in an iron pot over the fire until it all reached the desired consistency: mush. This was eaten at all times of the day. You might have heard the child rhyme, Pease Porridge Hot, well pease porridge was a pottage made of dried peas. It could also be made with corn or oatmeal. The housewife might also add some dried salt pork or salt beef or venison. Chowder was originally a seafood pottage. When sheep became plentiful, mutton was added to the pot. 

Fresh meat was a rare treat. Most animals were slaughtered and the meat salted as a means of preservation. One exception was bacon, which was smoked to preserve it. Fruit was eaten in season or dried to eat in the cold winter months. Pickled vegetables of all sorts appeared on the Colonial table. Salat (salad) of fresh greens was also served. But most food was boiled. 

Boston Baked Beans from Chowhound
As the houses of those first settlers were enlarged and improved and brick chimneys became the norm, baking food became popular. Instead of your meal coming out of a single pot, it might be baked into a pie. Mince meat pies, unlike to ones we associate with Christmas, contained meat. Fruits of all sorts were baked into pies as was the pumpkin. Everyone's heard of Boston baked beans, haven't you? They were served with baked brown bread made from rye. The most frequent type of bread served was cornbread as wheat was difficult to grow. Wheat flour was used only to make the best bread and few people ate it on a daily basis. 

Hasty pudding was a staple. Made from cornmeal it was a polenta like dish. It could be eaten as cornmeal mush with a little molasses or milk or chilled, sliced and fried just like Italian polenta. Johnny cakes were made of corn and look just like pancakes. Hominy was dried corn, with it's hull removed, boiled until tender. It was served on it's own or in a pottage. 

Hasty Pudding, from Dit-Elle.org
The early American dairymen made cheese; a firm aged cheddar like cheese, and of course butter. So life wasn't so bad, not when there's cheese! All in all it was a very predictable, monotonous diet interspersed with fresh fruits and veggies. Children did not wake up an ask, 'mom, what's for dinner.' They already knew the answer. Pottage may have been tasty, but if you have to eat everyday, meals became less about eating for pleasure and more about eating to live. Still, it was all washed down with alcohol. 

In my novel, Weave a Web of Witchcraft, I tell the story of Hugh and Mary Parsons of Springfield, Massachusetts. The were both accused of Witchcraft and other crimes in 1651. The book details daily life in Colonial Massachusetts. The production, preparation, cooking and consuming of food took up most of their waking hours. My book can be found on amazon.com.






More burning questions about Colonial life:

Where did they sleep?

Where did they use the toilet?



Saturday, January 27, 2018

Questions You Always Wanted To Ask About Life in Colonial New England: Beds and Sleeping Arrangements




My previous blog post cover the delicate issue of early American 'restrooms.' The idea of going in a chamber pot is enough to convince me that I would not do well living in the past. Time machines are great, but only if I can come home at night for a hot shower and a flushable toilet. But what if the time machine malfunctioned and I was forced to have a pre-revolution sleep-over, what would my accommodations be like? Let's find out.

So, I just read a fantastic book called Dissenting Bodies by Martha Finch. It's a superb reference on the daily lives of our Great Migration ancestors. She delves into the nitty-gritty of daily life for these hardy people, including their bedroom furniture. Have you ever read a pre-1700 estate inventory? They are amazing documents which frequently feature all things bedding. Every sheet and pillowcase was documented and bequeathed to someone.  These wills also give details on various types of beds, although I have yet to see a Beauty Rest listed. 

The original colonist built small single room houses. A 20 x 20 square house might be home to ten people. Clearly each of these people did not have a bed to themselves. There was a lot of sharing going on. What you slept on had a lot to do with your economic status and your rank in the household. Parents typically had the best bed, servants the least comfortable. When houses began to expand into the two room hall and parlor style, the parents moved their bed and their best furniture into the parlor, everyone else slept in the hall. Babies usually slept in a cradle near it's mother. Young children often slept on a trundle bed near their parents. Older children and servants slept in the hall or in the loft built inside the house. Privacy was all but nonexistent. The parents, if they had the means, might have a bed with curtains or hangings around it, providing some degree of privacy. According to Finch, few people at the end of the 17th century slept alone. Everyone shared a bed with someone. 

Pallet/Flock bed
A pallet was probably just as awful as it sounds. A flock bed was basically a coarse linen 'bag' filled with rags and straw. This would be placed directly on the floor. Depending on it's size it might be shared by several people. 




Feather bed
This was a bed to aspire to, a linen sack filled with feathers. I'm not sure how many birds had to give up their feathers to make a bed, but I'm betting it was alot.

Bedsteads
If you were lucky, your bed was not on the floor but placed on a bedstead. Again, you got what you paid for. The bed might be little more than a wooden frame strung with rope. The finer beds had headboards and foot boards and the best beds had an upper frame from which could be hung curtains. The curtains afforded a small bit of privacy and keep out drafts. 

Settle bed
A settle bed was a bench by day, but opened into a bed at night, thus making the most of the small space. 

Trundle bed
A trundle was a small bed frame that was pushed under a larger bedstead to get it out of the way when not in use. 

Linens
Linens also were listed in the probate inventories along with the beds. Sheets were made of linen, in various degrees of quality. Like today, the colonist slept covered first with a sheet and then a blanket. A coverlet, if they had one, went on top of the blanket. The sleeper had a pillow in a pillow case. There might also be an item called a bolster on the bed. No one seems to be exactly sure what a bolster was but Finch guesses it might have meant an extra firm mattress or a some type of pillow used to give extra support to the head. 

Status symbol
It seems hard to believe, but a bed could denote your status to visitors. Guest were entertained in the parlor when the housewife showed off her most prized possessions, including her bed. Rich embroidered fabrics let everyone know that you were someone to be reckoned with. Beds and linen were so valuable that they often made up a sizable portion of a colonist's estate. 

Source:
Martha Finch, Dissenting Bodies, (New York : Columbia University Press, 2010).

More burning questions:

What did they eat?

Where did they use the toilet?







Saturday, January 20, 2018

Questions you always wanted to ask about life in Colonial New England: Where did they use 'The Bathroom'?


As a lover of history as well as genealogy, I try to imagine what the day to day life of my ancestors was like. Anyone who says they'd love to live in the past, to my mind, is crazy. Life was hard, dangerous and very smelly. I have done a lot of research on daily life in early New England for my recently published book, Weave a Web of Witchcraft, set in the 1650s. So, I thought I write some articles based on my research. 


Today I'm blogging about 'the bog'.What's a bog you ask. It's British slang for the toilet, yes you heard me right the toilet, bathroom, restroom, take your pick. Culturally we have an amazing  amount of slang words for the toilet. There's polite slang like "the ladies." There's rude slang, which I won't repeat here, but some of it's pretty funny, also names like "the John." There is also some old names like privy, jakes, loo, WC and latrine. These days when we speak about going to the toilet we are referring to indoor toilets with plumbing and running hot and cold water. But what did people, our ancestors, do before indoor amenities were developed. How and where did they go?  

These days most of us, and I'm speaking as a female here, are rather squeamish about all things having to do with elimination of bodily waste. We can't even say the words, we have to use special code numbers; number one and number two. Even then, saying number two can make most of us blush. Some of us have bladders so shy that we cannot pee in a public restroom never mind do the other thing. Recently, a new product came on the market that you spray into the toilet when you have to 'launch a rocket' and it blocks creates a barrier which locks in any accompanying odors. Speaking of smells, tooting in public has got to be one of the most humiliating things a person can do, at least for anyone over the age of 12. 

Were our ancestors as fastidious? Did our GGGGG grandmothers blush with shame if they let one loose in company. Come on you know you really want to know. So, here's what I found out about our ancestors and their bogs.

Close stool in the back and chamber pot on the floor. The
painting is called Lady at her Toilet, c. 1650.
My interest lies with the average Joe, not the hoi poloi, although I really would like to know how Marie Antoinette used the potty while wearing one of those fantastical dresses. No matter how wealthy you were in the 1600s you still did not have indoor plumbing, you just had fancier options.

Anyway, I want to focus on our ancestors who immigrated to New England and other English colonies in the years before indoor plumbing was common. These people had three choices when nature beckoned. Plein Air, the chamber pot or a privy. 

Plein Air
Ah, the great outdoors. Need to pee, find a tree, or a bush or a rock. Farmers often toiled in fields far from home. Did they hoof it all the to their house or just drop their drawers. I think you know the answer to that. There was no toilet paper yet, so you just grabbed a handful of leaves or grass, whatever was handy.

Chamber Pot
ironstsone/china chamber pot for sale on Etsy
Did you know there is a museum in Prague dedicated to toilets, who knew. They have over 2000 examples of chamber pots and other vessels, large and small. Chamber pots have been used for centuries. The were usually made of pottery or porcelain with a handle on one side. To make use of the pot, one would simple squat over it and, well you know. This was handy on those cold winter nights or days, when the thought of going outside made you shudder. Chamber pots could be slotted into a seat so that one did not have to squat down, rather you simple sat, like on today's pottys. 


So the chamber pot option doesn't sound too bad, except for one thing. The size of your house. Now the early immigrants to New England lived in very small houses. The first houses in Plymouth Plantation were small one room buildings. The family socialized, cooked, ate, worked, slept and did their 'business' all in the same room. And, these families might be a father, mother and 10-12 children and possibly a servant or two. That's a lot of poop, and a lot of people sitting around while you pooping. That tree is sounding pretty good right now. I can't imagine the lack of privacy in these people's lives. And the smell, don't get me started on that. How did they survive the stink of each other. Thank God for option three, the privy. 

The Privy
Howdy Neighbor!
The privy, better know to us as the outhouse, could be as simple as a hole in the ground with a board over it. There are websites that can give you 'off the grid'  types instructions in building and maintaining an outhouse. It begins with a deep, about six feet, hole in the ground. You need a platform with one or more openings, some walls and a roof and bam your in business and you can do your business in private. Some of our ancestors built elaborate outhouses with multiple 'seats' for bums of various sizes. Sometimes the outhouse were gender specific; one for females one for males. There are examples of privies that looked like miniature houses built of brick or with wainscoting and decorative finishes. One thing they did not have was heat!  

Vauxhall Garden 'Ladie's Room' 
A well dug privy could last a long time. Some folk put wood ashes over the 'deposits' to try to manage the smell, but lets face it, in the heat of summer, it must have been overwhelming.  Still you were on your own, unless you weren't. Let's say you were at a Church service or a party at an elegant home. The privy might be quite large and accommodate multiple patrons. There were no partitions to offer privacy. I suppose you just made the best of it and took the time to gossip or critique the sermon.  

What about toilet paper?
As I said earlier, toilet paper is a pretty modern invention. What did our ancestors do? According to the website the Plummer, vegetation was the most available option. According to them, many Americans used dried corncobs to clean themselves. This does not sound the least bit comfortable, rather like using sandpaper to my mind. Once paper, as in newspaper or books, became available it was also employed, but in early America paper was rare and I doubt it would have been wasted in that way. 

Conclusion
There are people today who excavate old privies. People tossed garbage into them, which today are valuable artifacts. Something to think about the next time you are seated in your warm bathroom. If you are looking for something to read while you complete you transaction, may I recommend my book, its a great read, but if you don't like it...you can still put it to good use.

More burning questions:
What did they eat?

Where did they sleep?


Monday, January 8, 2018

Weave a Web of Witchcraft: The story of Hugh and Mary Parsons of Springfield


When I was an Air Force nurse, I worked many a long boring night shift with nothing but a romance novel to keep me awake. I remember thinking at the time that I could write a book, a better book, than some of the cheap novels that were passed around the wards. I kicked the idea around for a while until life got too busy and the quality of my reading material improved. 


My interest in genealogy was the impetus to begin writing a blog, now I write two. Slowly the idea of writing a full length book floated through my mind until one day I decided to give it a try. My first book, Weave a Web of Witchcraft went live for sale on Amazon.com on January 8th. I have to say I am very proud of my book, God knows I spent enough time agonizing over it. 

The book is the story of Hugh and Mary Parsons, a real couple, who lived in Springfield, Massachusetts in the mid-17th century. Hugh was accused of witchcraft and deposed at length by William Pynchon before being turned over to the General Court in Boston. I tried to recreate the world in which Hugh and Mary lived, including details of daily life in those very trying times. 

If you have any interest in early American history, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, early colonial life, witches or trials, this book is for you. It is currently available only as a  Kindle edition, I am hoping to have a paperback version for sale soon. I will post when it is available. If you are interested in the book, click on the book, it will take you straight to Amazon, where you can 'look inside' and see if it is next on your reading list. 




Friday, December 29, 2017

English Ancestry of Moulton Immigrants to New England: Part III

The English ancestry of the Moulton brothers and their cousin who immigrated to New England was explored at great length in a Register article by William Haslett Jones in 1987. Since that article was published the further research has uncovered new information and new analysis of the old information has led to new conclusions. The genealogy of the 1987 article should not be used, rather the updated information in the 2009 article by Myrtle Stevens Hyde using the updated information is the most reliable.

See this article for Robert Multon and Margaret Watts
See this article for John Multon and his brother Thomas Multon



john 
John was born about 1563. He was the only child of his father's second wife. He had three half-siblings Robert, Margaret and Grace. In older genealogies John was said to be the oldest child but his has been disproved. John inherited his father's house and land in Ormesby St. Margaret. His mother had remarried, but was widowed a second time in 1579.

John married at age 21 on 14 June 1584, at the parish church of Hemsby. His bride was Ann Taylor, daughter of Robert and Margaret Taylor. The religion of the day was now firmly protestant, Catholics were in hiding, Puritanism was stirring. The Lord of the Manor was Sir Edward Clere. He had been knighted by Queen Elizabeth I in 1580 and served as Sheriff of Norfolk. The 16th century had seen a raise in enclosure of common land by large land owners. Sir Edward was complained on by his tenants for taking 30 acres of common ground and locking the gate to the common called Barrow Lowes, preventing his tenants from using the common marshes as summer pasture. Many of the land holders were called on to testify. This would have impacted John as, like his forefathers, he was a farmer. 

John inherited land from his father and when his brother Robert died, he inherited his house and land as well. He was called a yeoman, and left a healthy estate in his will proved 5 Feb 1637/8. He and Ann had at least nine children. He eldest son, Robert, died leaving children, named in their grandfather's will. John, son of Robert, was to receive a 'tithing' called Millers at the east end of Ormesby, in exchange for land he would have inherited from his father. Joseph Moulton was to receive his father's messuage and 11 acres of land. He was also to receive a messuage called Cordiner's. Ann Taylor Moulton survived her husband. He ordered that she would have use of the parlor chamber within the house and all his household stuff. Joseph had to provide wheat, malt, coal, faggots of wood, half the fruit of the orchard, a milk cow, and two swine. Furthermore, Joseph was directed to provide her with summer meat and winter meat. Ann would receive all this in lieu of claiming her dower or her thirds, something she would do if she chose to remarry.

benjamin
The only mention of his son Benjamin was a bequest to his daughter Hannah. Benjamin clearly was not alive, else he would have been named as a recipient of his father's will. His widow Mary remarried on 15 July 1623. Her second husband was William Eastow. By the time of his father's will in of Feb 1637/8 William and Mary Eastow and her son William Moulton had sailed for New England. This is a revision of William Moulton's ancestry as it had previously been believed that he was the son of Robert Moulton and Mary___Moulton Estow.

A review of powers of attorney in the Norfolk records office produced a power of attorney for William Moulton of Hampton, New Hampshire who wished to sell land he had inherited from his father who he named as Benjamin.

robert
Robert was the son of Thomas and Joan Green of Ormesby St. Margaret. He was most likely born in his parent's home in Ormesby. Thomas, his father, was not a land owner, and it is believed that he might have had a profession and/or some formal training. He leased land from his wife's nephew William Green. In his father's will, Robert was given draft horses, and farming implements. In a 1597 indenture, Robert Moulton, husbandman of Scratby, leased from Sir Edward Clere, lord of the manor of Ormesby, 22 parcels of land for 25 years. Most of the land was in Scratby; two parcels were in Caister. In a 1620 document, Rental of the Manor of Ormesby, then held by William Baispole, Robert Moulton held land in Scratby Bardolphes, some of it freehold.

Robert married Mary Smythe of Hemsby 1595. She was the daughter of Henry Smythe of Hemsby and possibly his wife Brydgett who was buried on 4 Jan 1611/12. In an earlier article Mary's father was misidentified as John Smith of Caister, but in his 1625 will, Henry Smythe calls Robert Moulton his son-in-law. He left Robert 24£, a half share of a marsh and the residual of his estate. Henry also named his great-grandson and namesake Henry, son of John Moulton. This confirms the relationship between Mary and her father. Henry, of note, had a estate valued at over 600£, the second largest in East Flegg from 1580-1680.

Robert and Mary had at least ten children. Three sons, John, James and Thomas immigrated to New England.

Robert died, probably at Scratby and was buried at Hemsby on 11 October 1633. Mary survived him and died in 1636, she was buried at Ormesby St. Margaret on 27 April 1636. In his will Robert called himself a yeoman. He left his wife Mary all his plate, four milk cows, four feather beds, ten milk bowls, four cheese vats, a table, four chairs and six stools. He had a house in Ormesby and his house and land on which he lived. He left money to his daughters, servants and grandchildren. He had definitely come a long way.


Sources:

William Haslet-Jones, "The English Background of Some Early Settlers of Hampton, New Hampshire From Ormesby St. Margaret, Norfolk," (The Moulton Family) The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (October 1987) Vol. 141, 313-329, digital images, American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11613/313/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Joan Wade Moulton, "Some Doubts About the English Background of the Moulton Family," The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (July 1990) Vol. 144, 245-263; digital images American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11735/245/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Barbara MacAllen, "More Thoughts on the Moulton Family," The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (April 1993) Vol. 147, 129-145; American Ancestors  
(https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11686/129/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Myrtle Stevens Hyde, "Revised Ancestry for William Moulton of Hampton, New Hampshire, Including Some Revisions of the Early Ancestry of His New England Cousins," New England Historical and Genealogical Register (July 2009) Vol. 163, 165-173 and 273-277; digital images, American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11728/165/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Thursday, December 28, 2017

English Ancestry of the Moulton Family Part II: John and Thomas Moulton of Ormesby St. Margaret

Part II

John and Thomas Moulton of Ormesby have had multiple revisions in their ancestry. Once thought to be cousins, it has been proven that they are brothers; sons of Robert and Margaret Watts of Ormesby. Their family tree looks like this:




john
John was possibly the second son of Robert and Margaret Watts Moulton. It seems there was a son, Robert, who died prior to his father. In the subsidy roll of 1523/24 there were two Robert Moultons; one was taxed for land, the second taxed for wages. These are assumed to be father and son. With his brother's death, John found himself the heir.

Robert Moulton wrote his will in 1535, after making the usual bequeaths, he gave the bulk of his estate to his son John, but only after the death of his mother, Margaret. Both John and Margaret were on the subsidy roll of 1545/1546 and again on the roll for 46-47, both mother and son are taxed. The next subsidy roll is for the year 1552 and John is the only Moulton on the roll. His mother must have died in the years between the rolls and by 1552 he had inherited his fathers house and property.

John seems to have been married twice. His first wife was Jone (Joan) Grene (Green). Joan was the daughter of Richard Green and his unknown wife. She was the mother of three children; Robert, Margaret and Grace, all named in their father's 1573 will.

thomazine
John's second wife was called Thomazine _____. It is believed that she was significantly younger than him. In earlier articles about John, (NEHGR 141:317) she was called Thomazine Greene, but this was corrected in a later article (NEHGR 163:169-170). Joan Moulton was named in her father's 1561 will.

Thomazine was born around 1530. She bore John a son, also John, in about 1563. He was only ten when his father died. His older siblings were all under the age of 20 as well. His half brother Robert died by 1600.

Thomazine remarried and had a one son with well to do John Hodgekyn of Ormebsy. In his will dated 8 September 1579, he left a significant amount of money to his 'little child.' He instructs that the boy be sent to school and when finished he tells his wife, 'bind him to son friends, so that he may make a living.' Thomas Moulton, her brother in law and Mr. William Greene, brother of John Moulton's first wife, were overseers of the will.

On 9 November 1580, Thomaszine married a third time to a William Taylor. The marriage took place at nearby Hemsby. He died in 1616 making her a widow for the third time. Thomazine died in 1619, a widow of Great Yarmouth. She names in her will her son John Moulton and leaves money to his children.

john's will
John wrote his will on 22 June 1573 and it was probated in October of that year. He was identified as a yeoman. He left his son John, the house and land where they then lived, it would be his when he reached age 21. Robert, his eldest son was given the house and land and the appurtenances (equipment) that had belonged to his parents. He also gave him some land in nearby Caister. He made an exception in the Ormesby property as he had sold four acres of it to his brother in law, William Green, who was not yet of age. His brother Thomas lived on that land.

His will is a window into the world of people on the edge of modern history. Such items as a bed standing in the solar eve, a bedstead, a feather bed, a bolster and sheets, a flock bed with a transom, a coverlet and a brass pot ignite the imagination. Most of these items are identifiable, others not so much. A flock bed, for instances, was one that laid directly on the floor. He also makes distribution of pewter plates, a table, livestock including, horses, milk cows, ewes and lambs, his market cart, and combs of wheat and barley. The will points to the most valuable possessions in the home were beds, linens and cooking and eating utensils.

John gives a detailed description of the land in Ormesby and the owners of land which bounded it. Two names jump out; Mr. William Paston, esq. and Edward Clere, esq. Sir William Paston was the grandson of John Paston, the younger, a member of The Paston Family of Norfolk, authors of the Paston Letters. He lived at Oxnead in Norfolk. If you've never read about the Paston Letters I recommend you do, it is a fascinating insight into the lives of medieval people. Sir Edward Clere was Lord of the Manor of Ormesby. The manor had been held by his family for several centuries.

thomas
Thomas was the younger son of Robert and Margaret Watts. He was born around 1513 and this is confirmed by a deposition in 1587 when he stated that he was 74 years old. His brother the heir got the house and land. Thomas was given money. Thomas was misidentified by William Haslett Jones as Thomas of the 'Scratby Line,' in his 1987 Register article (141:313-328). This has caused much confusion over who he was and where he lived. This has been corrected in subsequent articles.

Thomas does not appear to have ever owned land. It is believed that he leased the land  he lived on from William Green, his brother John's brother-in-law. It has been suggested that he had some other occupation, possibly some formal training, as well as being a part-time farmer. The fact that Thomas was appointed supervisor of the estate of William Ballard, Vicar of Ormesby, in 1579 indicating he held a position of importance in his community. His brother also chose him to supervise the estate of John Hodgekyn, his sister-in-laws second husband.

joan
Like his brother John, Thomas married later that average. His wife was another Jone (Joan) Grene (Green). Joan was the sister of Richard Green of Ormesby, who daughter Joan married John Moulton. This makes the relationship between the two women, sisters-in-law as well as aunt and niece.

Richard, whose parents are unknown, as is his wife, was born about 1505 and died in 1561. Haslet-Jones says he was a blacksmith. Joan, his sister, was born about 1530. She was married to Thomas and had a daughter Mary, who was named in her brother's will. She and Thomas had at least five children. Robert, the heir, William, Edmund, Rebecca (who married Thomas Hodgekyn, s/o John and Thomazine Hodgekyn) and Mary.

will
Thomas wrote his will in 1578. He asked to be buried in the churchyard of St. Margaret's in Ormesby. He gave his eldest son Robert two horses, one black, one brown. He gave him farm implements, plows and traces and horse collars. William was to receive twenty pounds when he reached the age of 21. All else was to go to Joan.

Sources:

All the sources for the genealogy of the Moultons comes from a series of articles in the New England  Historical and Genealogical Register.

William Haslet-Jones, "The English Background of Some Early Settlers of Hampton, New Hampshire From Ormesby St. Margaret, Norfolk," (The Moulton Family) The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (October 1987) Vol. 141, 313-329, digital images, American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11613/313/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Joan Wade Moulton, "Some Doubts About the English Background of the Moulton Family," The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (July 1990) Vol. 144, 245-263; digital images American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11735/245/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Barbara MacAllen, "More Thoughts on the Moulton Family," The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (April 1993) Vol. 147, 129-145; American Ancestors  
(https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11686/129/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).

Myrtle Stevens Hyde, "Revised Ancestry for William Moulton of Hampton, New Hampshire, Including Some Revisions of the Early Ancestry of His New England Cousins," New England Historical and Genealogical Register (July 2009) Vol. 163, 165-173 and 273-277; digital images, American Ancestors (https://www.americanancestors.org/DB202/i/11728/165/0 : accessed 28 December 2017).




















Roles of Men, Women and Children in 17th Century Puritan Massachusetts

In 17 th century pur itan Massachusetts , the roles of men , women and children were very clearly defined . Men were the ...