Re: Nathaniel Rockwood (B.1700)
-
In reply to:
Re: Nathaniel Rockwood (B.1700)
Alfred Dillon 10/04/03
Hello again, Alfred.Nice to talk to you.
Sorry for the long post, but there may be a hint or two for other Rockwood searchers here, so I posted here rather than writing directly.
I have not personally proofed from the old local records all the info I have received , but the portions of the work from this researcher that I *have* proofed have turned out to be accurate.'Theories' below
The information I have about the movements of Nathaniel (b 1700) is, in brief, that he was in a party of eight that surveyed in 1734, and then brought their families to, the place that became Keene, NH, then thought to be part of MA.
There were Indian troubles, and in 1735, this Nathaniel, "with others of the party, including Dea. Alexander, concluded to join their fortunes with a party ... granted a township at a place farther down the river, which he [the leader] called Arlington, now the town of Winchester."The information also says that, although Winchester also had its frontier troubles, "Mr. Rockwood, however, appears to have remained there..."and that "...he was frequently called upon to hold office".
It appears that Nathaniel (b 1700) had at least intermittent mentions in the local records at Winchester over the years.And he would have been in his 50s in the 1750s.
Re the Newfoundland Rockwoods, this is very interesting.And 'family stories' generally have some truth to them.You just have to some analyzing.
Was your earliest known Newfoundland Rockwood actually a "Nathaniel"?Important.
In looking at family stories, one has to try to put themselves into the place of the the grandfather or grandmother who told the grandkids....And what they would have known or remembered.
"The first Rockwood had seven sons."The first Rockwood in Newfoundland?The first Rockwood in the family on the continent that memories carried through about?The first immigrant of this family line?
I was aware of four sons of Nathaniel (b 1700) before you told me of three more, making seven.One died young?If he died at 14, he would have been remembered by the story source.If 'died young' meant one year old, the story teller might have talked of 'six sons'.
Nathaniel (b 1700) seems to have stayed local, and would have been in his 50s in the years you are exploring, but he also had a son Nathaniel (b 1728).....Just of an age to be elsewhere in the 1750s.Also another son or two who were old enough to be on their own, and may have later been the story source.
The elder Nathaniel's father, Nathaniel (b 1665), had five sons that I know of.And there could very well have been two more.In early genealogy research, when depending on local records, it was easy to miss a child or three.This was particularly true if they moved away.No local land records, no mentions in town or local military records, and they may even have been given their 'portion' when they moved, and with no records kept.So they may not have even been mentioned in a will. They just 'disappeared'.This occurs just as often in published genealogies, no matter how expert and careful they are.They can tell you about who they could find, but cannot tell you anything about a child who does not appear in local records.
The father of Nathaniel(b 1665), Nicholas, could easily have been seen as "first immigrant" a generation or so later.He had six sons that I am aware of from early records, so there could well have been another who moved away.Above applies.And any one of them could have had sons named Nathaniel.
Unfortunately, I also understand that there were other lineages of Rockwoods from what is now Great Britain that also came across the pond.
Who is the earliest person that you have information on *in* Newfoundland?I would love to help research connections between the Newfoundland and New England Rockwoods!Can you let us know the early bits from Newfoundland?
Thanks!
Linda Schreiber
More Replies:
-
Re: Nathaniel Rockwood (B.1700)
Alfred Dillon 10/06/03