The lineage of Esther Baldwin (1746 - 1820)
In my first post I listed my lineage dating back to Robert Baldwin and Agnes Dolte. There was something pretty funny lookin' if you took notice of generation #9, where Asahel Baldwin married an Esther with a maiden name of Baldwin. I was recently able to look into and verify her lineage back to Joseph and his father Richard using Charles Candee Baldwin's The Baldwin Genealogy and its supplemental volume, and please see my previous post "The Problem of Richard Baldwin" for further exposition on the previous generations back to Robert.
After doing this research I can put together a second, different line of descent from Robert Baldwin and Agnes Dolte down to Esther Baldwin, and then down to myself, and it reads as follows:
2) John Baldwin of the Hale (c.1500 - 1566) - Wife Unknown**
3) Thomas Baldwin (1542* - 1570) - Jane Tyndall(?) (1552 - 1612)*
4) Richard Baldwin (1565^ - 1632) - Isabella Harding (d.1633)
5) Joseph Baldwin (1609 - 1684) - Hannah Witlock (1616 - 1661)
6) David Baldwin (1651 - 1689) - Mary Stream (1651 - 1712)3) Thomas Baldwin (1542* - 1570) - Jane Tyndall(?) (1552 - 1612)*
4) Richard Baldwin (1565^ - 1632) - Isabella Harding (d.1633)
5) Joseph Baldwin (1609 - 1684) - Hannah Witlock (1616 - 1661)
7) Samuel Baldwin (1683 - 1740) - Sarah Kirby (b.1685)
8) Samuel Baldwin (b.1713) - Grace Buck (1719 - 1785)
9) Esther Baldwin (1746 - 1820) - Asahel Baldwin (1739 -1821)
10) Isaac Baldwin (1787 - 1845) - Amanda Drake (1796 - 1899)
11) William H. Baldwin (1816 - 1862) - Fidelia A. Thomson (1820 - 1844)
12) Lyman J. Baldwin (1843 - 1921) - Elizabeth A. Wolcott (1847 - 1938)
13) William H. Baldwin (1866 - 1951) - Irene Keeler (1869 - 1953)
14) Lyman J. Baldwin (1889 - 1981) - Bessie Siddell (1898 - 1977)
15) L. L. Baldwin (1921 - 1996) - H. M. Baldwin (1928 - 2011)
16) W. Baldwin - L. Baldwin
17) William Baldwin, Myself
Earlier I briefly mentioned Asahel and Esther; I'll be elaborating on that point now. Because Asahel and Esther Baldwin (descendants of Sylvester and Joseph, respectively) both descended an equal number of generations from Robert Baldwin and Agnes (Dolte) Baldwin, that is, they were both Robert's sixth great-grandchildren, then Asahel and Esther were seventh cousins to each other when they married. This is no social taboo; even in those days it was not uncommon for first cousins to marry. Genetically speaking even third cousins only share .78 % of their DNA. A seventh cousin is more of a fun-fact than a scandal when it comes to a spouse.
For the record, I like to use the cousin calculator located here:
Using this I can determine that Joseph was Asahel's 3rd cousin 4x removed. The same relationship exists between Esther and Sylvester. Other relationships between people on the two branches can be calculated using the above resource, or in your head if you're REALLY good.
But because I am descended the same number of generations from Asahel and Esther, cousins themselves, and then also both Joseph Baldwin and Sylvester Baldwin, then these two are both equally my 10th great-grandfathers. This means I share the same familial relationships with either of their ancestors and descendants, when it comes to figuring out cousins. And, as I mentioned, these two were 3rd cousins themselves, having the same great-great-grandfather, Robert Baldwin. So because Joseph is my 10th great-grandfather and Sylvester is Robert's 2nd great-grandson, then this makes Sylvester my 3rd cousin 12 times removed. But Sylvester is also my 10th great-grandfather, and Joseph is also Robert's 2nd great-grandson, which makes Joseph my 3rd cousin 12 times removed also.
This is all very awkward.
I don't know if Proper Genealogists count such connections, but let's have some fun. I can take this idea even further. If I, as a descendant of Robert Baldwin through Sylvester's line being his (Robert's) 14th great-grandson, am also, relative to this, a descendant of my 3rd cousin 12 times removed, say, Joseph, being his 10th great-grandson, then the 10th great-grandson of my 3rd cousin 12 times removed should always be my 15th cousin evenly.
Therefore, I am 15th cousins with myself.
But it gets worse! Or better, depending on which way your mind slants.
If we follow this logic, then I am 15th cousins with my own brother. I am 15th cousins once removed with my own nephew and niece, and I become the 14th cousin once removed of my own father, aunt, and uncle. Unfortunately this makes my own brother the 15th cousin once removed to his own children.
Let's take it even further still, because that's what I do. If indeed we are all related to one another due to statistics, probability, pedigree collapse and common ancestors, that makes us not only cousins to every other person on earth, but this also means that everyone who has married in recorded history was already cousins with each of their spouses.
In other words, I may be my own cousin, but then again, so are you.
Next time: Robert, Dundridge, and earlier Baldwins. This next post should conclude the "introduction" of the Baldwin blog.
Notes:
* I have found these dates sourced from apparent birth records held in England. However I can not access these records at this time so I will place this note here.
** John's wife died prior to the proving of his will and I can find no name or information about her.
^ See previous post for discussion on birth year. May well have been 1576, but I just don't know.
So this means that we have two distinct lines of Baldwin lineage that split after Robert and Agnes. Their sons, two brothers named John (of the Hale) and Richard (1503), each wed, reproduced, and had many descendants. This Richard's great grandson, Sylvester, was the same Baldwin who emigrated over in 1638 as I discussed, aboard the ship Martin. However, John's great grandson Joseph also emigrated over with his two brothers Timothy and Nathaniel and settled in Milford CT at the same time. This made Joseph and Sylvester both great-great-grandsons of Robert, and therefore 3rd cousins to one another. I'll bring this up again later. It's fun.
Some sources I found have stated that the Martin carried no fewer than 13 Baldwins on the same voyage, the one on which Sylvester father of Richard (1622) died. A Quinnipiac University page made this claim and contained language which identified Joseph, Nathaniel, and Timothy as the cousins of Sylvester Baldwin. This also offers some insight on the passenger list itself. The only list I could find included four Baldwins and only a few other passengers, from two other families (I believe I included it in my third post). The list is known to be incomplete because Sylvester and Sarah Bryant had six children with them upon arrival in Milford; only two, Richard and Sarah were mentioned on the list.
So who else could be missing?
If there were 13 Baldwins on the Martin then it might have included Sylvester, Sarah, children Richard, Sarah, Mary, Martha, Ruth, John (of Stonington), and the three brothers Timothy, Nathaniel, and Joseph. That's eleven Baldwins so far.
Two other Johns appear around this time. One of these was a witness to Sylvester's oral will in court. This John could have been the one known as John of Milford, since he would have been old enough. In addition, to witness the will he would also had to have been present on the ship. This John had two wives (I doubt they were concurrent) and fifteen children between the two!
The other John was known as John of Norwich. A Baldwin cousin named John D. Baldwin wrote in "Descendants of John Baldwin of Stonington" that "John Baldwin of Norwich traveled with Sylvester's family on ship "Martin" but was only 6 or 7 yrs old". If this is the case, and since young children would not have been able to witness in court, then this provides us with our thirteenth Baldwin. John of Norwich was an orphan and traveled with Sylvester's family, living with them until he was of age. So then he could not have been a son of John of Milford.
Both Charles' Genealogy and John D. Baldwin mentioned an old family bible that contained some of the above information. However it has since been lost and not recovered to my knowledge.
The relations to these two Johns to the rest of the Baldwins and my branches in particular have not become clear to me as of yet.
The three brothers Timothy, Joseph, and Nathaniel each have a stone on the Milford Memorial Bridge. I'm glad I took pictures of them at the time; i figured we would end up being related somehow. I never thought one would turn out to be a direct 10th great-grandfather though.
* I have found these dates sourced from apparent birth records held in England. However I can not access these records at this time so I will place this note here.
** John's wife died prior to the proving of his will and I can find no name or information about her.
^ See previous post for discussion on birth year. May well have been 1576, but I just don't know.
So this means that we have two distinct lines of Baldwin lineage that split after Robert and Agnes. Their sons, two brothers named John (of the Hale) and Richard (1503), each wed, reproduced, and had many descendants. This Richard's great grandson, Sylvester, was the same Baldwin who emigrated over in 1638 as I discussed, aboard the ship Martin. However, John's great grandson Joseph also emigrated over with his two brothers Timothy and Nathaniel and settled in Milford CT at the same time. This made Joseph and Sylvester both great-great-grandsons of Robert, and therefore 3rd cousins to one another. I'll bring this up again later. It's fun.
13 Baldwins on the Martin?
John of Stonington, John of Norwich, John of MilfordSome sources I found have stated that the Martin carried no fewer than 13 Baldwins on the same voyage, the one on which Sylvester father of Richard (1622) died. A Quinnipiac University page made this claim and contained language which identified Joseph, Nathaniel, and Timothy as the cousins of Sylvester Baldwin. This also offers some insight on the passenger list itself. The only list I could find included four Baldwins and only a few other passengers, from two other families (I believe I included it in my third post). The list is known to be incomplete because Sylvester and Sarah Bryant had six children with them upon arrival in Milford; only two, Richard and Sarah were mentioned on the list.
So who else could be missing?
If there were 13 Baldwins on the Martin then it might have included Sylvester, Sarah, children Richard, Sarah, Mary, Martha, Ruth, John (of Stonington), and the three brothers Timothy, Nathaniel, and Joseph. That's eleven Baldwins so far.
Two other Johns appear around this time. One of these was a witness to Sylvester's oral will in court. This John could have been the one known as John of Milford, since he would have been old enough. In addition, to witness the will he would also had to have been present on the ship. This John had two wives (I doubt they were concurrent) and fifteen children between the two!
The other John was known as John of Norwich. A Baldwin cousin named John D. Baldwin wrote in "Descendants of John Baldwin of Stonington" that "John Baldwin of Norwich traveled with Sylvester's family on ship "Martin" but was only 6 or 7 yrs old". If this is the case, and since young children would not have been able to witness in court, then this provides us with our thirteenth Baldwin. John of Norwich was an orphan and traveled with Sylvester's family, living with them until he was of age. So then he could not have been a son of John of Milford.
Both Charles' Genealogy and John D. Baldwin mentioned an old family bible that contained some of the above information. However it has since been lost and not recovered to my knowledge.
The relations to these two Johns to the rest of the Baldwins and my branches in particular have not become clear to me as of yet.
The three brothers Timothy, Joseph, and Nathaniel each have a stone on the Milford Memorial Bridge. I'm glad I took pictures of them at the time; i figured we would end up being related somehow. I never thought one would turn out to be a direct 10th great-grandfather though.
 |
| Stone, 10th G.Grandparents Joseph Baldwin & Hannah Witlock |
 |
| My 11th Great-Uncle Nathaniel and 11th Great-Aunt Abigail |
 |
| My 11th Great-Uncle Timothy and 11th Great-Aunt Mary |
I'm my own cousin? (And so are you!)
Earlier I briefly mentioned Asahel and Esther; I'll be elaborating on that point now. Because Asahel and Esther Baldwin (descendants of Sylvester and Joseph, respectively) both descended an equal number of generations from Robert Baldwin and Agnes (Dolte) Baldwin, that is, they were both Robert's sixth great-grandchildren, then Asahel and Esther were seventh cousins to each other when they married. This is no social taboo; even in those days it was not uncommon for first cousins to marry. Genetically speaking even third cousins only share .78 % of their DNA. A seventh cousin is more of a fun-fact than a scandal when it comes to a spouse.
For the record, I like to use the cousin calculator located here:
Using this I can determine that Joseph was Asahel's 3rd cousin 4x removed. The same relationship exists between Esther and Sylvester. Other relationships between people on the two branches can be calculated using the above resource, or in your head if you're REALLY good.
But because I am descended the same number of generations from Asahel and Esther, cousins themselves, and then also both Joseph Baldwin and Sylvester Baldwin, then these two are both equally my 10th great-grandfathers. This means I share the same familial relationships with either of their ancestors and descendants, when it comes to figuring out cousins. And, as I mentioned, these two were 3rd cousins themselves, having the same great-great-grandfather, Robert Baldwin. So because Joseph is my 10th great-grandfather and Sylvester is Robert's 2nd great-grandson, then this makes Sylvester my 3rd cousin 12 times removed. But Sylvester is also my 10th great-grandfather, and Joseph is also Robert's 2nd great-grandson, which makes Joseph my 3rd cousin 12 times removed also.
This is all very awkward.
I don't know if Proper Genealogists count such connections, but let's have some fun. I can take this idea even further. If I, as a descendant of Robert Baldwin through Sylvester's line being his (Robert's) 14th great-grandson, am also, relative to this, a descendant of my 3rd cousin 12 times removed, say, Joseph, being his 10th great-grandson, then the 10th great-grandson of my 3rd cousin 12 times removed should always be my 15th cousin evenly.
Therefore, I am 15th cousins with myself.
But it gets worse! Or better, depending on which way your mind slants.
If we follow this logic, then I am 15th cousins with my own brother. I am 15th cousins once removed with my own nephew and niece, and I become the 14th cousin once removed of my own father, aunt, and uncle. Unfortunately this makes my own brother the 15th cousin once removed to his own children.
Let's take it even further still, because that's what I do. If indeed we are all related to one another due to statistics, probability, pedigree collapse and common ancestors, that makes us not only cousins to every other person on earth, but this also means that everyone who has married in recorded history was already cousins with each of their spouses.
In other words, I may be my own cousin, but then again, so are you.
Next time: Robert, Dundridge, and earlier Baldwins. This next post should conclude the "introduction" of the Baldwin blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment