Joseph Waterman, Died Young - Did he exist?

Private User and Roland Henry Baker, III

The problem would seem to center on the birth date of Joseph Waterman of Marshfield .

There are lots of references to this Joseph, seemingly the younger brother of Joseph Waterman of Marshfield . The birth date varies, from 1639, 1643, to 1649. See:

https://books.google.com/books?id=VLhYAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=...

https://books.google.com/books?id=F5yrNq-zNjgC&pg=PA204&lpg=PA204&d...

https://books.google.com/books?id=k6fDl9gE45IC&pg=RA2-PA537&lpg=RA2...

https://books.google.com/books?id=VLhYAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=...

https://books.google.com/books?id=88AwAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA98&lpg=PA98&dq=...

https://books.google.com/books?id=zAV98m0cyl4C&pg=PA395&lpg=PA395&d...

https://archive.org/details/mainewatermanswi00byuwate/page/17/mode/...

https://books.google.com/books?id=7R9FrcTCswMC&pg=RA1-PA153&lpg=RA1...

https://books.google.com/books?id=88AwAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA98&lpg=PA98&dq=...

https://books.google.com/books?id=zAV98m0cyl4C&pg=PA395&lpg=PA395&d...

https://mathcs.clarku.edu/~djoyce/gen/report/rr02/rr02_042.html

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/20902180/joseph-waterman

I can only find one reference to a Joseph Waterman who died young, which may be where the entry came from, given that it was added in 2007:

https://sites.rootsweb.com/~whosefamilyisit/waterman.htm

Rootsweb is always questionable, but sources are listed throughout, some of which are not available on the internet.

Given the poor state of record keeping at the time, I would suggest that the profile be kept, but headed with a caveat as to its reliability. As we are all aware, many children with duplicate names were born into families at the time due to the high rate of infant and childhood mortality. Not all were recorded in any way that we can know now. In addition, a notation regarding the variability of the birth date of Joseph Waterman of Marshfield needs to be made.

Jessie

These are the Marshfield Vital Records

https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000180577575874

No Joseph “died young,” no Elizabeth.

However, members can get upset at deleted profiles. I’d suggest disconnect and isolate instead.

Elizabeth Tilden Has attracted too many Tilden children & needs a cleanup.

Tagging the whole family to this discussion:

Robert Waterman of Marshfield (parents unknown) married Elizabeth Tilden daughter of Deacon Thomas Bourne of Marshfield & Elizabeth Bourne She married Thomas Tilden as his 1st wife. 3 children by her 2nd marriage: 2 unnamed sons who died young, and daughter Lydia Rider

Known Waterman children were:

Joseph Waterman of Marshfield Deacon John Waterman Ens. Thomas Waterman and Robert Waterman

Not known to be his children: Elizabeth Waterman (Died soon) & Joseph Waterman of Marshfield

Erica Howton you seem to be in agreement with Roland (his argument seems logical as he presents it here and I have no intention to research it myself) as you have disconnected Joseph Waterman of Marshfield

If you concern is that "members can get upset at deleted profiles" I suggest rather than Isolating Joseph Waterman of Marshfield he be merged into Joseph Waterman of Marshfield

As things stand now we have two MPs for two men with the same name born in the same place at approximately the same time, whereas all the evidence points towards there only having ever been one such person. Two MPs seems like a poor resolution even if one is so obscure as to escape the notice of most people.

Just catching up on this now...thank you to everyone who has been engaging! Thoughtful comments all around.

A solution might be to merge the profiles, but also include a note saying that 1) some researchers have proposed that Joseph was named in honor of an older brother who died young, 2) no record has been found, 3) it's known that not all infant deaths were recorded during that era, and 4) if anyone finds a record with proof of the older Joseph's existence, they should please share it.

We should also not lose sight of Jessie's point about the "younger"/only Joseph's birth date being reported differently from source to source. We should clarify that in a note as well. I'm ready for sleep but can help tomorrow if no one else is interested/able before then.

Thanks again, all!

Yes, I thought of the merge-in option, and if this hasn’t been a big deal discussion, would have done it automatically.:). Meaning - I looked at the image of the vital record, and it is difficult to read the date, if there’s even a date; which means, different interpretations of it; and there is no valid argument for 2 Joseph’s. There’s only one source - the VR - so I don’t actually buy the argument that it’s possible there was a died young child. Of course as a general note, records are lost, etc. But I truly do not think that happened here.

Here’s my note within profile for Joseph Waterman of Marshfield

Birth date

The vital record for his birth is difficult to read and interpret (see “Waterman births at Marshfield”), which has led at least one researcher to propose that Joseph was named in honor of an older brother who died young, and others to report variable birth dates. But Joseph’s death in 1711/2 was noted as “age 62”, which places his birth in 1649. A previous version of the tree showed a brother born about 1647, but after discussion (see https://www.geni.com/discussions/241885?msg=1526231), that profile was merged into this one. If anyone knows differently, please post to the discussion.

I think you hit POST three times, i just reported them to keep the clutter down :)

https://archive.org/details/mainewatermanswi00byuwate/page/17/mode/...

The existeiue ol rhis daughter, Elizabeth, rests entireK on the will of John (2), who makes bequest to Elizabeth Rider, "daughter of my sis- ter Elizabeth".

—-

That’s actually John Waterman’s “half” sister Lydia Tilden, Lydia being a nickname for Elizabeth, also seen as it’s own name. Lydia Rider

How she shows up “born 1649 and died same day” is perhaps, a Gedcom miracle , from garbling up the already misunderstood Will notation.

Should I merge Elizabeth into Lydia now that I understand her internet origin?

If Nathaniel Tilden 2 didn’t exist, then who is Elizabeth Tilden and which Nathaniel Tilden was named in the 1664 Will of Deacon Thomas Bourne of Marshfield

The expression "my Daughter Tildin: Daughter Lydia Tildin" means, and perhaps should be read, "my daughter Tildin's daughter Lydia Tildin," in other words, his granddaughter Lydia, child of his daughter Elizabeth (Bourne) (Waterman) Tilden; and it will be noted that Elizabeth's four Waterman boys were given legacies in the same paragraph immediately following Lydia's legacy. The ambiguity of the Tilden clause has caused many genealogists to conclude that Thomas Bourne had a daughter Lydia, but care-, ful study of the records fails to substantiate the existence of such a daughter.

—

Looks like an old NEHGR article garbled the Will:

The New England historical and genealogical register (1847) Vol. VI

https://archive.org/details/newenglandhistor1852wate

https://archive.org/stream/newenglandhistor1852wate#page/367/mode/1up

Pg.185

THOMAS BOURN. (Marshfield.)

Will dated May 2, 1664. To daughters Martha Bradford, Anne Smith, and Margaret Winslow. To son Nath'l Tilden. [SIC] To daughter [SIC] Tilden's daughter Lydia. To John, Thomas, Joseph, and Robert Waterman. To Mr. Arnold. Makes his son John his right heir, and Executor of the will. Witnessed by Sam'l Arnold, and Anthony Snow.

Inventory (£138. 14s. 2d.) by Sergt. Joseph Riddle. A. Snow, and Thomas Doged. ________________________________

https://archive.org/stream/newenglandhistor1911wate#page/331/mode/1up

Pg.331

4. NATHANIEL TILDEN, baptized at Tenterden 28 July 1583. came to New England in the Hercules in March 1634-5, with wife, seven children, and seven servants ; settled at Scituate ; and died, probably at Scituate, between 25 May and 31 July 1641. He married in England Lydia, who, Savage thinks, was perhaps daughter of Thomas Bourne. But as Thomas Bourne was born about 1581, he would have been only twenty-seven when Nathaniel Tilden's eldest child was born, and therefore Savage's conjecture is wrong. The "son Tilden " referred to in Thomas Bourne's will, made in 1664 (see Pope's Pioneers of Massachusetts), could not have been Nathaniel, who had been dead twenty-three years, but was probably Thomas Tilden, son of Nathaniel and husband of Elizabeth Bourne. ....

—-

Therefore -

- Lydia Bourne did not exist (she was her sister Elizabeth)
- Nathaniel Tilden Jr did not exist (he was his brother Thomas, who married Elizabeth (Bourne), widow Waterman)

Agreed?

Merging 2nd Nathaniel Tilden into 1st, and “Lydia Bourne Tilden” into Elizabeth Bourne Tilden.

And while we’re on the Will of Deacon Thomas Bourne of Marshfield apparently his origins are unknown also. He’s not the son of Bartholomew Bourne & Agnes Bourne - their child Thomas Bourne was a generation younger.

Extensive discussion of possible origins at Wikitree follows their Disambiguation note,

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bourne-2

Disproven Origin - Thomas, Son of Bartholomew Bourne

The Find-A-Grave page for Thomas[4] and the Pane-Joyce Genealogy[5] (as well as a significant number of family trees) state that Thomas Bourne of Marshfield was the Thomas Bourne who was the son of a Bartholomew Bourne of London. The origin of this theory was probably the January 1873 NEHGR article "Rear Admiral Nehemiah Bourne"[6] and the January 1897 NEHGR article "Genealogical Gleanings in England,"[7] which both contain summaries of the 1609 will of John Bourne, citizen and baker of London, which includes a bequest to Thomas and Maudlin Bourne, the children of son Bartholomew. The problem with identifying Thomas, son of Bartholomew, as the same person as Thomas Bourne of Marshfield is that (i) there is no evidence connecting the two and (ii) as discussed in the profile for Thomas, son of Bartholomew, it highly likely that he was born sometime in 1597-1608, most likely about 1605, and certainly much too late to have been Thomas of Marshfield, born about 1581.

Can you add the references to his profile?

That ol' sly dog Jacobus never met another genealogist he wasn't willing to correct. :) And we're all the richer for it!