Dear Jack, I would like to direct this to Hal..if I 'm reading you correctly, he's now on the Davenport list. (?) I have a really odd coincidence. My husband's family (whose name is Garland) have an Elizabeth Philbrick , of her birthplace I am uncertain, but she was married in Hampton , NH. However the date is too early: Oct 26, 1652. You mention a book "Genealogy of Philbrick and Philbrook Families". I would love to know if she is mentioned in it. She first married a man named Chapman (above date) and then on the same date in 1654, married John Garland, Sr. Her father's name was Thomas Philbrick and her mother Elizabeth Knopp. Naturally, we are curious to know if our families were connected .....way back when!!! For any information, Thanks! Sincerely, Mary Lou Garland ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack W. Ralph <Jack@Ralph.org> To: <DAVENPORT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 9:56 PM Subject: Re: [DAVENPORT] Fw: PHILBRICK, Elizabeth wife of Nathaniel Berry > Dear Cousins (again), > > I apologize for the message I send a short while ago. It was meant for > a different list. > > One of the problems of maintaining multiple lists (and getting old) is > that I occasionally make mistakes. Look on the bright side; Nevada Jack > is as "human" as everyone else :-) > > Jack > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jack W. Ralph <Jack@Ralph.org> > To: <DAVENPORT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 6:32 PM > Subject: [DAVENPORT] Fw: PHILBRICK, Elizabeth wife of Nathaniel Berry > > > > Dear Cousins, > > > > I received the message below from Hal Bradley, who was not a member of > > this group when he sent it, but now is. > > > > I hope that some of you "gurus" out there will be able to shed some > > light on Hal's observations and conclusion. I hope that all replies > are > > made "on the list", so that I (and every other interested party) can > > read them too. If you *must* reply privately (due to email program > > settings and not exchange of personal information), I would appreciate > > you adding me to your cc list. I am as interested in resolving this > > "Elizabeth" problem as anyone else and would like to make my database > as > > accurate as possible. > > > > Nevada Jack > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Hal Bradley <hwbradley@bigfoot.com> > > To: <nvjack@intercomm.com> > > Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 11:16 AM > > Subject: PHILBRICK, Elizabeth wife of Nathaniel Berry > > > > > > > I was hoping you could help me out with something. I descend from > > > Nathaniel Berry and Elizabeth Philbrick. There seems to be some > > > confusion on her identity. Noyes' "Genealogical Dictionary of Maine > & > > > New Hampshire" on p. 545 states that either Elizabeth, daughter of > > James > > > and Ann (Roberts) Philbrick, b. 24 Jul 1666 or Elizabeth, daughter > of > > > Thomas and Ann (Knapp) Philbrick, b. 3 May 1667 is the wife of > > Nathaniel > > > Berry. > > > > > > As you have noted on your website, there is a problem with the dates > > of > > > Thomas' daughters. Elizabeth is born 1 Nov 1663. The next child is > > also > > > named Elizabeth, b. 3 May 1667. A death date for Elizabeth, daughter > > of > > > Thomas is recorded for 21 May 1667. It is unlikely that Thomas would > > > name another daughter Elizabeth, unless the first Elizabeth is > already > > > dead. I think that the first Elizabeth died unrecorded. The recorded > > > death date of 21 May 1667 is for the second daughter Elizabeth. > Thus, > > > Thomas had no daughter named Elizabeth that reached maturity. this > > > conclusion is partially substantiated in Jacob Chapman's "A > Genealogy > > of > > > the Philbrick and Philbrook Families," p. 11, where he identifies > > > Elizabeth, b. 1667, " died as infant." However, he does not show the > > > daughter Elizabeth, born in 1663. > > > > > > The conclusion would then be that James' daughter Elizabeth, must be > > the > > > wife of Nathaniel Berry, since Thomas did not have a daughter > > Elizabeth > > > that lived to adulthood. > > > > > > The one thing that would refute this conclusion is if Thomas had a > > will > > > which named his daughter Elizabeth. Did Thomas have a will > identifying > > > his daughter Elizabeth? > > > > > > Thank you for taking the time to help me resolve this issue. > > > > > > Hal Bradley > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >