Hal, (again!) After I wrote my reply, I went back to Gen Forum to see what I could find and there IS a will for Thomas Philbrick of Hampton, 1663. In it he mentions his daughter Elizabeth Garland! Mary Lou ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack W. Ralph <Jack@Ralph.org> To: <DAVENPORT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 9:32 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 > > > > > > >