John Bartlett (abt. 1606 - 1670)

There was apparently also an Esaya or Isaiah Bartlet, son of John, born at Windsor in 1641. See: Some early records and documents of and relating to the town of Windsor, Connecticut, 1639-1703 or FamilySearch Index

Thanks Brian. The Esyas/Isaiah of Hackensack you mention, who was his father? I'd suggest that you add your lineage here on WikiTree along with the sources that you've uncovered. It would be helpful to have a direct male descendant's DNA info here to help others prove their connections. Eventually, it might help prove who John Bartlett's parents were, too.

Renee, there are two questions embedded in your question:

1) What makes a good, quality, reliable source?

2 Is "A catalogue of the Names of the Early Puritan Settlers of the Colony of Connecticut..." a quality, reliable source?

Question 1) Learning to identify the reliability/quality of a source is paramount to performing accurate genealogical work. There is much that can be said about analyzing sources for reliability. As a primer on the topic I highly recommend the book, "Elements of Genealogical Analysis" by Robert Charles Anderson (yes, the same gentleman as the Great Migration series). He walks through his methodology with thorough explanations and examples.

Chapter 1 is "Source Analysis" which covers the reliability of sources. Following are a few relevant points:

"You must be rigorous and methodical in your research. Whether you are investigating a person who left England in 1620 or an ancestor who left Eastern Europe in 1900, you need to attend to the substance and the reliability of records and sources. After all, all of us who are researching people in the past are focused on the same thing: developing a list of reliable information about a particular person. We have all struggled with unreliable genealogies written by people who have made quick assumptions that a particular record refers to their ancestor—incorporating a record that seems relevant without carefully assessing the dates and the surrounding information, including details of other names in the records. By using the methods I outline in this book, you will avoid making such mistakes.

and

"This comprehensive methodology can be formulated as two compact, fundamental rules.

"First Fundamental Rule: All statements must be based only on accurately reported, carefully documented, and exhaustively analyzed records.

"Second Fundamental Rule: You must have a sound, explicit reason for saying that any two individual records refer to the same person.

"Much is packed into these two rules, but there is a very important reason for having two and only two rules. The First Rule considers the validity and accuracy of individual records before any genealogical judgments are made. The Second Rule concerns itself totally with the process of combining records and drawing conclusions. Stated more briefly: the First Rule deals with evidence and the Second Rule deals with proof."

and

"Source analysis generally precedes record analysis. In order to maximize your understanding of the substance and reliability of any record, you must first understand that record within the context of its source. Different jurisdictions, for example, will handle probate differently. Different clerks will have distinctive styles in recording vital events..."

He further says that some questions to ask in source analysis include:

1. Is it the original or a copy?

2. When was the source created?

3. Who created the source?

4. What formulas were used in creating the source?

Many of the sources that can be found online are secondary sources that rely on other secondary sources which themselves relied on secondary sources. The better secondary sources rely on primary sources or transcripts of those primary sources. Of course, we hope to find those primary sources or transcriptions.

Question 2) In looking at the book, "A catalogue of the Names of the Early Puritan Settlers of the Colony of Connecticut...," we can see that it is a secondary source. So we hope to find that it cites primary sources (or transcriptions thereof) that it used. The author states in the preface that for the writing of the book he depended

"upon all kinds of evidence, for proof of early days, such as town, court, probate and church records, often badly written two hundred years since, connected with an orthography, frequently difficult to decipher, and old books, with many obliterated margins, with family records in ancient tattered Bibles, and tombstones with many of the words and figures obliterated by time, journals to which I have referred, with dates culled from odd numbers and broken volumes..."

And in the introduction he reiterates that he depended "as little as possible, upon tradition, but upon the Town, Church, Probate, Colony and Court Records, in different towns in the Colony"

That's a positive first step in our analysis of the source.

In looking through entries it can be seen that he typically cited the types of sources he said he would rely on, usually in parentheses and sometimes with quotations. In parts of the text he used language that could have only originally come from primary sources, like monetary amounts, boundaries, court rulings, etc., which is also a good sign.

Comparing information in this book to original sources, and to other, verified information, leads me to believe that yes, it appears that the source is reliable.

However, it still behooves us to actually check his sources where possible and compare to known data.

I hope that helps.

Great! I'll add it to my family tree and who ever manages this page can add it to the source list.

Thanks for providing this information, Renee.

However, how do we know that the John Bartlett baptiized in 1619 is this same man? Also, I don't see any source that says he arrived with his parents. His "father's" profile lacks support for him immigrating to New England.

Also, what shows that this is the John Bartlett who arrived in 1634? Anderson says he arrived in 1640, and that his origins were unknown.

I selected the 1619 baptism record because it was in the same area where his parents were married (Dorset). There were many lines back then, and I'm sure there was another Bartlett line from Sussex. John Bartlett was listed on the Mary and John, so that would be the arrival date for him or his father. He may have come over by himself, since 15 year old's were considered almost adults back then.

Can it be proved that it wasn't him?? Who is Anderson and is this from a genealogy book?

Hi Renee - this is a baptism record for a John Bartlett of roughly the right age, but there are also burial records for two John Bartletts at that same parish who could be the same person, one in 1637 & 1688. And, there are several other baptism records for other John Bartlett's in Dorset around the same time who could also be the the emigrant. For example, a search of the Ancestry database "Dorset, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812" returns baptism records for at least four other John Bartletts in other Dorset parishes between 1616-20. And, it is always possible that the John Bartlett who emigrated was baptized somewhere else, or not baptized, or that the record of his baptism was lost. The problem is we just don't know. So we can't just assume that this particular John Bartlett is the one who emigrated.

"Anderson" is R.C. Anderson, who was the author of the "Great Migration" series published by the NE Historical & Genealogical Society, which is generally recognized as the leading authority on these PGM emigrants. If you have an Ancestry.com subscription, you can access a searchable version at this link: https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/2496/

John Bartlett was such a common name back then. I do know this John had a brother from Guilford, CT. Lt. George Bartlett. This may help to find the time period for both brothers.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Genealogies_of_Connecticut_Families/k6fDl9gE45IC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Bartlett Page 102

Here's a source to show when John arrived.

U.S. and Canada, Passenger and Immigration Lists Index, 1500s-1900s Name John Bartlitt Arrival Year1640 Arrival Place Connecticut Primary Immigrant Bartlitt, John

Same source shows that brother George arrived the following year. Name George Bartlett Arrival Year 1641 Arrival Place Connecticut Primary Immigrant Bartlett, George Source Publication Code 9450

With new sources coming online daily, we need to consider other sources too.

Renee, that would be the WT profile George Bartlett-954. Unfortunately there seems to be no proof that he was the brother of John although obviously it's possible. The "Genealogies of Connecticut Families" book you linked to says exactly this, that no relation has been discovered between them but "it was said" that they were brothers. If you are able to find some proof, that would be fantastic. As Scott indicated, parish records showing a man of about the right age and name can't be relied upon by themselves since there are matching parish records showing a man of that name in that parish dying as well. So we need something more like a will or deed or business contract linking a specific John Bartlett of England to this John Bartlett of Connecticut.

Re: US and Canada Passenger and Immmigration lists as a source, it's not actually a primary source. It's a completely uncritical and un-edited aggregation of over 4.5 million "records" about early immigrants. These can come from legitimate primary/secondary sources but they also come from unsourced user work sheets and family trees from genealogy sites so you always have to try and find out where did that database entry actually come from.

If you work with it you will see that it's common to get back multiple entries for one person citing conflicting dates and places so it really can't be used for more than a starting point. For example, look for "John" (exact) "Bartlett" (soundex) and arrival 1640 +/- 5 years. I got back 13 hits (one was Virginia) in Connecticut and Massachusetts covering the two known John Bartletts who immigrated early to those states. George Bartlett is much better, he only gets 2 entries, one in 1641 and one in 1645 but there was only one George Bartlett.

Even ship's "passenger lists" are many times assembled on a best-guess basis after the fact, based on people in a certain community who seemed to travel together, or testified in court that they traveled with somebody. So as always with these aggregated databases like the IGI or "US and International Marriages" or "OneWorld Tree", we need to peel back the layers to see if the data really came from a reliable source.

I will be leaving my Ancestry family tree the same to show a brother George and parents from Dorset, England until better records come online in the future to prove otherwise. This would be a great assignment for the Puritan Migration Project to find out the origin of where John came from in England.

Renee,

The PGM Project certainly keeps an eye out for any newly published research in the major genealogical journals and then updates the appropriate profiles.

You might also want to check in with Bartlett Name Study and the Bartlett YDNA Study over at FamilyTreeDNA (which looks to be quite active). There may be some clues there.

Looking for the origins of these early immigrants is not easy and definitely frustrating. Careful, methodical work doesn't always yield results. When new information comes to light, it's often by chance, sometimes when a researcher is looking for something else entirely. But as you mentioned, more records are being indexed and brought online all the time, so something may turn up for John Bartlett.

Brad, a small correction regarding " US and Canada Passenger and Immigration Lists"...I believe this only includes published sources and not family group sheets (like Family Data Collection, US & International Marriages, OneWorldTree). The publication is usually listed in either the source or detail tabs on the individual record....Of course a lot of the secondary sources in there are still unreliable, but some are excellent (Great Migration is in there I believe).

Well that was an interesting exercise. Like other ancestry.com databases, "U.S. and Canada, Passenger and Immigration Lists Index, 1500s-1900" is a mix of many underlying sources, some good and some bad. It certainly should not be taken as some sort of proof if there is conflicting information.

"U.S. and Canada, Passenger and Immigration Lists Index, 1500s-1900" for John Bartlitt gives as the underlying source Virkus, Frederick A. ed. Immigrants to America before 1750. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1965): page 220.

The underlying source for Immigrants to America before 1750 is a series printed in The Magazine of American Genealogy, number 23 (April 1932): page 196-197. Immigrants to America before 1750, edited by Virkus.

The underlying sources used by Virkus again is a wide variety, but he was not very critical and more of a collector of information. I believe he gives his sources as B424-C1126a-C1126g-E378-G170, but I wasn't able to determine what these referred to. Certainly, he does not give any evidence that John and George were brothers or that they originated from Dorset.

Here is an Ancestry sharing link to an image of the original baptism record. It is also indexed on FamilySearch here.

However, there are also burial records for two John Bartletts at that same parish who could be the same person, one in 1637 & 1688. A search of the Ancestry database "Dorset, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812" also returns baptism records for at least four other John Bartletts in other Dorset parishes between 1616-20. Unless there is some further evidence that points to this particular John Bartlett as the emigrant, I would vote for detaching the parents.

I agree, Scott. We just don't know. Being age 20 when marrying also seems a bit young for the era.

Interesting and thanks for the information. I don't have Ancestry International anymore, so I can't do additional research. If someone could look into this and try to find the correct parent's location would be great. Thanks.

Renee,

You might check with your local library to see if you can access Ancestry.com from home through them. Because of pandemic restrictions, I'm able to use the full Ancestry.com remotely logging in with my library card on the library's web site.

Renee, it appears that John Bartlett of this profile, immigrant to America, was born about 1606. The full source citation for that birth year is found in the bio: The Winthrop Medical Journal. The journal is a highly reliable source and it indicates that in 1667 Winthrop treated John Bartlett of Windsor, aged 61.

I have not heard of that source and will need to research more on a medical journal as a reliable source. I just searched the book (if I have the correct book) on archive.org which had a publication date of 1908, and did not find a Bartlett or John Bartlett - no results. Also, there is no page 703. The last page of the book is page 335.

https://archive.org/details/winthropsjourna05hosmgoog/page/n6/mode/2up?q=Bartlett

If this is the correct web page, I'm not sure I would consider this a reliable source:

https://freepages.rootsweb.com/~pamw/genealogy/SS/Winthrop.htm

Renee, you are looking at John Winthrop's Journal, but the source is Winthrop's Medical Journal by John Winthrop, Jr. They are two completely different journals by two different men. The only source I know of for the medical journal is the one found in the profile (unfortunately it comes from a subscription site).

As far as reliability, it is one of the sources used by Robert Charles Anderson, a highly regarded genealogist and the person responsible for the Great Migration series. The Great Migration series is the impetus for the Puritan Great Migration Project here on WikiTree. Any source found in Anderson's Great Migration series is considered a reliable source. There is a page here on WT that lists the sources he used: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sources-GMB If you search on that page for "WMJ" you will see the entry for the Winthrop Medical Journal.

Scott, A lot of the TAG issues (including this one) are available on FamilySearch.

Here is the page for Winthrop's Medical Journal that mentions John Bartlett. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSVL-D9CS-Q?i=36&cat=319844

Renee, The editor's note a couple of pages back provides some context on Winthrop's Medical Journal's credibility as a source.

Excellent, Thanks! ........................adding my 30 characters

Thank you and I have added this source to my Ancestry family tree and Family Search. I am having a hard time finding the pages on the index for John and Benjamin's wife. Is this an index only? I would like to see the actual pages from the index. If someone has time, could they email them to me through Wiki? Thanks. It is important to me to get the Bartlett line correct, so it can be traced to the correct Bartlett line in England.

I noticed there was a George from Guilford listed on the index with his sons George and John. I don't see a George listed on profile Bartlett-954, but there is a John listed as a son. Maybe he had another son?

Hi Renee. The article in TAG contains all the information you'd find in the journal. Its a transcription of the entries, rearranged alphabetically by patient name, with a notation of the original page in the journal where the information came from. So, the only thing you might get from the original would be the chronological order in which Winthrop treated his patients.

As for George, I see that you added a comment to his profile already...which is probably the best place for that discussion.