no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Elizabeth (Unknown) Pierce (abt. 1596 - aft. 1667)

Elizabeth Pierce formerly [surname unknown]
Born about in Englandmap
Daughter of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
Wife of — married [date unknown] [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died after after about age 71 in Charlestown, Middlesex, Massachusetts Bay Colonymap [uncertain]
Profile last modified | Created 15 Apr 2017
This page has been accessed 2,615 times.
The Puritan Great Migration.
Elizabeth (Unknown) Pierce migrated to New England during the Puritan Great Migration (1621-1640).
Join: Puritan Great Migration Project
Discuss: pgm


Contents

Biography

Uncertain Origins

This profile originally stated: Frederick Clifton Pierce, Esq.'s book "Pierce Genealogy", published in 1882, had Thomas Pierce Sr. married to an Elizabeth Wortington; either an alternate name for Elizabeth Carew, another wife of Thomas Pierce Sr., or an error subsequently corrected.

However, the book does not actually say that. It only names her as "his wife Elizabeth Pierce" and states that she was born in England in 1596/96. No specific source is given, and it is not clear if the author means that her maiden surname was also Pierce but he does not claim Worthington, Carew or any other surname for her.[1] So whatever F.C. Pierce's mistakes, he does not claim a surname nor does he assert a death date or location or say anything else at all about her origins other than she came with her husband Thomas to Charlestown in 1633/34.

Regarding her birth year, Pierce is accurate in his assertion that she filed her deceased husband's estate inventory on 22 Mar 1667 listed as "age 71" so if she told the truth then a birth year of 1595/96 is correct.[1] Thomas Pierce's will and inventory is listed as as Probate packet 17583 Vol. 3 p. 81, 83 dated 22 Mar 1677.[2] The probate itself confirms this data, she was indeed listed as age 71 on that date.[3]

However, if her son Thomas was born in 1608 as estimated, assuming she was 20 at marriage (WikiTree standard guesstimate) and leaving a year for pregnancy that places her birth at 1587 or earlier. Thomas "Jr" birthdate is also not known with certainy and could have been later. With all this uncertainty, it is hard to pick a birth date but either she lied about her age in 1667 or Thomas Pierce Jr. was probably born 1616 or later.

Her FindAGrave memorial has some interesting text which bears further investigation, but has no sources and lists her as Carew: ...Some genealogies online indicate she was Elizabeth (Carew) Pierce, daughter of Richard Carew and Bridget (Chudleigh) Carew, and this appears to concur with a marriage in International Marriage Index in 1608. Other internet pages call her mother Juliana Arundel and place her birth as Apr 4,1592 at Shilligford St George, Co.Devon...

Note that the "International Marriage Index" on ancestry.com is an auto-aggregated database of a variety of "sources" including unsourced user tree and worksheet submissions and should never be relied upon by itself. A marriage proven to be for Thomas Pierce has not yet been found in a reputable source.

A few unsourced or ridiculously sourced Ancestry trees list her as Elizabeth Brown b. 1601 in Benhall, Suffolk, England married 9 Apr 1622 in Norwick, Norfolk, England

Death & Estate

Elizabeth's final fate is not yet known but her death was clearly after 22 Mar 1667 as described above.[3] A death location of Woburn was previously asserted without source on this profile, perhaps conflating her husband with the Thomas Pierce of Woburn. This family was of Charlestown as stated in Thomas' will and there is no particular reason to think she moved elsewhere unless and until other sources come to light.

Research Notes

Not the mother of Daniel Pierce: She is not shown as the mother of PGM Daniel Pierce Sr. (1611-1677).

Sources

  1. 1.0 1.1 Pierce genealogy : being the record of the posterity of Thomas Pierce, an early inhabitant of Charlestown, and afterwards Charlestown village (Woburn), in New England, with wills, inventories, biographical sketches, etc. by Pierce, Frederic Beech, 1845-; Pierce, Frederick Clifton Publication date 1882 p. 3
  2. Probate records 1648--1924 (Middlesex County, Massachusetts) Probate docket Pa-Ri 16801-19200 FHL film 385984 7552878 Image 136 of 467
  3. 3.0 3.1 Probate records 1648--1924 (Middlesex County, Massachusetts) Probate papers 17480-17605 Family History Library film 421491 7553719 Packet 17583 probate of Thomas Pierce Image 1060 of 1241

See also:





Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA
No known carriers of Elizabeth's DNA have taken a DNA test.

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 15

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
If son Thomas was born in 1608, wouldn't 1588 be a better estimate for her DOB?
posted by M Cole
Yes but...her son Thomas was more likely born about 1616. Elizabeth was listed as 71 years old in 1667 when she filed her deceased husband's inventory so that's where the 1596-ish comes from. Thomas does not actually have a source for a 1608 birth year and he was married (first known anyway) about 1639 which, if he were born about 1616, would make him about 23, a pretty reasonable number. If he was born in 1608, then he was 31 at first marriage.

I see now that I put this same comment on his profile about 3 months ago but had not followed up on it and nobody else appears to have either. I'm going to change his estimated birth year since we at least have Elizabeth's own testimony as to "her" age.

posted by Brad Stauf
Hi,

I have been trying figure out the ages of Thomas Sr's children. Looking at Sgt. Thomas's birth date of 1608, it seemed to be a little early, based on possible dates for the birth of other children, although I don't really have good dates for possible siblings, only my estimates. You stated that Elizabeth gave her age as 71 in 1667. The copies of the inventory I have looked at are very poor copies, so I have been unable to find where she signed. Could you point me to the place on the inventory where she gave her age? Thank you very much, Michael D Pierce [email address removed]

posted by Michael Pierce
At the bottom of the inventory here: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-L9DP-147H?cat=263304 it says that Elizabeth... the widow of Thomas, aged about 71 years ...
posted by Traci Thiessen
Thank you. I have now found it.
posted by Michael Pierce
She is PPP. Please sever association as parent of Daniel Pierce Sr. (1611-1677). Anderson reported no parents for Daniel.

In his profiling of Daniel in 2007, Robert Charles Anderson did not identify an origin or birth location for Daniel Pierce. No parent or sibling associations were commented upon.

posted by GeneJ X
(1) If there is not a reliable source for "Norwich, Norfolk, England," Should Eizabeth's birth place be changed to "England."

(2) I did not readily identify an entry in New England Marriages to 1700 in the array of returns at AmericanAncestors (by subscription, search results might appear here.) Has anyone else identified the entry?

posted by GeneJ X
Is there really any source for anything about her? I was about to crack open the F.C. Pierce book on archive.org but I don't see where any of her data comes from and that book at initial glance is the usual unsourced vanity publication so even if some of it is right, we can't be sure what's right and what's wrong.
posted by Brad Stauf
Brown-35442 and Unknown-364648 are not ready to be merged because: B dates too far apart, birth locations very different. Just don't know, at this point, that it works well. I guess I'd need to see more citations
posted by Christopher Wright
Brown-35442 and Unknown-364648 appear to represent the same person because: I don't see a lot of Ancestry trees supporting the surname Brown, and the few that do are unsourced or ridiculously (things like children born in the 1800s) sourced.
posted by Anne B
Not the daughter of Richard Carew and Bridget Chudleigh.
posted by Zoe Cochrane
Completed the requested merge.

Confirmed online that this person existed but could not confirm either birth date. There are now duplicate husbands that seems to be under consideration of a merge.

posted by [Living Foster]
Carew-264 and Carew-76 appear to represent the same person because: Same name, same husband, same son. Birthdates differ; I don't know sources for this person, but it seems to me that research is needed to reconcile dates -- and see if the details in these profiles are actually supported by records.
posted by Ellen Smith

[Do you know Elizabeth's family name?]  |  P  >  Pierce  >  Elizabeth (Unknown) Pierce

Categories: Frederick Clifton Pierce Fraud | Puritan Great Migration