Richard Seymour migrated to New England during the Puritan Great Migration (1621-1640). (See The Directory, by R. C. Anderson, p. 301) Join: Puritan Great Migration Project Discuss: pgm
On 18 April 1631, when he was twenty-seven, he married Mercy Ruscoe in Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, England. She bore him six known children, four sons and two daughters:
Richard was baptized on 27 January 1604 in Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, England.[3][1]
In Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, England on April 18, 1631, Richard married Mercy Ruscoe. (Daughter of Roger and Sarah Ruscoe) [4][5][6][7]
Migration
He and his family resided in Hartford, Connecticut by 1639. Richard received an allotment of land by the "courtesie of the town.” A chimney viewer by occupation,[8] he was named Hartford chimney surveyor for the north side in 1646.[9]
Richard and his former neighbors in Sawbridgeworth, the Ruscoes, later removed to Norwalk in 1650 where he was among many who made an agreement with Captain Patrick and Roger Ludlow “for the settlinge and plantinge of Norwalke.” As one of the planters of Norwalk, Richard Seymour's name appears in the indenture dated February 15, 1651, between the Planters and Runckinheage and other Indians.[2]
Richard's home in Norwalk was well situated at present day Fitch St. & East Ave., only a short distance from the roadbed of the New York, New Haven & Hartford railroad. In his time his house was directly opposite the meeting house and the Parade Ground, and on the highway leading from Stamford to Fairfield. Richard was elected Selectman on March 29, 1655; however, he did not hold this position very long since his will was executed later that same year on July 29, in which he is described “very week & sike.”[2][10]
Death and burial
Richard died between 29 Jul 1655, when his will was written, and 10 Oct 1655, when his will was proved.[3] Richard Seymour of Norwalk, Connecticut in his will gave his entire estate to his wife Mercy Seymour. At 21, John, Zachary and Richard to have £40. Control of this given to the mother.[11]
Burial: 1655 Probably in Norwalk, Fairfield Co., Connecticut. His name is on the Founders of Hartford Memorial in the old cemetery there, but was probably not buried there.
Mercy Semer remarried 25 Nov 1655 to John Steele in Farmington.[12]
↑ 2.02.12.22.32.42.52.62.7 Jacobus, D. Lines. (1939). A history of the Seymour family: descendants of Richard Seymour of Hartford, Connecticut, for six generations ; with extensive amplification of the lines deriving from his son John Seymour of Hartford. New Haven, Conn.: [Printed by the Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor company]. pg 21-28. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=wu.89058583543;view=1up;seq=51
↑ 3.03.1 North America, Family HIstories, 1500-2000: Richard Seymour of Hartford and Norwalk, Conn., and some of his descendants
↑ Pinney, Maria Watson. Richard Seymour, Hartford, 1640 : a paper read before the Connecticut Chapter Daughters of Founders and Patriots of America ... Publisher (New Haven : Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, [1903?])
↑ Farmington.
Connecticut: Vital Records (The Barbour Collection), 1630-1870 (Online Database: AmericanAncestors.org, New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2011.) From original typescripts, Lucius Barnes Barbour Collection, 1928. https://www.americanancestors.org/DB414/i/12536/158/139027228 p. 156
↑ Jacobus, Donald Lines, MA (compiler, editor.) History and Genealogy of the Families of Old Fairfield. (Fairfield, Conn.: The Eunice Dennie Burr Chapter of Daughters of the American Revolution, 1930.) p.536
Is Richard your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or
contact
a profile manager, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Richard by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA.
Y-chromosome DNA test-takers in his direct paternal line on WikiTree:
Denny Seymour :
Family Tree DNA Y-DNA Test 111 markers, haplogroup R-BY3298, FTDNA kit #108347 +
Y-Chromosome Test 419 markers, haplogroup R-Y20344
Richard was listed on p. 46 of the Daughters of the American Colonists Lineage Book, Vol XIII, as well as p. 501 of Families of Early Hartford, Connecticut by Lucius Barnes Barbour.
In the Barbour book a daughter Mary is listed as having married Thomas Gridley 29 Sep 1644 and Dea. John Langdon of Farmington.
In 1906 there was an article published about Richard Seymour written by Morris Seymour. See https://books.google.com/books?id=2T0GAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA156 Evidently Morris Seymour is not the same person as Seymour Morris, the author of the 1918 article cited above. Very strange.
Thanks for the catch on the immigration date, That's what comes from relying on Ancestry indexes.
Re: Ancestral Roots. You're right that did not belong to that paragraph. I think Puritan Migration to CT, the Saga of the Seymour Family is where that paragraph comes from. It's new and isn't available to peruse on line. Records don't support the statements about arriving on the Increase making the references to Hooker doubtful.
I'd like to see the book to see whether the author can support such statements, or if he's just conjecturing, because Richard was in Hartford early.
Pages 133-134 of Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists who came to New England between 1623-1650, by Frederick Lewis Weis. does not seem to support the information you credit it to. Do you have a better source?
Seymour-3454 and Seymour-128 appear to represent the same person because: same first name, last name, birth year, birth month, father, son, death year, death state.
In the Barbour book a daughter Mary is listed as having married Thomas Gridley 29 Sep 1644 and Dea. John Langdon of Farmington.
edited by Edward Trever
Re: Ancestral Roots. You're right that did not belong to that paragraph. I think Puritan Migration to CT, the Saga of the Seymour Family is where that paragraph comes from. It's new and isn't available to peruse on line. Records don't support the statements about arriving on the Increase making the references to Hooker doubtful.
I'd like to see the book to see whether the author can support such statements, or if he's just conjecturing, because Richard was in Hartford early.
I'm going to hide the paragraph.