no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Elizabeth (UNKNOWN) Rose (abt. 1610 - 1677)

Elizabeth Rose formerly [surname unknown] aka Potter, Parker
Born about in Englandmap [uncertain]
Daughter of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
Wife of — married 1635 in England or Connecticutmap [uncertain]
Wife of — married before Jul 1646 in New Haven, New Haven, Connecticutmap
Wife of — married about 1663 in New Haven or Branford, Connecticutmap
Descendants descendants
Died at about age 67 in New Haven, Connecticut Colonymap
Problems/Questions Profile manager: Puritan Great Migration Project WikiTree private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 7 Feb 2011
This page has been accessed 4,178 times.
The Puritan Great Migration.
Elizabeth (UNKNOWN) Rose migrated to New England during the Puritan Great Migration (1621-1640).
Join: Puritan Great Migration Project
Discuss: pgm

Contents

Disputed Identity

Elizabeth is not the Elizabeth Wood(abt.1606) who married a different John Potter.

Biography

Elizabeth was born in England, about 1610 (estimated age at first marriage), died New Haven, Connecticut Colony, 28 July 1677.[1] Her birth and parentage are unknown or unproven.

She married first John Potter about 1635, probably in England.

They were NOT the Elizabeth Wood and John Potter who married in 1630 in Chesham, Buckinghamshire. John Potter's origins were identified in an article published in 2004.[2] She had by John two sons and a daughter.

John Potter died by the end of 1643 or shortly thereafter.

Elizabeth then married second, between June and July 1646, Edward Parker. The church did not approve of this marriage, but it went forward anyway.[3]

Edward died in 1662, after which Elizabeth married (third) Robert Rose of Branford; he died in 1665.

According to Records of the colony and plantation of New Haven, from 1638 to 1649[4] on June 2nd 1646 three women (Mrs. Brewster, Mrs. Moore & Mrs. Leach) were charged for "several miscarriages of a public nature." Elizabeth Smith, Mrs. Leach's servant, and fellow servant, Jacob Hall, bring several complaints and charges to the courts. The 12th Involving Edward Parker. Widow Potter states that she would not leave Edward. Mrs. Brewster was heard stating that he was not under scandal, but that rather he "had not given satisfaction to the elder," and as a result "they would not let him marry her." The report goes on to explain that Edward and widow Potter understood the church's proceedings, but wanted clarification as to the reasons as to why Elizabeth was being kept out of the church and whether it was because she would not part with Edward. Apparently, Edward told Mrs. Brewster that he did not know whether the Church was against the marriage or not. The Church "did not make the match, nor did they go about to break it off, but they advised him to walk accordingly to rule." Mrs. Brewster did not agree with these proceedings and advised him to take two or three people and appeal to the magistrate. Mrs. Brewster denied this particular allegation and stated that widow Potter and Edward were trying to "currey favor" in order to gain admittance to the church again.

Children

With John Potter:[5]

  1. John Potter [Jr]; b abt 1636 (his 1706 will calls him about 70); in 1646, he was apprenticed for eight years to Roger Allen.[6] He m1 Hannah Cooper who d. 15 Jun 1675; he m2 Mary Russell 29 Dec 1679; he died 24 Dec 1706.
  2. Hannah, not yet of age in 1649; she m1 Samuel Blakesley 3 Dec 1650 [this suggests a pre 1630 birth year for her; therefore an earlier marriage for her parents!]; she m2 21 Dec 1676 Henry Brooks. She is "my daughter Brooks" in her mother's 1677 will. She survived her husband and died as widow Hannah Brooks 7Nov 1723.
  3. Samuel Potter, b abt 1647; m 21 Nov 1670 Annah, dau of William Russell.

With Edward Parker:[7]

  1. Mary Parker, bpt 27 Aug 1648; m. 6 Dec 1666 John Hall of Wallingford, CT
  2. John Parker, bpt 8 Oct 1648; m 8 Nov 1670 Hannah Bassett
  3. Hope Parker, b Apr 26, bpt 26 May 1650; m. 2 May 1667 Samuel Cook of Wallingford, CT
  4. Lydia Parker, b 14 Apr 1652; m 12 Jan 1671 John Thomas.

Last Will & Testament

She made her will as widow Elizabeth Rose 23 Jul 1677[8] but died before signing it on 28 July 1677. Her children agreed to abide by her unsigned will. It made the following bequests:[9]

  • son John Potter, 20 shillings
  • son Samuel Potter, 20 shillings
  • son John Parker, my house he lives in...
  • daughter Brooks, 20 shillings
  • daughter Hall, my small bible
  • daughter Cooke, my best "sute" of apparel
  • all my grandchildren, 12 pence each
  • my three daughters, Mary, Hope and Lydia; remainder of my estate equally divided

Sons John Potter and John Parker appointed executors of the will.

Her inventory was taken on 2 August 1677.[8]

Note that there was a DIFFERENT Mrs. Elizabeth Potter at the same time. This OTHER Elizabeth was born Elizabeth Wood, and was chr. 14 Apr 1606 at Chesham Bucks, England. She married a John Potter in Chesham 14 Apr 1630 and spent the rest of her life in England. The christenings of her several children can be found easily by searching on freereg.org.uk, in Chesham or within a 12 mile radius thereof.

The emigrants to Connecticut were from the south coast - Sussex, and not from county Bucks.

Marriage 1) John POTTER b about 1606/1607 in England; dc 1643 New Haven, CT Married in England Children John POTTER bc 1636 (alternative 17 Oct 1635) in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; d 1706 Hannah POTTER bc 1639 in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT, bp 17 Oct 1641 in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; d 1723; m 1) Blakeslee, 2) Brooks Samuel POTTER, c1641-1696

Marriage 2) Edward PARKER bc 1620/2 Married: 1 Jul 1646 likely in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT Children Mary PARKER bp 27 Apr 1648 (abt age 2) in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; d 1725 John PARKER bp 8 Oct 1648 in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; d 1711 Hope PARKER b 26 Apr 1650 in New Haven, New Haven Co.,CT, bp 26 May 1650 in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; d 1690; m Cook Lydia PARKER b 14 Apr 1652 in New Haven, New Haven Co.,CT, bp 14 Apr 1652 in New Haven, New Haven Co., CT; aft 1740; m Thomas

Marriage 3) Robert ROSE bc 1594 in Ipswich,Suffolk, England, of Branford, New Haven Co., CT Married: 1662/3 in New Haven (alternative Branford), New Haven Co., CT

Elizabeth died leaving an unsigned will.(3:150-156; 8:1459) The will was dated 23 July 1677 and Elizabeth died on the 28th before she signed it. As a testament to her abilities and the deep respect they had for her wishes, her children agreed to abide by the unsigned will which was later admitted for probate. Per New Haven Probate Records: "The last will of Elizabeth ROSE widdow N. Haven deceased. Know all whom it may concern that I Elizabeth Rose of New Haven widdow being weak in body yet of competent sound understanding and memory doe make and ordain this my last will and testament in manner and form following; committing my soule into ye hands of Jesus Christ my redemer and my body to a descent buriall according to ye discretion of my executors hereafter to be named; I dispose of my outward estate as followeth. Item I doe give and bequeath unto my two sons John POTTER and Samll. POTTER twenty shillings a piece. Item. To my son John PARKER my house he lives in with all my land and meadow and all the rights & priveledges thereunto belonging. Item. To my daughter BROOKS twenty shillings.

and to my daughter COOKE my best sute of apparrell. Item. To all my grandchildren twelve pence a piece. Item. After all my debts & legacyes be paid and other necessary expenses discharged my will is that ye remainder of my estate be equally divided between my three daughters Mary, Hope, & Lydia. And I doe desire and appoint my two sons John POTTER and John PARKER joint Executors of this my last will and testament and I doe allow them to have out of my estate ten shillings a piece for their care and paynes therein. And I doe hereby revoke all former wills and declare and publish this to be my last will and testament to which I put my hand and seal this three and twentyeth day of July one thousand six hundred and seventy seven, 1677, signed and sealed in ye presence of --- The inventory of her estate amounted to 49 pounds 11 shillings 9 denari.

Sources

  1. New Haven, CT: Families of Ancient New Haven, (AmericanAncestors.org: NEHGS, 2008), v6, Potter, p 1459.
  2. Patricia Law Hatcher, "English Origin of the Potter and Beecher Families of New Haven, Connecticut," in TAG, 79(2004):28
  3. Shepard: in NEHGR 54(1900):20-26
  4. Hoadly
  5. Shepard: p 23
  6. Shepard: p 22
  7. Shepard: p 23
  8. 8.0 8.1 “New Haven Probate Records, Vol. 1-2, 1647-1703”, database with images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-L92K-G9NG-6 : 7 March 2021), New Haven, Connecticut, FHL microfilm 007626739, image 104. New Haven Probate Record, 1647-1687, Vol. 1, Part 1, page 176.
  9. Shepard: p. 22, citing New Haven Probate Records, Vol. I, part first, p. 176




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: 24

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Wood-36290 and UNKNOWN-30448 are not ready to be merged because: Suggestion has been made to redevelop the inferior profile so that it is about the "other" woman, who is so often confused as one and the same Elizabeths. See the comment.
posted by GeneJ X
I just proposed a merge for a profile to be merged in to this one but accidentally switched the order. I am so sorry but really want the group to take a look at it here is the reason I suggested it:

Wood-36290 is a dupe for Unk-30448 and actually cites the page for this profile in the written bio as a "source" for either a wedding or child's birthday. I believe this newer profile and that of the duplicate profile for husband Edward were made from the Ancestry confusion but still should've been checked. I appreciate everyone reading this and the comments on thir pages before dismissing the proposals. Thank You All! Becky Elizabeth (Simmons-11603)

posted by Becky Simmons
Have adopted profile of Elizabeth (Wood) Parker (abt.1608-1677) (Wood-36290).

Unless folks are proposing we first change her LNAB to Unknown, seems Wood-36290 needs to be merged into UNKNOWN-30448.

UNKNOWN-30448 is PPP, so she is protected by PGM. --Gene

posted by GeneJ X
Hi Gene!

The profile along with the spouse Edward had a p.m. earlier or I'd have adopted them and "held" their place so they could be taken in. As always I sincerely appreciate you giving this matter attention- Cheers! Becky Elizabeth

posted by Becky Simmons
I forgot to mention:
  • Warning Inconsequential comment to follow *

As for the merge direction, despite proposing so many over the years I understood the instructions re: "...whereas Profile 1 will be the kept/final profile after the merge is completed" but "logically" assumed the first box would be "Profile 1" so I questioned what I've done hundreds of times and placed the profiles in the opposite boxes...afterwards realizing the first box is labeled "Profile 2" - which I think should be changed :/ but lesson learned and my apologies to everyone realizing how dumb this probably makes me seem; just felt an honest answer was owed as to how /why it happened. Thanks! Becky

posted by Becky Simmons
Can we delete or at least edit the trash out of a "source" that alleges preposterous factoids? I refer to the ludicrous "Family Data Collection" assertion, evidently based on a couple of baseless "Ancestry Family Trees," maintaining that Elizabeth (___) Potter Parker Rose was born in either 1607 or 1626 in "New Haven, CTI ." Do the people who put out this sort of disinformation know nothing at all about American history? There were no white people whatsoever in what became New Haven before 1634 at the earliest. I suspect that these kinds of data, which I encounter ALL THE TIME in online sources, are based the mining of information out of the old Archive sheets at the Genealogical Society Library (now FHL) in which, on the "birth place" line for immigrants to North America, the submitters would put "of New Haven" to indicate that the actual birth place was unknown, but the first trace of such people was found at the "of" location. But then Ancestry and the other data miners stripped out the "of" qualification, and gullible researchers are fed absurd allegations under the banner of "facts." It's unfortunate that neither FamilySearch nor Ancestry has a convenient way of expressing that notion that (say) Edward Parker was "of New Haven" at first appearance.
posted by Barry Wood
Go for it Barry, Take them out. PGM even has a "subject to removal" guideline https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Puritan_Great_Migration_Project_Reliable_Sources#Unreliable_Sources
posted by Anne B
Hi Barry,

I adopted the Elizabeth (Wood) Parker (abt.1608-1677) (Wood-36290) just a bit ago.

See my note (here).

Believe you wanted her LNAB changed to Unknown not long ago. Is it okay with you if we just merge her into this Unknown-30448?

Separately, I am setting up a FSP in order to move there the unsourced information in the narrative of Wood-36290. After the merge is complete, that Free Space Page can be a repository for excess comments or additional research notes. --Gene

posted by GeneJ X
Absolutely. I will be forever in your debt for taking care of that. I would have done it a year ago, but time always seems in short supply when I'm trying to stay on top of things at the law firm.
posted by Barry Wood
Parker children were reattached by someone to Elizabeth Wood, so I have now changed their mother back to this Elizabeth Unknown. I have therefore posted a G2G request to have the profiles of these Parker children Project Protected to prevent them being reattached to Elizabeth Wood in the future: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1116485/could-someone-project-protect-mary-parker-younger-siblings
posted by Kenneth Kinman
edited by Kenneth Kinman
Looks like it’s only the older John who migrated by 1640, so other children are out of the scope of PGM project. This profile is already PPP, so my suggestion would be to put note about children on profile of Elizabeth Wood...

Anyone else have an idea?

PGM can still PP them as PGM Adjunct.
posted by Joe Cochoit
Thanks Joe. I connected with Jillaine and we are agreed this is a good way to go. PGM Adjunct for children.
Kenneth... Hi.

I've conversed with Jillaine and Joe Cochoit, plus checked the PGM project page to refresh my memory about PGM adjunct.

Tomorrow I'll go ahead and put the children you reattached into the PGM adjunct project and protect them. (too tired to do it tonight after source-a-thon much of the day.)

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Cheryl PGM Co-Leader

Birth data adjusted.
posted by Jillaine Smith
Shouldn't her birth information be changed to "about 1610, England"?

The present birth information seems to be that of Elizabeth Wood.

posted by Kenneth Kinman
Wood-4168 and UNKNOWN-30448 appear to represent the same person because: The wife of John Potter, Edward Parker and James Rose was Elizabeth, last name Unknown. She was NOT Elizabeth Wood. While there was an Elizabeth Wood who married a John Potter in 1630, this marriage took place 88 miles from where John Potter's family lived. In the merge, she should be detached from the parents on Wood-4168. OR if you want to keep her as their daughter (since such a female did exist), detach her from Potter-146 and the children associated with her. See this g2g discussion: http://www.wikitree.com/g2g/224620/published-research-concerning-hannah-william-potter-beecher
posted by Jillaine Smith
Rose-2672 and UNKNOWN-30448 appear to represent the same person because: The wife of John Potter, Edward Parker and James Rose was Elizabeth, last name Unknown. Her last husband's name was Rose; her LNAB was not. See this g2g discussion: http://www.wikitree.com/g2g/224620/published-research-concerning-hannah-william-potter-beecher Thank you.
posted by Jillaine Smith
Wood-975 and UNKNOWN-30448 appear to represent the same person because: The wife of John Potter, Edward Parker and James Rose was Elizabeth, last name Unknown. She was NOT Elizabeth Wood. While there was an Elizabeth Wood who married a John Potter in 1630, this marriage took place 88 miles from where John Potter's family lived. See this g2g discussion: http://www.wikitree.com/g2g/224620/published-research-concerning-hannah-william-potter-beecher
posted by Jillaine Smith
The wife of 1) John Potter and 2) Edward Parker was not Elizabeth Wood daughter of Henry Wood and Isabell Goodspeed. See this g2g thread about 2004 research published in TAG.
posted by Jillaine Smith
I believe this woman is the same as my Wood-975. I believe my birthdate is correct which makes your marriage dat to John Potter believable. It seems likely that my death date is correct and yours is a funeral or burial date.
posted by Theodore Palmer
Wood-975 and Wood-4168 do not represent the same person because: It is certainly possible that here is some confusion between the people described in these two profiles, but it seems to me that there is little prospect that they represent the same person.
posted by Theodore Palmer
Wood-975 and Wood-4168 are not ready to be merged because: Most likely a match, but clarification of birth would be desirable.
posted by [Living Woodhouse]
I have Elizabeth Wood and John Potter marrying back in Chesham, Buckinghamshire prior to migrating to the colonies. There is also a citation showing Elizabeth Potter born in Chesham in 1631. Shw was a baby when they sailed. Source at Ancestry.
posted by [Living Hotlen]

[Do you know Elizabeth's family name?]  |  R  >  Rose  >  Elizabeth (UNKNOWN) Rose

Categories: Puritan Great Migration