Is there stronger proof that Susanna (Vincent) Blower did not die in 1597?

Question

    Need proof that Susanna (Vincent) Blower did not die in 1597, but most likely was the Susan Blower who married George Ruggles Sr. (Ruggles-10) in 1602.  The internet is full of claims that Susanna (Vincent) Blower died in 1597, but this is probably wrong.  Instead, an article in 1976 in The American Genealogist (a reliable source) gives Susan (Vincent) Blower's death date as "After Oct 1597".  See the following weblink using that article as the source for that more accurate death date: https://nielsenhayden.com/genealogy-tng//getperson.php?personID=I33506&tree=nh1 

     This is because she was executor of the will of her husband (Thomas Blower) in October 1597 (he was buried on 01 October 1597 at Lavenham).  So she certainly could be the Susan Blower married five years later to George Ruggles Sr.   Thomas Blower being a resident of Lavenham would place wife Susan (Vincent) Blower in Lavenham (which could explain why George Ruggles married a Susan Blower in Lavenham (not in Sudbury).

Comments

But the best evidence I have found so far is that her daughter Susanna Blower was married in 1606 to George's son Jeffrey Ruggles.  The 1602 marriage would have resulted in daughter Susanna Blower and Jeffrey Ruggles to be step-siblings in the same household 4 years before their marriage.

---

The 1976 "The American Genealogist" article can apparently be accessed directly here (but it requires a subscription): Threlfall, John Brooks. ''The English Ancestry of Richard and Alice (Blower) Brackett of Braintree'',  The American Genealogist, Barrington, RI, 1976) Vol. 52, [https://www.americanancestors.org/DB283/i/12344/73/0 Page 73] * [https://www.americanancestors.org/DB283/i/12344/75/0 Page 75]

---

Have you had a look on Archive.org? There are quite a few American Genealogist volumes there.

---

The article in TAG says (p.73) that Thomas Blower's will was made 28 Sep and proved 27 Oct 1597 at Bury St Edmunds, but does not say who obtained probate. The article also suggests there would have been a posthumous child, expected in the will, but does not give a baptism date, unlike all the other children who were baptized at Stanstead. The will is transcribed on p.69-70 and names Susanna and her brother Nicholas Vincent as executors.

---

There is a wikitree profile for the posthumous child (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Blower-302).  It suggests that the child didn't necessarily come to term.  However, I suspect that perhaps the child was born, but baptized somewhere other than Stanstead.  Having lost her husband, perhaps Susanna had no good reason to have her youngest child baptized at Stanstead if she was living with relatives elsewhere.  Her brother Nicholas lived at Bildeston, and her sister Mary lived at Thorpe Morieux.  But Susanna had so many children die young, perhaps that one would have also died young even it was born and baptized somewhere.