Should Margery Pierce wife of Anthony Eames be changed to Margery Unknown?

+9 votes

Anderson's Great Migration lists her as Margery ____. I haven't looked yet to see where the name originated from but the Pierces are involved with the Frederick Clifton Pierce Fraud

WikiTree profile: Margery Eames
in Genealogy Help by Anne B G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)

Note I received a private message.

"Re: Your question on Margery Pierce and Anthony Eames, no, the name is correct, do not change this to unknown, that is not correct. It is correct the way it is, this is my family."

It is my family too. It is possible that Margery's name was Pierce, but it is not proven.
Margery’s maiden name has not been proven. Only being suggested in an old book is not proof.
Neither Pope (Pioneers of Massachusetts) nor Savage (Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England) gives her a last name.

5 Answers

+6 votes
Michael Russell, ( Dorchester and Fordington online parish clerk) has found a will of a Roger Kete  dated  15 Mar 1619/20 in which a  bequest was made to "my kinswoman Margery EMES the wife of Anthony EAMES--" but has not been able to sustantiate a maiden name. He found one lady of that name but
"Margery Pierce was a spinster in 1623 and clearly not Anthony's wife. "

(I'd say change her to unknown but am not a member of pgm project)
by Helen Ford G2G6 Pilot (483k points)
edited by Helen Ford
Thank you Helen, excellent information. I'll can take care of the changing, but will wait a little bit to see who else chimes in.

Just to add the reason Michael Russell states that  a Margery Pierce is known to have been single in 1623

(From a transcript of the LDS film of the Bishop's Transcripts for Fordington. )


Aprill 29 Robert base  sonne of Margery PIERCE buried

What would have been a bastardy case (but obviously didn't continue)  is mentioned in the Casebook of Sir Francis Ashley 1614-35 (Dorset records society) p 74 copy in my possession

15 April 1623 

Examination of Robert Toope of Fordington, Carpenter

Complained that he had followed one Edmond Chub who was reputed to be the father of a base born child to one ... Pierce, spinster of Fordington, and overtook him at Chetnoll ... ( summary: he was apprehended given into the charge of the tithingman who then let him escape and refused to sound the hue and cry as it wasn't a felony)  

+7 votes
Someone has just created another duplicate profile for Margery Pierce.  This now needs to be merged with Pierce-127 and THEN she should be removed from husband Eames.  There does exist a Margery Pierce, daughter of John PIerce however no proof she was wife of Anthony Eames.

After removing her THEN create a NEW Margery UNKNOWN as wife to Eames.
by David Mason G2G6 (8.5k points)
Thanks David. Yes if she is "real" that is what we should do.
David, what makes you think Margery d/o John and Eliz./Maud Eames exists? Do John and Eliz/Maud Eames exist.?
Margery's baptism record in the church of England as daughter of John
Is there a citation for that? Would you add it to the profile?
This is going to keep happening. People feel the urge to complete their family trees and want to bypass this one, where the managers are reluctant to add parents. I even felt that urge myself, but resisted because I'm trying to be 'professional' about this and follow WT guidelines. Just commenting, not trying to get anyone to rush with the parents.
+6 votes
Yes. The sources used to say Margery's name was Pierce and her father was John and mother was Elizabeth Maude do not actually show any documentation. Torrey's "New England Marriages Before 1700" does offer that her name could have been Prisse or Pierce, but he puts a question mark after each name since he did not know if it was correct. It is possible her name was Pierce, but there is no solid evidence.

Also, the sources provided for the names of her parents don't show any documentation. My speculation is if we could see what the information actually is in the sources cited on Wikitree we might see it was cobbled together from the following: 1. A Maude Jenkins  married a John Pierce in 1591 Heddington, England. 2. A Elizabeth Pierce was baptized in Horton, Dorset, England in 1573. Perhaps this is how the  name Elizabeth was added to Maude Jenkins. 3. According to Findagrave, there was a John Pierce who died in 1643 in Dorset. There is no picture of a tombstone, so I don't know how accurate that entry is. 4. There was a Margery, daughter of Thomas Pierce baptized in Dorset in 1604, but she would have only been 12 years old when her first child was born, so it doesn't seem that she would be Margery Eames. Nothing connects these four events to Margery Eames.

So, it could be that someone has taken these separate pieces of documentation, and decided to link them together to come up with parents for Margery.

Until we can actually see the information contained in the cited sources it is not known if the above speculation has any merit. Can the person who gave the sources provide the documentation  contained within the sources?
by Michael Pierce G2G Crew (970 points)
edited by Michael Pierce
+8 votes
by Anne B G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)
+5 votes
Has anyone looked into the validity of the source in the link below?
From the book[?] Eames Genealogy & History of Marshfield.
by Roger Poole-Horspool G2G Crew (900 points)

History of Marshfield

Eames Geneaology ? the only one that turned up in a google search. pg 213 has Josiah Eames the page before has Anthony. But that pg is missing from the Hathi version. It's on Ancestry and Says: "Anthony Eames, b. 1595/6 in Eng. d. 1686, in Marshfied,[sic] Mass. married Miss Price; he came to America abt. 1637; the had issue: of at least the following children": list. (Our list is more complete) This page is typewritten (as opposed to printed) and looks like it was tucked in later. Anyway, there are no sources listed.

I do like the addition of what looks like it came from the town records.

I've been researching in more local records including  Fordington manorial records, local municipal records and a suit in chancery. (so it's taken a long time to get various strands together)  I now know who Roger Kete was (Roger Kete wrote  the will that names Margery)   I think I have pretty good evidence as to what his relationship was to her.  If I'm right I can take her ancestry back for two more generations.Sorry I don't want to go any further at the moment as am half way through a paper on the subject. Think she should be left as unknown until I find out it the evidence passes muster (i.e. peer review.)
I agree Helen.

Related questions

+11 votes
3 answers
+6 votes
0 answers
171 views asked Jun 5, 2018 in Genealogy Help by Helen Ford G2G6 Pilot (483k points)
+3 votes
1 answer
+6 votes
1 answer
+9 votes
1 answer
+9 votes
1 answer
236 views asked Jun 17, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Living Horace G2G6 Pilot (645k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright