Born in Windham, Windham, Connecticut Colony
Ancestors 
Son of Benjamin Bidlack
and Lideah (Abbe) Bidlack
Died
at age 1
in Windham, Connecticut Colony
Profile last modified
| Created 28 Apr 2020
This page has been accessed 125 times.
Biography
James (Badcock) Bidlack died young.
James was the first of two sons named James for Benjamin and Lydia (Abbe) Bidlack/Bidlacke/Badcock. His younger brother James was born in October 1728.
James's name at birth has been mistranscribed in the Barbour records as Badcock. While Badcocks certainly did reside in Windham at this time, the original Windham town records show that James clearly was part of the Bidlake/Bidlack family. [1]At the time of his birth James was noted as a "Bidlake," though later some family members shifted to the Bidlack spelling. No one in this family seems to have adopted the Badcock spelling, and the application of that name to this younger James is simply a transcription mistake.
James's birthdate is noted in the original record as "Janu 3 1726/7". This should be understood as January 3rd in the Winter of 1726 going into 1727, meaning in modern dating he would be born January 3rd, 1727. This interpretation properly aligns his birth with the birth of his brother Benjamin which had been July 10th,1725.
Sources
- ↑ Windham Town Records within Connecticut Town Marriages courtesy of Family Search. Film # 007730726. Image 50
- "Connecticut Births and Christenings, 1649-1906", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F74V-XYD : 7 January 2020), James Badcock, 1726.
- Find a Grave, database and images (https://www.findagrave.com : accessed 22 December 2020), memorial page for James Bidlack (3 Jan 1726–29 Mar 1728), Find A Grave: Memorial #83580638, citing Windham Center Cemetery, Windham, Windham County, Connecticut, USA ; Maintained by Mark Peebles (contributor 46514135) .
- "Connecticut Deaths and Burials, 1772-1934", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QLM4-6NCB : 29 November 2018), James Bidlake, 1728.
- Connecticut Town Birth Records, pre-1870 (Barbour Collection)
- "Connecticut Marriages, 1640-1939," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QLM4-6NCB : 11 April 2017), James Bidlake, Death 1728, Windham, Windham, Connecticut, United States; Connecticut State Library, Hartford; FHL microfilm 1,376,454.
Is James your ancestor? Please don't go away!
Login to collaborate or comment, or
contact
the profile manager, or
ask our community of genealogists a question.
Login to collaborate or comment, or contact
the profile manager, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA
No known carriers of James's ancestors' DNA have taken a DNA test. Have you taken a test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.
No known carriers of James's ancestors' DNA have taken a DNA test. Have you taken a test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.
Images: 1
Featured Asian and Pacific Islander connections: James is 21 degrees from 今上 天皇, 18 degrees from Adrienne Clarkson, 22 degrees from Dwight Heine, 21 degrees from Dwayne Johnson, 14 degrees from Tupua Tamasese Lealofioaana, 18 degrees from Stacey Milbern, 17 degrees from Sono Osato, 30 degrees from 乾隆 愛新覺羅, 20 degrees from Ravi Shankar, 23 degrees from Taika Waititi, 21 degrees from Penny Wong and 16 degrees from Chang Bunker on our single family tree. Login to see how you relate to 33 million family members.
B > Badcock | B > Bidlack > James (Badcock) Bidlack
Categories: Windham, Connecticut | Connecticut, Child Mortality
I noticed the Barbour records display this same quirk of splitting Benjamin Bidlack and Lideah Abbe's children into two buckets, one named Badcock and one named Bidlack....here's why I think it is a mistranscription.
Barbour link: http://www.ctgenweb.org/county/cowindham/records/barbour/barbourwindhamab.htm
In the Barbour record it refers to the source for the misnamed Badcocks as 1:61 . When looking at the original town records, on page 61 one sees the birth of the two necronym Jameses and their brother John, all listed as Bidlake with proper birth dates and proper parents. A hand written note tells us to see page 105 (Maybe it reads 108?). Right now the Family Search system is down for maintenance as they seem to be doing some beta testing, but the source was working all day and likely will be restored by tomorrow. Eventually we should be able to follow that clue...hopefully that is the page where the other siblings are noted.
see Image of Original Records (page 61 AKA Image 50)): https://beta.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-C9BT-ZQ27-K?cc=2448940&personaUrl=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQLM4-6NCB
About Last name at birth, unfortunately only the manager can modify that field. Hopefully the profile will in time show a LNAB as either "Bidlake" as the original record shows or "Bidlack" as the family seems to have generally gone by. Either way would be loads better than having his LNAB code as "Badcock."
edited by R Adams
https://beta.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-C9BT-ZQK2-H?i=112&cc=2448940
On that page the birth of two Mary Bidlakes is noted, the first having died. Then it says see page 184? (AKA Image 133) That image has more kids born and some older Bidlakes passing on. Lots of good dates. Oh wow, it has the death dates for Benjamin Bidlake's parents Christopher and Sarah!
So following all the entries, to me it is pretty clear that Barbour just got some similar looking names mixed up.