no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Mary (Benedict) Olmstead (1650 - 1693)

Mary Olmstead formerly Benedict
Born in Southold, Suffolk, Province of New Yorkmap
Ancestors ancestors
Wife of — married 17 Jul 1673 in Norwalk, Fairfield, Connecticutmap
Descendants descendants
Died at age 42 in Norwalk, Fairfield, Connecticut Colonymap
Profile last modified | Created 30 Dec 2010
This page has been accessed 2,968 times.

Contents

Biography

This profile is part of the Olmstead Name Study.

Disputed Origins

The exact dates and order of birth for Thomas and Mary (Brigham) Benedict's children is unclear. Some sources give Mary's date of birth as December 4, 1650,[1] while others surmise that she was born as late as 1656.

Family

Mary (Benedict) Olmstead was born on 4 December 1650 in Southold, Suffolk, Province of New York, daughter of Thomas Benedict Sr. (<1617–~1690) and Mary (Bridgham) Benedict (<1618–~1719).

Her parents lived in Hassamommock, near Southold, on Long Island, New York.The family removed to Norwalk, in the Colony of Connecticut, around 1665.

Her siblings were:

  1. Thomas Benedict (~1640–1688)
  2. Dea. Samuel Benedict I (1646–1719)
  3. Lieut Daniel Benedict (1649–1723)
  4. John Benedict (1649–1729)
  5. Elizabeth (Benedict) Slawson (~1650–1688)
  6. Sarah (Benedict) Beebe (>1650– )
  7. James Benedict (1650–>1717)
  8. Rebecca (Benedict) Wood (~1660– )

Mary (22) married Ensign John Olmstead (23) (born on 30 December 1649 in Hartford, Hartford, Connecticut; son of Richard Olmstead) on 17 July 1673 in Norwalk, Fairfield.[2][3][4] Their known children were:

  1. Mary (Olmstead) Reed (1673–1758)
  2. Jane (Olmstead) Wilson (~1675– )
  3. Sarah Jane (Olmstead) Abbott (1679–~1742)
  4. Elizabeth (Olmstead) Whitney (1680–1728)
  5. Rebecca (Olmstead) Lockwood (~1681–~1755)
  6. Capt Daniel O (Olmsted) Olmstead (~1682–1749)
  7. Eunice (Olmstead) Lobdell (~1687–~1743)
  8. Richard Olmsted (~1692–1776)

Mary died on 11 July 1693 in Norwalk, Fairfield, Connecticut Colony, aged 42.[1] Her headstone is no longer visible in the historical cemetery in East Norwalk.

Sources

  1. 1.0 1.1 Find A Grave: Memorial #34791852
  2. The Barbour Collection of Connecticut Town Vital Records - White, Lorraine Cook, ed. (Genealogical Publishing Co., Baltimore, MD, 1994-2002) Vol. Norwalk, Page 11.
  3. Clarence Almon Torrey; New England Marriages Before 1700; Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company; 1997
  4. William M. Clements; American Marriages before 1699
  • William Benedict; Benedict Family Genealogy.
  • Donald Lines Jacobus, History and Genealogy of the Families of Old Fairfield, CD-Local and Family Histories: CT, 1600's - 1800's, (Produced in collaboration with the Genealogical Publishing Company, 2000), vol 1, p 61.
  • 1912 "Olmsted Family in America"
  • Hall, Edwin. The Ancient Historical Records of Norwalk, Connecticut (James Mallory & Co., Norwalk, 1847) Page 185

From behind the ancestry.com subscription wall:

  • Ancestral File (R), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (Copyright (c) 1987, June 1998, data as of 5 January 1998). Birth: Dec. 4, 1650 Southold Suffolk County, New York, USA. Death: 1693 Norwalk Fairfield County Connecticut, USA
  • Connecticut Town Records (Barbour Collection), 1673




Is Mary your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message private message private message private message private message a profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Mary by comparing test results with other carriers of her mitochondrial DNA. Mitochondrial DNA test-takers in the direct maternal line: It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with Mary:

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 7

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Benedict-1880 and Benedict-59 appear to represent the same person because: Dates and husband is the same. Please proceed with the merge.
posted by Karen (Rollet) Lorenz
Benedict-1880 and Benedict-59 are not ready to be merged because: Since this is a pre-1700 profile, it requires the approval of a Volunteer Coordinator to confirim the merger.
posted by Dorothy (McKenzie) M
Benedict-1880 and Benedict-59 appear to represent the same person because: Duplicate!
posted by Walt Steesy
The disputed origins area needs to be cleaned up with correct dates.
Benedict-59 and Benedict-1062 appear to represent the same person because: These two should be merged with a disputed date of birth notice. They do represent the same person, just there is no definitive source and correct date of birth available. Leaving them separate can create confusion.
Benedict-59 and Benedict-1062 are not ready to be merged because: We differ on birth date: my sources for her death in 1693 are these.

Family Data Collection - Individual Records U.S., Find A Grave Index, 1600s-Current Web: Connecticut, Find A Grave Index, 1636-2013

Benedict-59 and Benedict-1062 appear to represent the same person because: Recent merge of husband.

B  >  Benedict  |  O  >  Olmstead  >  Mary (Benedict) Olmstead

Categories: Norwalk, Connecticut | Olmstead Name Study