He was NOT a son of Benjamin Scott and Margaret Stevenson!!!
There is no record anywhere showing that they had a son named William!!
Questionable parentage of William Scott:
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/SCOTT/2002-09/1032025366
SCOTT-L Archives
Archiver > SCOTT > 2002-09 > 1032025366
From: BJCOD@aol.com
Subject: Re: [SCOTT] Benjamin and Margaret (Stevenson) Scott
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 13:42:46 EDT
This e-mail repeats a common error in identifying William Scott's parents as Benjamin and Margaret (Stephenson) Scott and probably mixes the records of two Benjamin Scotts.
Benjamin Scott of Braintree MA was born in 1612 in England, married Hannah ? (possibly Chaffor), and had at least four children: John, Peter, Benjamin, and Hannah. Benjamin died in 1654 and left a will (in Suffolk County MA probate records) that makes no mention of a son William or any descendants of such a person.
Benjamin Scott of Rowley MA married Margaret Stephenson (possibly in 1634) and had at least seven children: Joseph, Benjamin, John, Elizabeth, Mary, Samuel, and Sarah. Benjamin died about July 1671 and left a will (in Essex County MA probate records) that makes no mention of a son William or any descendants of such a person.Since William Scott of Hatfield MA did not die until at least 1716, the fact that he was not mentioned in the will of either Benjamin pretty much rules out a father-son relationship. It is also noteworthy that none of William Scott's ten children is named Benjamin or Margaret.While an Edward Scott was married in Hadley MA in 1670 and a John Scott was married in Springfield MA in 1659, no linkage to William Scott in nearby Hatfield MA has been found. Over 330 years after William Scott first appeared in the records of Hatfield MA, his parentage and relationship to other Scotts in MA remain a mystery.
It is better that no name be put in if the parentage is not sure! leave it blank!!
Clifton William Scott and Mildred Evelyn Bradford Scott of Ashfield, Mass ...
https://books.google.ca/books?id=zsYY4RDnAGcC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=
benjamin+scott+of+braintree+ma&source=
bl&ots=YnL02Vm71c&sig=
q038CZWRNwvwNUk1ycktkFf6cnk&hl=
en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwict8y1i8raAhVkiOAKHT8aCTM4ChDoAQg-MAQ#v=onepage&q=
benjamin%20scott%20of%20braintree%20ma&f=false
Is William 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.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with William by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA.
However, there are no known yDNA or mtDNA test-takers in his direct paternal or maternal line.
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with William:
If William Scott Sr. was not related to Benjamin Scott Sr. than how come my DNA proves direct lines that directly tie to him ? I'm sorry but there has to be a tie from WILLIAM SCOTT SR TO BENJAMIN SCOTT SR. otherwise I wouldn't be here technically !!!
The researcher states that William's Scott senior's parents are unkown. Since Benjamin has no recorded children with the name William, that makes sense. I can with a high level of certainty, directly link the following: My son is James, I am Jeffrey, my father is Oliver, then: Phillip, Jay, Jedidiah, Phillip, Dr. Philip, Abasalom, William Junior, William senior. From there the trail is cold. We know from the grave stone that he was born in 1633. The first Scott did not come to Massachusetts much before then. (Benjamin arrived in 1632. He was one of if not the first. ) This highly increases the chances that William was born in England, but does not guarantee it. Was William a bastard? Possibly not. Here some possibilities: Record not found yet. Records destroyed. Birth never recorded. Orphaned and adopted but kept the last name. Parents killed in transit, plague there or while over here. We may never know.
William did live along time. That means he had money for keeping up good nutrition and descent housing, as well as good genes. His family plot lends to this idea. He married later in years. Did he have a previous wife? Perhaps in England? The more learned about Hannah may also lead to better understanding. What was the social station of her parents? To me, it sounds like he maybe is remarrying.
William did live along time. That means he had money for keeping up good nutrition and descent housing, as well as good genes. His family plot lends to this idea. He married later in years. Did he have a previous wife? Perhaps in England? The more learned about Hannah may also lead to better understanding. What was the social station of her parents? To me, it sounds like he maybe is remarrying.
edited by Jeff Scott