First Rice Families in Massachusetts

Started by Erica Howton on Monday, January 20, 2014
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing all 12 posts
1/20/2014 at 6:31 PM

I'm listing them here from Farmer's Register (1842).

http://books.google.com/books?id=TUGHVUEbRBoC&lpg=PA242&ots...

1. RICE, *EDMUND, Sudbury, freeman 1640, representative 1640, was one of the petitioners for the grant of Marlborough, to which place he probably removed. His son Benjamin was b. in 1640.
2. EDWARD, a deacon of Marlborough, was admitted freeman in 1651. His descendants are numerous and have been remarkable for longevity. Worcester Magazine,
3. HENRY, Sudbury 1640, was admitted freeman 1648, and was one of the proprietors of Marlborough.
4. PHILIP, Boston 1640. was a member of the church.
5. RICHARD, Concord 1635, admitted freeman 1641, died 9 June, 1709, ae., according to the records, "more than 100 years," but Mr. Shattuck makes him but 97. It is said that he left 8 sons, who lived to great ages.
6. ROBERT, Boston, disarmed in 1637, had sons, Joshua, b. 1637, Nathaniel, b. 1639.
7. THOMAS, Sudbury, perhaps son of Richard, was admitted freeman 1660, and d. 16 Nov. 1691.

In addition, Pope's "Pioneers of Massachusetts" (1900) has:

8. "widow Rice," proprietor at Sudbury, 1639. "She appears to be the same person who married Miles Tarne of Boston about 1652. See his will."

1/20/2014 at 7:24 PM

Widow Rice is here: Elizabeth Tarne

She and Robert Roice are only slightly older than John Rice of Dedham. No Dedham connections.

1/22/2014 at 2:05 PM

I am also listing Robert Royce, of New London

I do not believe his ancestry is proven but there is a tree. It looks to originate in south England, the county of Somerset.

That seems to also be the origination thought for Richard Rice of Concord who is not associated with any English tree.

1/22/2014 at 2:15 PM

From Farmer's list, Edmund, Edward & Henry Rice are all in the family of

Deacon Edmund Rice

I cannot find a tree for the Philip Rice who was a member of the Boston church in 1640

Robert Roice of Boston had 3 known children, much younger than John of Dedham. No origination has been thought of.

1/22/2014 at 2:47 PM

Robert Royce of Connecticut is the line from which ANN Churchill Foote is a connected .... Kezia, marries SAMUEL Royce son of Neimeiah of the MORGAN to Royce family. The DNA of the Y chromosome is at leat 6 or 8 steps different from Edmund and John RICE so many hundreds of years seperate the common ancestor. DCR

1/22/2014 at 3:12 PM

Erica Isabel Howton, (c) C
The Great Migration newsletter, in an analysis of "becoming freedman" in 1641, concluded, in 2008, that the bulk of arrivers were well before that year.

http://www.greatmigration.org/gmletter/pdf/gmn_v17_04.pdf

They do not say (know) why a settler waited 6-8 years before being admitted as freeman, but the rhythm was inevitable: there was a "class" each year.

Thus we can think John Rice settled in Dedham some 7 years before becoming free.

1/22/2014 at 4:31 PM

I believe that they had to be 'free of debt' to become a freedman.....that is, if they were indentured to anyone (in repayment for passage to America) or for any other debt....they could not vote, and could not join the Church. ...or buy land..

1/22/2014 at 5:06 PM

If born 1630 age is 19 at marriage to ANN Hackley. If born 1624 age is 25. THE 1610 dob would make him age 39 and not as likely to have lived to his age at death known to be 1686 which would make him 76 at death...which is qutie long for the era. Does a 19 year old recent arriver have the cash? not likely, so he must have had a family of resource in order to comply with town requirements. DCR

1/22/2014 at 5:55 PM

Dale...there are plenty of people that lived to be 76 and older in the 1600's....

Your point about a 19 year old, recent arriver, having the money to have paid his passage has merit....he probably came with or joined up with a family....(the amount of land that was granted depended on the number of people 'in the family unit'.....so he may have been a relative and indentured to the family til his passage had been repaid.....THEN he was free to go wherever he wanted to, to vote, to join the Church, and to buy land of his own.

1/22/2014 at 7:44 PM

Fay - just one note of caution.

Dedham was unique.

Land was allocated "for free" ; they had an agenda of creating a utopian community (read the compact).

Otherwise - yes, of course. John Rice needed to have been "of age" & debt free.

One of the points made in this newsletter is that by 1641, the 2nd generation were becoming freeman.

So one thing to keep in mind as a possibility is that he was in fact born in America. And the odds are, if he immigrated, the "latest date" is 1641, with the peak of migration being about 1639 / 1640.

1/22/2014 at 7:48 PM

I agree that 1610 is less likely. Frankly 1624 has "always" made good sense as a DOB, and the case can be made for younger - but not much for older.

In case I wasn't clear, I'm thinking about the Roxbury settlement, as the 30 founding families of Dedham in 1636 were in Roxbury 1st.

1/23/2014 at 5:03 AM

Good point....still, when people 'removed' from one location to another, the same rules applied....they got the land 'free' (subject to certain restrictions: they had to build a structure of -x- size, clear fields, maintain roads, etc.....and the amount of 'free land' was determined by the number of people in their household......there were often pseudo-relatives who lived with them so that they could obtain more land....the cost of feeding and caring for that person would be considered one of those 'short term' indentures....quickly paid off...

Agree with the dates and best DOB calculation (until something WRITTEN comes up that tweaks the dates to a 'truer' figure.)..

Showing all 12 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion