Probably not the son of Robert 'Rot.' Bruce, of Kennet

Biography

Elizabeth Clarke, daughter of William and Margery Clarke of Watertown & Woburn, was born 26 Nov 1642 in Watertown, Middlesex, Massachusetts, and died 13 Aug 1710 at age 67 in Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts.

She married George Brush on 28 Dec 1659 at Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts. His parents are not known. He was born about 1633 and died 13 Aug 1692 at about age 59 in Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts. it can be speculated that he was captured at the Battle of Dunbar in 1650 where he may have served as a Leftenant of Horse and sent to the Colonies as a slave aboard the ship Unity.

From https://spows.org/battle-of-dunbar/battle-of-dunbar-prisoners-of-wa...

Biographical Notes:

The marriage record for George Bruce and Elizabeth Clark is the first documented appearance of him in New England. 10 On 18 April 1690 he applied to be a Freeman.12

SEE: Sources and Notes below!

Children of GEORGE¹ and ELIZABETH (CLARK) BRUCE:

• 2. i. WILLIAM² BRUCE 1 (George¹), b. at Woburn 21 Nov 1660;13 d. 1 Jan 1661.14
• 2. ii. WILLIAM² BRUCE 2 (George¹), b. at Woburn 20 Oct 1661; 15 d. 3 Nov 1661.14
• 2. iii. ELIZABETH² BRUCE 1 (George¹), b. in Woburn 26 Jan 1662;16 d. abt 1671.
• 2. iv. MARY² BRUCE (George¹), b. in Woburn 15 June 1665; d. abt 1742; m. (1) in Woburn 4 June 1683 WALTER CRANSTON17 18 b. abt 1661; d. bef. 30 Dec 1684; m. (2) in Woburn 30 Oct 1684 JOHN BROOKS19 b. in Woburn 1 Mar 1664;20 d. in Woburn 7 Aug 1733,21 son of John and Eunice (Mousall) Brooks; m. (3) in Woburn 15 Jan 1734 PETER HAY22 b. in Concord abt 1661.
• 2. v. WILLIAM² BRUCE 3 (George¹), b. at Woburn 28 Apr 1667;23 d. at Bolton, Worcester 15 March 1747;24 m. in Woburn 15 Mar 1693, ELIZABETH (_____) GOULD, widow.25 26
• 2. vi. JOHN² BRUCE/BRUSHSen. (George¹), b. in Woburn 18 June 1670; m. (1) in Woburn 31 Jan 1693, ROSE WATTLES, 27 b. in Chelmsford 22 Oct 1670;28 d. in Woburn 21 Sept 1723,29 dau. of John Wattles/Woodall, Worcester Prisoner of War and Mary (Gould) Wattles; m. (2) in Woburn May 1724, ISABEL LEPINGWELL,17 b. in Woburn 6 Jan 1697, dau. of Thomas and Hannah (Dunkley) Lepingwell.30
• 2. vii. ELIZABETH² BRUCE 2 (George¹), b. in Woburn 24 Aug 1672; 31 d. in Cambridge, Middlesex 20 Apr 1748; m. in Woburn 2 Mar 1698, EBENEZER SWAN,32 b. in Cambridge, Middlesex 14 Nov 1672;33 d. in Menotomy, Middlesex 27 Jan 1740, son of John and Mary Elizabeth (Pratt) Swann.
• 2. viii. GEORGE² BRUCE (George¹), b. in Woburn 18 Jan 1673/4;34 35 d. in Woburn 18 Jan 1673/4.36 37
• 2. ix. JOSEPH² BRUCE 1 (George¹), b. in Woburn 11 Jan 1674/5; 3438 d. 28 Feb 1676.36 39
• 2. x. JOSEPH² BRUCE 2 (George¹), b. in Woburn 29 Dec 1676; 34 40
• 2. x. SAMUEL² BRUCE (George¹), b. 28 Mar 1680;34 41
• 2. xi. MARJORY² BRUCE (George¹), b. in Woburn 24 Apr 1684; 34 42 m. in Woburn 20 Feb 1704, ISAAC WALKER, 43 44 b. in Woburn 1 Nov 1677, “removed to Concord, N.H.”, son of Deacon Samuel Walker, Jr and Sarah (Reed) Walker. 45 46 47
• 2. xii. LYDIA² BRUCE (George¹), b. in Woburn 10 Apr 1687; 48 47 d. in Woburn 27 Apr 1743; m. in Woburn 23 Oct 1734, JOSIAH WINN,49 b. in Woburn 11 Feb 1710; d. in Lancaster, Middlesex July 1777, son of Joseph and Martha (Blodgett) Winn.

  ---

IMPORTANT UPDATE! (April 2019)

I once again hired Ancestry ProGenealogists to research my lineage and gave instructions to either prove or disprove, my theory that George Bruce may have been a Dunbar Prisoner and this they have done which puts to rest my Dunbar Theory. What they have found is that George and his wife, Elizabeth, signed Worburn marriage documents and deeds, with their marks next to the name, BRUSH, not BRUCE. The following is a snippet of an email I received from George Ott of Ancestry ProGenealogists in December of 2018:

"I have attached the two documents that include the signatures of the same men, William and John Brush/Bruce, the sons of the immigrant John Brush who various family researchers consider to be a Bruce. All records for the immigrant John Brush during his lifetime is always written as Brush. Two of his sons in 1692 actually sign their names as Brush and then in 1710 and thereafter always sign as Bruce.

We are moving ahead with studying the Brush family in England because every piece of evidence points to George immigrating with the surname of Brush".

In a further email, Mr. Ott corrected himself when he misstated John Brush when he meant George Brush as the immigrant: "I meant George Brush/Bruce below as the immigrant".

I will continue to update this profile as I receive more information. In the meantime, I have edited out George's parents and place of birth until they can be reliably established.

George Bruce, Probable Dunbar Prisoner

Every attempt has been made to ensure accuracy; please independently verify all data.

Published: 03 Dec 2014 Updated: 29 Sep 2018 Page contributors: Charles D. Bruce, Daniel P. Bruce, Andrew Millard, and Teresa Rust

George Bruce, #10 on George S. Stewart’s Captured at Dunbar list

IMPORTANT UPDATE! (July 2018) According to, Christopher Gerrard, Pam Graves, Andrew Millard, Richard Annis, and Anwen Caffell, in, Lost Lives, New Voices: Unlocking the Stories of the Scottish Soldiers at the Battle of Dunbar 1650, (England: Oxbow Books, 2018), on page 248, George is categorized as:

Probable [that he is a Dunbar prisoner transported on the Unity]

Bruce, George. Residences: Woburn MA. Appears: 1659. D.1692. [Exiles; DR; SPOWS; Ch.7 & 8] https://scottishprisonersofwar.com/george-bruce-10-on-the-dunbar-pr...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

In March of 2017, I hired ancestryProGenealogists [http://www.progenealogists.com] to verify my research and lineage to George Bruce of Woburn, Massachusetts. The following is their report to me:

November 27, 2017
Dear Daniel:

We are excited to present you with the findings from our search into your Bruce family lineage. We were privileged to have our esteemed colleague, Nathan W. Murphy, a Fellow of the American Society of Genealogists, assist with the research. You wanted us to review the Bruce lineage back to George Bruce, born 1634, document George’s origins, and learn more about his immigration to the United States.

Research Summary:

We were able to quickly verify the pedigree you compiled back to Isaiah Bruce (1754–1837) of Bolton and Marlborough, Massachusetts, adding a variety of new documentation to your tree. Barnard A. Bruce married Frances M. Calkins at Plymouth Congregational Church in Seattle, King County, Washington in 1920 (Document 1). The marriage of Barnard’s grandparents, Barnard Bruce and Ruth Glidden, was found in Windsor, Kennebec County, Maine, in 1851. Barnard informed authorities he was a resident of “Patrick town Plantation” (Document 3). Barnard Bruce Jr. (age 42) and an elder Barnard Bruce (age 70) [his father], along with a 33-year-old Isaiah Bruce, were found in Patricktown Plantation, Lincoln County, Maine, on the 1850 census (Document 4).

The father of the elder Barnard Bruce was Isaiah Bruce, according to Heritage Consulting’s Millennium File. In the publication Some Descendants of George Bruce of Woburn, Massachusetts, it is also stated that Barnard Bruce was Isaiah’s son. Original sources identifying Isaiah Bruce’s children are not cited. The compilers base Barnard’s parentage on “Records of Annie Flewelling and her aunt, Lila Crummett.” Naming patterns in the Maine family suggest we’re on the right track, as the unique name “Isaiah” carried down through the family, and Isaiah’s wife’s maiden name was Barnard. The origin of the given name Isaiah, used by the Bruce family, can be identified. Isaiah Bruce (1754– 1837) was the son of Samuel and Betty (Whitney) Bruce of Bolton, Worcester County, Massachusetts. His maternal grandfather was Isaiah Whitney of Harvard, Worcester County, Massachusetts.

Identifying the parentage of Samuel and Betty (Whitney) Bruce produced significant challenges. In an article published in the prestigious New England Historical and Genealogical Register (NEHGR) in 1982, it is stated that Samuel Bruce, who married Betty Whitney, was the son of Samuel and Elizabeth (Townshend) Bruce of Bolton, Massachusetts, and a descendant of immigrant Thomas Bruce, a seventeenth-century settler of Sudbury and Marlborough, Massachusetts (Document 10). This disagrees with the family tree you shared with us, which traces Samuel Bruce’s ancestry back to an immigrant named George Bruce. One of the co-authors of the article, Catherine Rose Fahey, helped publish another genealogy of the Bruce family of Colonial Massachusetts twenty years later. In this more recent publication, Samuel’s parentage changed. He is identified as a son of Samuel and Rebecca (Winn) Bruce of Bolton, Massachusetts, grandson of William Bruce of Woburn and Bolton, Massachusetts, and great-grandson of immigrant George Bruce of Woburn, Massachusetts (Document 11). Catherine Rose Fahey also helped publish an updated account of immigrant Thomas Bruce’s descendants about the same time. The authors explain a mistake had been made in the NEHGR article, and it was a different Samuel Bruce who was the son of Samuel and Elizabeth (Townshend) Bruce, citing deeds of Worcester County, Massachusetts (Document 9). We reviewed a number of Worcester County, Massachusetts, deeds concerning men named Samuel Bruce. There were several men with this name there in the mid-1700s and they didn’t leave wills, which caused research challenges. Tracing the Bruce family land proved crucial in determining Samuel’s correct lineage. Samuel Bruce was in fact, the son of Samuel Bruce (who married Rebecca Winn), as is explicitly stated in land transactions (Documents 14, 18–19). There are also scant records concerning the elder Samuel Bruce’s father, William Bruce. The birth of his son, Samuel Bruce, is recorded at Woburn in 1701, but William didn’t leave a will, nor could we find a list of heirs recorded in Worcester County, Massachusetts, deed books. The elder Samuel can be traced back to Woburn, where he married Rebecca Winn in 1729. William’s age at death in Bolton (in 78th year in 1747), is a close fit to the 1667 baptism of William Bruce at Woburn. William Bruce’s 1667 baptism identifies him as the son of George Bruce. His mother was Elizabeth (Clark) Bruce. George Bruce’s name was also frequently spelled “Brush” in the early Massachusetts records. The Bruce family publications state his origin is unknown. The Bruce Y-DNA Project reports having tested descendants of both Massachusetts immigrants George Bruce and Thomas Bruce, and concluded they do not match. We didn’t have adequate time to verify the lineages of those tested, but the descendants of George Bruce report descent from Samuel and Rebecca (Winn) Bruce, which is your line, which we have attempted to verify. Some have theorized George was Scottish. All we know at this point is that he married an Englishwoman at Woburn in 1659, and gave his children the names William (three times), Mary, John, Elizabeth, George, Joseph, Samuel, Margery, and Lydia. These are very English-sounding names. In a court deposition, dated 1663, which you shared with us, George Brush gave his age as 30, calculating an approximate birth year of 1633. The original record should be reviewed. There have been no reported DNA matches between George Bruce’s descendants and Bruce men who still reside in the British Isles – which, if found, would be an invaluable clue to his origin.

In conclusion, direct evidence naming parent-to-child relationships does not appear to exist for all generations between yourself and immigrant George Bruce/Brush (1633–1692). Very few of the Bruces we studied left wills in the Colonial period. A reasonable case can be made that he is your ancestor, based on the records we have reviewed to date. It has not been determined where George originated, but he was born in 1633 or thereabouts (age 30 in 1663), had settled in Woburn, Massachusetts, by 1659, where he married an Englishwoman, and was adamant that his eldest son would be named “William,” a possible naming pattern.

Future Research:

The original court deposition identifying George Brush’s age should be obtained. A reference should be included in Melinde Lutz Sanborn’s Ages from Court Records 1636 to 1700. The name George Bruce will be very common in the British Isles, and Y-chromosome DNA clues have already been utilized without success. Background information could also be sought on Scottish immigration to Massachusetts in the 1650s. Options for continuing research include (1) waiting for a Y-DNA match with a Bruce in the British Isles to be found, or (2) searching indexes to Scottish and English parish registers for infants named George Bruce or Brush baptized around the year 1633 and attempting to identify one of them with the American colonist.

Daniel, we’d like to thank you for entrusting us with your family history research. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to share this information with you, and we hope you are pleased with the depth and scope of our research. If you have any questions about the research or report, we would be happy to answer them.

We look forward to your feedback and to the prospect of continuing your research soon. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be of service. Sincerely,

Paul K. Graham, AG, CG Senior Genealogist, Research Manager

Terri Hampton Account Manager Phone: (385) 775-5712 Email: terri.hampton@ancestry.com

This ends the report I received from ancestryProGenealogists and I hope this information I have shared with you helps in your genealogical research.

However, care needs to be taken here because other than a birth record, and a Baptism record of a George Bruce in Clackmannan, Scotland in 1633, there is NO current record to prove a link between George Bruce of Woburn, Massachusetts, and the baby George Bruce born in Clackmannan, Scotland. And as much as I would like this to be true, there is just no factual evidence to support it. But, one can make a circumstantial and speculative case (which I have done with this profile on Geni Tree), based upon the timeline of the birth of George of Clackmannan, and the marriage of George of Woburn to Elizabeth Clark in the Colonies, the Battle of Dunbar and the ship Unity. Why? Because the timeline fits, snuggly! But, again, I stress the information is based upon uncorroborated evidence with no supporting documentation of George of Woburn arriving in the Colonies, nor of his origin.

===============================================================================================================================================================

Daniel Bruce, as documented above, engaged researchers to disprove the link between this George and the George Bruce of Clackmannan who arrived on the Unity in 1651. What his researchers failed to find is one of two records to disprove it: a birth record in the Colony or an alternative passage record for him or his parents.

Baptism info on two George Bruce's around 1634. George b. 1633 s/o Rot.(sic) Bruce and Elizabethe Halyburton of Clackmannan, Scotland This info is from the Scotland parish records at www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

Note: this is the record for Maj. George Bruce, of Harpersland

-=-=-===-=-=-=-=-=-

(From an entry concerning the ancestry of Stanley Woodbury Carleton)

George Bruce 1, a Scotch prisoner of war in the battle of Dunbar,
settled in Woburn about 1652 ; d. 1692 ; m. Dec. 20, 1659, Elizabeth Clarke, of Watertown. b. 1642, d. 1710. John 2, b. 1670, d. 1742, Lieutenant in King Phillip's war; m. (2) May 13, 1724, Isabel Leppingwall, b. 1698, d. 1733. George 3, b. 1732, d. 1770; m. Jan. 3, 1755, Mary Holt, of Boston, b. 1733, d. 1800. Thomas 4, h. 1757, d. 1819; m. (i) Aug. 10, 1780, Susanna Wyrrian, b. 1759, d. 1815. Nancy 5, b. 1788, d. 1855; m. Aug. 24, 1809, Ezra Rhodes, b. 1784, d. 1846. Sarah Elizabeth Rhodes 6, b. Oct. 24, 1823, d. 1905 ; m. Oct. 27, 1841, James Madison Carleton. Stanley Woodbury Carleton 7.

Bibliographic information:

• The register of the Lynn historical society, Lynn, Massachusetts
• by Lynn historical society, Lynn, Mass. [from old catalog]
• Published 1898
• Topics Lynn, Mass. -- History Societies. [from old catalog]
• Volume 17
• Publisher Lynn, Mass.
• Pages 144
• Possible copyright status NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT
• Language English
• Call number 7738257
• Digitizing sponsor Sloan Foundation
• Book contributor The Library of Congress
• Collection library_of_congress; americana
• Scanfactors 1
• Full catalog record MARCXML
• Page 29
• Identifier-access http://www.archive.org/details/registeroflynnhi17lynn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BRUSH: — George Brush, of Woburn, Mass., said to be a Scotchman, married Dec. 20, 1659, Elizabeth, daughter of William Clark, and had Elizabeth 1663. Mary 1665, William 1667, John 1670, Elizabeth again 1672, Joseph 1676, Samuel 1680, Margery 1684, Lydia 1687. He was admitted freeman 1690, died Aug. 13, 1692.

References: — Meade's Hist, of Greenwich, Conn., 315; Sewall's Hist, of Woburn, Mass., 595; Smith's Hist, of Dutchess County, N. Y., 125; Phenix's Whitney Family, Conn., vol. I, 274; Savage's Gen. Diet: vol. I, 281.

Bibliographic information:

• Genealogical guide to the early settlers of America
• by Whittemore, Henry, b. 1833
• Published 1898
• Volume 1
• Publisher [New York
• Pages 188
• Language English
• Digitizing sponsor MSN
• Book contributor Cornell University Library
• Contributor usage rights See terms
• Collection cornell; americana
• Full catalog record MARCXML
• Page 65
• Identifier-access http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029818444

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ancestry.com from FHL film 1040207 shows a Scotland baptism record for George Bruce, 15 Jul 1633 in

Clackmannan of Rot. Bruce (presumably Robert) and Elizabethe Halyburton.   This would make him a  grandson of the 8th Baron of Clackmannan.    Close enough to have fought for Scotland but not so close he would have been ransomed after the battle of Dunbar.   The Bruces of Clackmannan were often the guardians of nearby Sterling Castle.   This also makes him a cousin of King Robert the Bruce. His elite status could also explain his being settled with a prominent Woburn MA man who married his daughter.   [Don Blish]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Info on the Battle of Dunbar:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunbar_%281650%29

http://www.scotwars.com/battle_of_dunbar.htm

http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/military/1650-dunbar.htm

"A Scotchman who changed his name to Bruce."

• Book of the Lockes : a genealogical and historical record of the descendants of William Locke, of Woburn ; with an appendix containing a history of the Lockes in England, also of the family of John Locke, of Hampton, N. H., and kindred families and individuals, Locke, John Goodwin, (Boston and Cambridge, Massachusetts: James Monroe and Company, 1853.), pages 300-301 (Reliability: 3).
• http://trees.wmgs.org/getperson.php?personID=I36017&tree=Schirado
• http://mayflowerfamilies.com/?page_id=1318
  • Savage mentions: George Brush (Bruce) of Woburn (mentioned elsewhere as being here as early as 1634–see other references) Bruce, James of Haverhill; 1677; Bruce,John of Sudbury with children by 1672; Bruce, Peter of Haverhill; 1677; Bruce, Roger of Marlboro (children listed) Bruen, John, New London, s. of Obadiah Bruen, Obadiah, Gloucester who settled Marshfield, moved across the bay, back to New London, and listed as the youngest son of John B. Esq of Bruen, Stapleford, Cheshire.
  • Other early Johns (Various genealogies) include John, son of George of Woburn, George “Brush,” later identified as “Bruce” being early there in Woburn., above; John above as father of Roger Bruce (contested, see Fahey) and both John, above and Roger, as son of Thomas Bruce of Sudbury, likely there as early as 1677 being called Thomas “Brewes”, later copied as “Brewer”.
• http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/BRUCE/2002-11/1038081390
  • " beginning to believe that George Bruce, born in Scotland about 1634 and later settled in Woburn MA was George Meline who was Christened in Montrose Scotland in 1635. His father is listed as William Meline.I found a William Meline who married Lydia Bruce February 7, 1633. They lived in Edinburgh and he was a weaver. George Bruce married Elizabeth Clark whose father was a weaver.Maybe George Meline changed is name to his mothers maiden name when he came to America. I don't know how to prove this and if anybody has some suggestion or would like to look into this further please email me."

    ---

• Reference: Ancestry Genealogy - SmartCopy: Aug 17 2016, 20:37:51 UTC

  ---

  
  

I have found more than one birth date for George. 1634-1692. I also have a Clark with an e on the end, Clarke. George Bruce and Elizabeth Clark Bruce had 9 children.

• Mary Bruce 1668-1742
• John Bruce 1670-1742
• George Bruce 1674-1674
• Samuel Bruce 1680-unk
• Lydia Bruce 1687-1743
• William Bruce 1667-1701
• Elizabeth Bruce 1675-1748
• Joseph Bruce 1676-1675
• Margery Bruce 1682-Unk

  ---

Y DNA

Three male descendants of George Ross of Elizabethtown have tested & are participants in the Ross Surname Project at Family Tree DNA. They carry Haplogroup R-M512. They are a match to one descendant of James Ross and one descendant of Isaac Ross, Sr.. Also several other Scottish prisoners of war... George Brush & William Thompson, of Kittery. Most importantly, they are all a match to descendants of Chief of Clan Murdoch Buidhe Matheson.

That definitely calls into question this idea that George of Elizabethtown was descended from any Rosses of Balnagown.

DNA matches: http://www.thefryingpan.net/charts/ross-mrca-chart-reorganized.html#18

• Reference: Ancestry Genealogy - SmartCopy: Feb 14 2020, 20:54:56 UTC
• https://digital.nls.uk/histories-of-scottish-families/archive/94948... “ No. 96.— 15th July, 1633. Baptized at Clackmannan to Mr Robert Brace (of Clackmannan) and Elizabeth Halyburton a son, lawful name George, in the presence of Mr Robert Bruce of Wester Kennet. (Session Record.)”