Genealogy Richard Remmé, The Hague, Netherlands » Thomas Stanton III (1616-1677)

Persoonlijke gegevens Thomas Stanton III 

• Hij is geboren op 30 juli 1616 in (19 Jan 1622) Wolverton, Warwickshire, England.
• Hij werd gedoopt in England, Great Britain.
• Geïmmigreerd op 2 januari 1635.

  From London, England to Virginia in the merchantman Bonventura

• (College) juli 1634.

  enrolled at age 17 at Oxford College

• Hij is overleden op 2 december 1677 in Stonington, New London County, CT, hij was toen 61 jaar oud.
• Hij is begraven december 1677 in Wequetequock Cemetery, Stonington, New London County, CT.
• Testament op 24 oktober 1677.

  Probated September 20, 1678

• Een kind van Thomas Stanton en Katherine Washington
• Deze gegevens zijn voor het laatst bijgewerkt op 4 december 2022.

Gezin van Thomas Stanton III

Hij is getrouwd met Anne Lord.

Zij zijn getrouwd in het jaar 1637 te Hartford, Hartford Co., Connecticut, USA, hij was toen 20 jaar oud.

Kind(eren):

1. Thomas Stanton  1638-1718 
2. Hannah Lord Stanton  1644-1727 
3. Mary Stanton  1643-????
4. Dorothy Stanton  1651-1743 
5. John Stanton  1643-1713
6. Robert Stanton  1653-1724 
7. Samuel Stanton  1657-> 1698 
8. Joseph Stanton  1646-1714
9. Daniel Stanton  1648-1687
10. Sarah Stanton  1650-1713 

Notities over Thomas Stanton III

**************************************************************************  ******************************
We have recorded Thomas Stanton, the immigrant to America, as Thomas Stanton, Sr because he is the first "Thomas" in America although he is the 3rd in a direct descendant line of 5 Thomas Stanton men.  Thomas Stanton, Sr., father of the immigrant,  in the following text is recorded in our data as Thomas Stanton, II.

Our recording of Thomas' ancestors was once thought to be incorrect based on the following:

     In "The American Genealogists" Volume XIV, D. L. Jacobus, New Haven, Conn. 1937, is an article by Clarence Almon
     Torrey, PH. B of Dorchester, Mass - The Stanton-Washington Ancestry".  Almon consulted published works on Oxford
     students and John Burke's "A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Commoners of Great Britain and Ireland".  From
     these records "it is evident that Thomas Stanton, son of Thomas and Katherine (Washington) Stanton, remained in
     England;  that he entered Oxford, aged 17 years, in 1634;  that he married Elizabeth Cookes and had a son Thomas,
     who was 17 in 1664, when he was admitted to Oxford."

But we believed the ancestry might be correct according to the following:

      Anna Chesebrough Wildey sources the pedigree of Thomas Stanton's ancestors from page 277 of "Visitation of the
     County of Warwick in 1619, Taken by William Camden Clarendieux, King of Arms; Jarleian Miscellany 55 - 1167",
     Ed. by John Fetherstone, F. S. A.; London:1877; Vol. XII of "Harleian Miscellany Soc'y", Est. 1869.  This information was
     provided her by Dr. George Dallas Stanton of Stonington.  Included in this pedigree is:

      "Thomas fil et haeres, aet 3, 1619."

     Thomas would be 18 years of age in 1634 and 19 years of age when he arrived in America in 1635.  So then, who is the
     Thomas that attended Oxford? Is there any significance in the age discrepancy?

We searched for more definitive information to determine, one way or the other, the correct lineage of Thomas Stanton the immigrant and his family in England.  Meanwhile, we recorded information of Thomas' ancestors as recorded by Anna Chesebrough Wildey.

Now, we have been rewarded with confirmation that Anna Chesebrough Wildey was correct!  The Thomas Stanton Society Newsletter, Number 4, May 1999 states the following (with references to Clarence Terry, author of the article in "The American Genealogist" that quoted the Torrey article mentioned above):

     "Terry begins his case by quoting 'The Visitation of Warwickshire in 1619' in which the parenthood of Thomas is
     given as Thomas Stanton Sr., and Katherine.  They had two children: Thomas Jr., heir, born in 1616 and Alice born 6 days
     before the visitation.  To this point we are all in agreement.

     We learn from Terry that an Oxford alumni society has provided enrollment records involving three generations of Stantons:
     Thomas Sr., Thomas Jr., and a third Thomas whom we claim has been wrongly identified.  The reasons for our opinion lies
     on the Stanton memorials found on the wall of Wolverton's Church, St. Mary the Virgin. ; Here, Thomas Stanton, Lord of the
     Manor, was born in 1621 and died in 1664.  His birth was two years AFTER the visitation.  This Thomas married Elizabeth
     Cooks, the daughter of Edward (This was so noted by Terry in referring to the chart 'Staunton of Longbridge, 1835'). It was
     also found on the church memorial.  Another memorial notes the birth of Thomas, son and heir of Thomas and Elizabeth,
     born 1646, died 1715 (He was the third Stanton on the Oxford list).

     Terry was not aware of the church memorial that revealed a second Stanton child in the family to carry the name Thomas.

     Oxford records as quoted by Terry, tell of Thomas Stanton Sr. born in 1595, enrolling in Jan. 1610 at age 15.  He was the
     father of Thomas Stanton (Staunton) Jr., 1st son of Thomas of Wolverton, enrolled July 1634 at age 17.  A third Thomas, 'son
     of Tho. Of Wolverton, co. Warwickshire, gent' was born.  He claims him the son of Thomas and Elizabeth.  That makes him
     the nephew of our Thomas, not the son as reported.

     We now have two Thomas Stantons born of Thomas and Katherine (Washington) Stanton. The first son Thomas is
     spelled out in the visitation chart.  The second son Thomas is called out in the 'Staunton of Longbridge' chart; in
     addition, he is identified as the husband of Elizabeth Cooks. Clarence Torrey finishes his case by declaring 'these
     details make it necessary to abandon the theory that the Stonington, Conn., settler was the son of Thomas and
     Katherine (Washington) Stanton.'  He further states, 'A search for his true origin might prove difficult but certainly
     not a hopeless undertaking

     Thomas Stanton's Last Will and Testament could not be found for over 300 years; we have found it.  Two memorials
     have been hanging on the wall of St. Mary the Virgin Church in Wolverton for well over 200 years.  We have found them
     also.  They substantiate the Stanton pedigree.  Thomas Stanton the Stonington, Conn. Settler, is indeed the son of Thomas
     and Katherine (Washington) Stanton.

     The undertaking was 'difficult' but certainly not 'hopeless'.

     Bernard J. Stanton
     April, 1999"

**************************************************************************  ******************************

1.  Thomas sailed to Virginia from London in 1635 aboard the "Bonaventura" and then went to Boston, Massachusetts in 1636.  He removed to Hartford, Connecticut in 1637.

2.  On January 25, 1649 Thomas, fluent in the Indian tongue and prominent as an interpreter was appointed official Indian Interpreter - $25 annual salary.

From The Cambridge Press: 1638-1692,  Books for Libraries Press, Freeport, New York; , Copyright 1946, University of Pennsylvania Press, Reprinted 1968 by Arrangement.  References to Thomas Stanton, interpreter and opinion of Eliot.

     Pages 157-8 RIVAL CATECHISMS -

"Eliot went ahead with his plans confidently.  A letter from the Commissioners to Winslow dated September 24, 1653 implies that Eliot had made arrangements with the printer without bothering to consult them, knowing that they would have to pay for whatever he ordered:

     'Mr. Eliot is preparing to print a Cattichisme of the Indian Langwige which wee shall further (as wee may) by disbursing the
     charge of paper and printing out of the stock but by some due allowance shall Indeavor to Incurrage Thomas Stanton
     to assist in the worke; who is the most able Interpreter wee have in the countrey for that Langwige that the worke may
     bee the more perfectly carried on; Wee have advised Mr. Eliot etcet: that if heerafter they publish anythinge about the
     worke of God upon the Indians they send it to the Corporation and leave the dedication to them which wee hope will be
     attended.

     It is left to the two Commissioners for the Massachusetts to give order for the printing of five hundred or a Thousand
     Catechismes in the Indian langwige and to allow paper and the charge of printing: and that the worke may bee carried on
     the more exactly and to better satisfaction It is ordered that Thomas Stanton's healp be used in the same."

"The reference to Stanton is significant.  It shows that from the beginning those who were best informed about affairs had doubts regarding Eliot's mastery of the language into which he was courageously and confidently translating the Word of God.  Stanton was a frontiersman who made his headquarters in the Narragansett country, trafficking with the natives who lived west of the bay of that name.  The English authorities repeatedly had occasion to realize that he possessed an unusual understanding of what the natives thought as well as what they said. He was highly  valued as an irreplaceable intermediary who had proved himself in many delicate negotiations.  He did not, however, possess an equally sympathetic appreciation of the thoughts and aspirations of the Apostle and those who supported Eliot in what he desired to convey to the heathen.  Even the Commissioners, who were worldly-wise men of affiars, occasionally found both the form and the substance of Stanton's language inconsistent with a proper regard for their own dignity.  As a collaborator in the delicate task of    expressing in a language hitherto unwritten what the words of the Sacred Scriptures meant to a seventheenth-centurey Protestant divine, Stanton lacked essential qualifications.  The persistence of the Commissioners in trying to utilize his knowledge culminated in an interview before them at which Stanton was asked to express his opinion of Eliot's translation in the presence of the translator and other local clergymen. The frontiersman's opening remarks led the ministers to leave the room abruptly, sending back word that never again would they permit him to  enter their presence.  The civil authorities could not dispense with his services so easily. Within a decade the Commissioners paid for printing another catechism adapted with Stanton's help for the use of the natives living near New Haven."

Page. 173 -

"The commissioners meanwhile, getting no encouragement from London, endeavored to induce Eliot to accept assistance from those who had known the natives more intimately, with what result appears from a letter to him dated September 25, 1654:

          'We desired that Thomas Stanton's help might have been used in the Catechism printed and wish that no inconvenience
     be foudn through the want thereof; and shell now advise that before you proceed in Translating the Scriptures of any parte
     of them you improve the best hleps the country affords for the Indian language that if it may be these south west Indians
     (some of whom as we are now informed desire help both for reading and to be instructed in the things of God and Christ
     may understand and have the benefit of what is printed.'

3.  In 1650, with his family remaining in Hartford,  Thomas built a trading post on the west bank of the Pawcatuck.  In 1651 Thomas joined William Chesebrough, the first white settler in 1649, as one of the early settlers and planters in Stonington, Connecticut.

4.  Thomas' family removed to Stonington in 1657 living in a house close to his trading post.

5. Thomas and/or Samuel Chesebrough, Sr. are believed to have originated the word "Stonington" as the name for what became the town of Stonington.
("New England Magazine", New Series, Vol. 20, March - August 1899, Page 244, Warren F. Kellogg, Publisher, 5 Park Square, Boston, MA, )

Heeft u aanvullingen, correcties of vragen met betrekking tot Thomas Stanton III?
De auteur van deze publicatie hoort het graag van u!

Tijdbalk Thomas Stanton III

Klik op de namen voor meer informatie. Gebruikte symbolen:  grootouders    ouders    broers/zussen    kinderen