Capt. William Raymond and Hannah Bishop
Husband Capt. William Raymond
Born: 11 May 1637 - St.John's, Glastonbury, Somerset, England Christened: Died: 29 Jan 1709 - Beverly, Massachusetts Buried:
Father: George Raymond (Raiment) (1599-1651) Mother: Mary (Abt 1584- )
Marriage: 1660-1666 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts (Divorced)
Other Spouse: Ruth Hull ( -After 1738) - Bef 1682 - Salem, Massachusetts
Wife Hannah Bishop
Born: 12 Apr 1646 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Christened: Died: 1738 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Buried:
Father: Edward Bishop (1620-1646) Mother: Hannah Moore (1644-1680)
Children
1 M William Raymond
Born: 1666 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Christened: Died: 29 Jan 1709 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Buried:Spouse: Mary Kettle (Kettel) (1660- ) Marr: 1687 - Beverly, Salem, Massachusetts
2 M Edward Raymond
Born: Christened: 12 Jul 1668 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Died: 6 Nov 1727 Buried:Spouse: Mary Herrick ( - ) Marr: 1 May 1695
3 M George Raymond
Born: Christened: 30 Oct 1670 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Died: Buried:Spouse: Jerusha Woodbury ( - ) Marr: 28 Mar 1698
4 F Hannah Raymond
Born: 18 May 1673 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Christened: Died: Buried:Spouse: Nathaniel Jr. Haywood ( - )
5 F Abigail Raymond
Born: Christened: 23 Jul 1676 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Died: Buried:Spouse: John Giles ( - ) Marr: 26 Mar 1694Spouse: Unknown ( - )
6 M Edward Bishop
Born: 12 Apr 1646-12 Apr 1648 - Beverly, Essex, Massachusetts Christened: Died: Buried:
General Notes (Husband)
I have considerable information on the Raymond family and can e-mail it on request. The following web site, http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~raymondfamily/, has substantial information, and there have also been discussions on the Raymond list at Rootsweb on occasion. The fact that Robert Raymond, author of the raymondfamily site, transcribed most Raymond documents and information in old books on New England is why most of my material came from his web site.
The following is a summary.
William Raymond came to Massachusetts with his brother John and sister Elizabeth. He was born in the vicinity of Glastonbury, Somerset County, England. The identity of his father, George Raymond, was proven by finding George Raymond's will that left small bequests to the three children who had gone to New England - if they should ever care to come to Glastonbury to collect it. William and Elizabeth were young when they accompanied their fairly wealthy brother John to Beverly.
John and William are confused with Richard Raymond, whose land adjoined theirs in the small foundational village of Beverly; but as unlikely as it seems these individuals appear to have not been related. Richard appears to have come from Essex County, England, and to possibly be related to earlier people named Raymond who participated in very early commercial enterprises in Maine and New Hampshire. He may have been involved in the fishing industry. John and William were not involved in that industry; they seem to have pretty much just settled down and gone about their business.
The 1886 Raymond genealogy, for instance, connects John and William to earlier John and William Raymond's of the commercial enterprises in Maine and New Hampshire, who were from London, and are far more likely to have been related to Richard, though they may not have been related to either of them. Raymond was a common medieval name that became a surname.
Family legend suggests that the Raymonds were descendants of a Norman aristocrat who accompanied one of the Norman princes to England. There is no evidence that this family with what was actually a common Germanic medieval name, has any such descent. The notion may have been developed by the author of the Raymond Genealogy of 1886; at that time it was common for family histories to engage in speculative myth history of family origins.
There has been considerable speculation on what brought John Raymond and his siblings to New England. My cousin's daughter reportedly asked something based on the notion that they were Puritans. There is actually no evidence that they were Puritans, and actually the founders of Beverly were members of the Church of England of moderate orientation and in good standing. The actual founders, who did not include the Raymonds, had been members of a commercial colony that failed, and decided to stay and strike out for themselves. Most people in the little village whose reaons to emigrate are known were drawn by commercial interests of one sort or another. When the Puritans later founded the Massachusetts Bay colony, they were much resented by the inhabitants of Beverly, who remained fairly isolated, and there was tension between the two groups throughout the 17th century, despite the fact that the founding families were often devout participants and leaders in teh Puritan church.
It actually is not known why John Raymond and his family decided to emigrate, and inquiring descendants have wondered much about it. They lived in an area where people were recruiting for the various early commercial ventures in New England. Their father's will suggested a wry and resigned attitude. He may have thought they were off adventuring. My own theory is based on my discovery by happenstance that the Squire and Henry Adams families lived in the little village of Charlton Mackrell and neighboring Kingsweston, where some of the Raymond children were born and the two families were close. See also my notes on Henry Adams and Henry Squier. Specifically, Henry Squire of Kingsweston, father of the three girls who went with their husbands to New England, was an overseer of the will of Robert Raymond of Charlton Mackrell in 1605. The records show tehm interacting in a way in which they would not have otherwise done. The records suggest that the families were related or atleast close friends. Two daughters of the Squire family married prominent Puritans and emigrated. Henry Adams married their sister, and followed them to New England. I think that more than likely this led to the Raymond siblings' decision to emigrate, even though they did not go to live in New England near any of the Squire family.
Robert Raymond whose will Henry Squire oversaw, was possibly the grandfather of William Raymond, but that is not certain. The specifics are in my notes that I will send on request, and may possibly be located on Robert Raymond's web page.
Robert Raymond who died in Charlton Mackrell in 1605 ahd a son George, baptized in Charlton Mackrell and not named in his will, which means he may not have still been living in 1605, and may not be teh same George Raymond who died in Glastonbury in 1657 who was definitely the father of William. His named children are Audred (Alice), who married James Everd, Joan, Maud who had married Phillip Ryall in 1585, Robert, John, and Francis.
There was another known Raymond family in the area. (Could have been others not named).
Arthur of Ilchester ahd a brother WIlliam, and a coat of arms, suggesting he was of the gentry and possibly an English knight; but not proving descent from a Norman knight let alone aristocrat. In his will, he left money for the education of a son George. Later George Raymond the father of William, John and Elizabeth died at Glastonbury Abbey, where he evidently had senior citizen quarters of some sort, and there is little clue what his connection to that place may ahve been or if he simply retired to live there. He signed his will with his mark which is odd since he had previously settled substantial property and resources on his elder sons Maurice and John, and his sons were literate.
One definite descendant of William's grandson Paul Raymond, and one suspected descendant of the same Paul, have been Y DNA tested. They matched very closely; 32 of 34 markers that both were tested on. One was also SNP tested. He proved to be positive for U198, downstream of U 106. U106 is Indo-European, and U198 is found at low frequency in Germany, the Netherlands, and southern England, being most common in the Netherlands. The clade is R1b1b2a1a1.
U106 and U152 both originated in central Europe, or else U106 originated to the north, around Poland. U106 is more associated with Germanic peoples and U152 (along with parent clade P312) with Celts, but neither is absolutely associated with either people. Both clades appear in nearlly equal proportions in Denmark and Germany.
Wikipedia says that R1b1b2 is no longer thought to date from before the ice age, but from 4000 to 6000 BC. Modern distribution seems more consistent with its former theory to me.
So far, none of the several Y DNA testees who claim descent from Richard Raymond of Beverly and Norwalk, Connecticut, match each other or Paul Raymond. There is a real need for a descendant of John Raymond of Beverly to be tested to see if it matches Paul Raymond's.
General Notes (Wife)
She was sister of Edward Bishop, Jr, who with his wife owned a tavern accused and tried as witches and escaped, and stepdaughter of Bridgette Bishop, who was executed as a witch. Her parents must not have been very savory, as they were once caught and punished for stealing food stuffs, and lying about it, and Edward Jr was as abusive toward his wife as Bridgette's former husband had been toward her. It also looks as if she may have married partly for protection against a charge of witchcraft made when her husband died, and she was made executor of his estate.
It looks as though Hannah's marriage to William Raymond must have ended in divorce. Hannah didn't die until 1738; William remarried in 1682. His children by Hannah were born between 1666 and 1676; his first child by Ruth Hull was b May, 1682.
There is a theory that there was a third Bishop family of same names in the town, but no evidence to support the idea has been found.
I found a single report of mtdna by a female line descendant of Hannah Bishop, in smgf.org. Actually there were reports on four women descended from common great-great grandparents named Rigby, a Mormon family of Utah. SMGF does not straightforwardly provide the markers it identifies in order to potentially match ancestral families together, and with mtdna it is possible to identify most but not all of the markers. Nevertheless, partly because just one of the four people tested had a specific mutation, and also because a common mutation for the obvous subclade that defines a common further subclade did not match, I think I actually did find all the markers.
The markers are 16292A, 16519C, 263G, 315.1C, and 477C. One person had the additional mutation 152C, which is a fast mutating marker, and found in a number of haplogroups. 16292A is a nearly unique marker and I am left wondering if it is a mistake or some reporting difference by smgf.org, which deliberately does not make it easy to identify the markers. The common muation of 16292 is C. The fact that all four Rigby's were found to have this marker lends weight to the possibility of its accuracy. If it is accurate, and if the lineage is also accurate, and if it dates to Hannah Bishop, which it doesn't necessarily, than it is a unique identifier of her line.
477C defines H subclade H1c. Haplogroup H is the most common haplogroup in Europe. H1 evolved in or near the Near East or Middle East, but is most concentrated in and radiating outward from Spain, especially in the Basques, who are descendants of the ice age people who lived in Spain.
However, H1c is found most often in Denmark and Germany. In both smgf and mitosearch, this marker is found more often in earliest known ancestors reported from Denmark than in those reported from England. Nevertheless there are aenough reported in England, and the greatest number is found in teh U.S. After Denmark and Germany, H1c is only ever found in mainlnad Europe in adjacent countries and in a thin line of countries stretching to eastern Europe. It was found in the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Pland, Slovenia, and Czechoslovakia. It is not found at all in Spain, and only once in any Hispanic country. The French Canadian DNA project found 5 in that sample, and it's a much smaller sample than mitosearch's or Ancestral File. Most French Canadians came from northwestern and western France, and a very high percentage of the women were "King's daughters"; orphans, usually from convents, and mostly from Paris and Normandy (a northwestern North Germanic province conquered in medieval times by Danish Vikings, who colonized the region). It is not clear that all five have known female line French ancestry; in two cases that appears to be doubtful, and in one case it actually appears that she was from Saxony, and completely unclear why he joined the French Canadian DNA project.
There is not enough data on H1c to for instance give it an age. All of its markers but 477c are a common marker set with H1 and H2 and other H haplotypes, and it could be old. It is hard to tell if it evolved in H1 people who came northward from Spain after the last ice age, or if it independently came across Europe, roughly following the path of other haplogroups that are known to ahve followed the reindeer across Europe toward England, or possibly Indo-Europeans, though IndoEuropeans usually covered a broader range of territory than this. It was unusual for people to migrate from west to east but not impossible.
However, no matter how H1c got to Denmark, it clearly got to England from Denmark and the Netherlands, most likely with the Saxons or hte Danes, though possibly with Celtic tribes.
Table of Contents | Surnames | Name List
This Web Site was Created 6 May 2012 with Legacy 6.0 from Millennia