History of the Urquhart, Urchard, Orcutt Name from Antiquity to the Colonial Period
By
Frederic Scott Orcutt, Sr.
Abridged from “Genealogy of Thomas Orcutt”
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: Please take this with the above mentioned Caveat in mind. I have placed this work on our family history site because it is the work of my Great Uncle Fred Scott Orcutt, Sr. who had every reason to believe his work was accurate at the time of its compilation in 1977. Please do not take these things as Gospel but rather as a starting point and research them more deeply through the Orcutt resources on this site, on www.genealogy.com, on Joel Orcutt's site and through the Clan's site which are both listed below.
Contents:
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- The Name Urquhart -- Orcutt and its Many Variations
- Early Peoples of England and Scotland
- The Earliest History of the Urquharts
- The Urchards – Urquharts, 1300 – 1800
- Lineage of the Two Main Urchard – Urquhart Families, 1300 - 1800
- Urquhart Castles
- The Reformation and Migration of Urquharts
- Orcutts in America – Scituate
- Julian to Gregorian Calendar
- Bridgewater Massachusetts
- Summary
PREFACE
It is staggering to contemplate how many ancestors one must certainly have. As one goes back through the various families in his ancestry and doubles the number for father and mother for each generation removed the number soon reaches astronomical proportions. In a somewhat opposite direction, if one starts with some distant generation long ago and fans out from one individual and lists all those with one surname (following the male lines) the number is also astronomical. All of which is to say how futile it is and meaningless from a personal standpoint to point out a single ancestor who was famous or well known; it brings credit on that one individual but certainly not on oneself. It is a fortunate biological fact that our genetic makeup is so diverse as to be almost incomprehensible. While some characteristics of an individual may be seen to have a likeness to others a generation or so back it is a simple fact that each one of us is an individual unto himself but in many ways tempered by the genes of thousands upon thousands of those in previous generations.
All of this is to say that a genealogy carries no serious import other than interest in just one of the exceedingly many lines from which he sprung. For a person who carries on genealogical interest and activities it is a very fine game he plays piecing together the many faces he must pursue. It requires a skill similar to a good bridge player but has a much more lasting effect in that others of his surname may find interest too in the product of his research and labor.
In each stem of a family one can usually find someone interested in recording or at least saving letters and papers that give names and often interesting facts about two, three or four generations. Such records are often lost or destroyed by succeeding generations if no one then finds interest in such things; or they may be just stuffed in a box in the attic thinking that perhaps someone sometime might do something with them. Family histories are often lost in this way, and lost forever. This is a great pity because others in later generations may have a very keen interest and good reasons for wanting to know the genealogy for many generations back or even for connecting families in the same generation.
It is for this reason that the author of this volume feels a sense of duty to at long last get his own line as straight as possible, into some publishable form and safely deposited in a number of genealogical libraries such as Library of Congress, Boston Public Library, Connecticut State Library, New England Historic Genealogical Society, etc. The author also feels that individuals in the last four generations may be interested in an accurate account of just who their relatives are together with a few notes about them.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To list all the people who have labored long and hard to compile sections of this family history would be a monumental undertaking – an exhaustive work in itself. There is one, however, to whom I am in great debt and for whom I have the greatest admiration. Mrs. Helen Judson began many years ago piecing together various bits of family history in an effort to establish as far as possible the genealogical lines of the six sons of the first William Orcutt in America starting in 1664. This was a frighteningly difficult task for anything to undertake but little by little she has been able to contact people that either had bits of records or knew where such records were so that she came up with these six lines and continues to work on them. This particular volume will attempt to bring to some sort of conclusion the lines of Thomas, fifth son of the first William, and to add a great deal to the 8th 9th, 10th, and 11th generations.
There are many, many people of Orcutt extraction who have collected genealogical information in these lines along the way; they all deserve much credit for making these records available to Mrs. Helen Judson. It is beyond the scope of this present publication to attempt to acknowledge the debt we owe to all these people, or even to attempt a bibliography of all the multitudinous sources that the =author of this volume has consulted. This author makes no claim whatever to being either an historian or a genealogist; but he has recorded here bit by bit the information he has been able to find; he has great hope that he will find in the near future very important information to fill the two main gaps left open in this particular volume.
THE NAME URQUHART – URCHARD – ORCUTT
The history of Orcutts in America stems back to a single William Orcutt who came to North America in 1664, and before that the name of Orcutt and still earlier Urchard or Urchar (and other variations) was fairly common in the region between Coventry and Birmingham, England – more specifically, Fillongley a small village about seven miles north of Coventry in Warwickshire. In this period of time an exact spelling of names was not adhered to in any legal sense partly because ability to read and write was not particularly common; as a result, records of names are in whatever form the recorder could understand by word of mouth from the subject. There were variations also because of individual desire; as a result one finds quite commonly the following variations in addition to the main ones given above: Orchar, Orquart, etc. It should also be pointed out that those who have firm knowledge of pronunciation of Scottish people strongly attest to the fact that all these variations are pronounced in such a similar way as to be practically indistinguishable.
About one hundred years previous to the time William Orcutt came to America the period of Reformation was at its height. Scotland was staunchly Catholic so that many such people of the name Urchard or Urquhart who had protestant beliefs were among the m any who were persecuted. Many, many such families fled to the areas of England that had strong groups of Protestants. We have knowledge of the probability that Urquharts and or Urchards came to Fillongley from Scotland at least by 1600 and perhaps before. History of the Urquharts in Scotland goes way back to the very beginnings of any knowledge of people in Scotland, long before real records were kept by anyone. What is known is an interesting tale and should be emphasized here as the very beginning of the record of all Orcutts in America.
EARLY PEOPLES OF ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND
The name Urquhart and its precursors go so far back into the dim history of Scotland and Britain that it would appear worthwhile to jog one’s memory about the very early peoples of the British Isles. The earliest known to inhabit the region now known as Britain was Palaeolithic man of the Pleistocene or early Stone Age. They were stunted savages who lived like animals.
Neolithic man came ages later in the new Stone Age with a more temperate climate. They are now known as Iberian; such men at one time inhabited the greater part of Western Europe. The Basques of the Pyrenees are the only Iberians that preserve anything like the original characteristics of the Iberians.
Iberians in Europe were followed by swarms of Celts that came in successive waves over hundreds of years. The Celts belong to a group of races sometimes known as Aryan whose origins were Asia Minor, to which also belong Teutons, Slavonians, Italians, Greeks as well as the ancient Persians and Indians. The Celts were the first Aryans to arrive in the West and spread in waves through Gaul, Spain and Britain. In Britain they conquered and absorbed the Iberians. The first Celts in Britain were called “Goidels.”
The second great wave of Celts to swarm over Britain were called “Brythons” or “Britons.” The language of these two were similar but with many differences, i.e., the Gaelic of the Highlands, the Isle of Man and the Erse or Ireland was derived from the Goidels whereas Welsh and Old Cornish are derived from the Britons. It is apparent that the Celtic Goidels and Britons were gradually pushed north and westward respectively by the numerous invasions of Saxons, Angles and Jutes from Germany and finally the Northmen from Denmark and Norway. Huge stone circle such as Stonehenge were left by Britons. Even the Phoenicians and Greeks pushed into Britain as early as 330 B.C. looking for trade, but a knowledge of anything like accurate modern history started with Caesar’s two invasions, 55 and 54 B.C., against the Britons. The Roman influence lasted the first five hundred years A.D. and then it was mainly Danish until William the Conqueror established the Normans in the eleventh century.
The Goidels and Iberians of the Scottish Highlands were a savage race. The Romans called the Caledonians. It was because of their continued marauding down out of the Highlands in the first century A.D. that the Romans built their famous wall and forts in the Scottish lowlands and northern England. The Caledonians came to be known as Picts, probably from Latin “Pictus” because they painted or tattooed their bodies.
Quite in contrast were the Scots of Celtic origin that pushed into Scotland by many invasions from Ireland in the sixth century and eventually became the dominant people, just as the Normans became the dominant people in England during the eleventh century. Thus became established what we now know as England and Scotland.
THE EARLIEST HISTORY OF THE URQUHARTS
The name Urquhart is of great antiquity. One of the earliest chroniclers of the Urquharts was Sir Thomas Urquhart, who incidentally signed his name “Th. Urchard.” According to him in his “True Pedigree and Lineal Descent of the Family of Urquhart” (1774) the founder of the family was Nomoster, the son-in-law of Alcabrader, who left Greece and landed at the harbor of Ochoner now called Cromarty. Nomoster or Nomaster (389 B.C.) on landing was recognized as chief. According to some records he came by way of Ireland as many Scots did. H.A.H. Tayler(sp?) in her “History of the Family Urquhart” (1946) and John Willcock in his “Sir Thomas Urquhart” (1899) give the best compilations about the early history of Urquharts; these various notes along with many others are not always in agreement because they are gleaned from ancient sources but they do come close to a reasonable chronology.
In the sixth century St. Columba (TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: Most likely this St. Columba http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintc1e.htm although possibly this one http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintc17.htm )hastening to baptize a very good pagan old man named Emchath found him resident of the district Airchart-dan, Glen Urquhart, pronounced Aroch-dan. This is the first mention of the name. It occurs in the account of the Saint’s visit to the Court of Brude, King of the Picts, in the year 560. In Blaeu’s “Atlas of the Seventh Century” the district name is given as Urchoden, in the early Gaelic Urchardian and in modern Gaelic Urchadainn.
To the kinsman of Nomaster who landed at Ochoner (Cromartie) centuries earlier one Conacher or Ochonachan was granted the “Castle Urquhart” and the surrounding lands in Invernesshire by the King of Scotland in 1160. He had a son called Ochonochan who had three sons. The second settled there and was called Urquhart of whom descended the Lairds of Cromarty and Urquhart. The first and third sons founded the families Forbes and MacKay.
The Urquharts were not, however, the earliest to bear rule in the part of Scotland with which the name is connected. Cromartie was originally the Crwnbawchty (or Crumbath) of which Macbeth was reputed thane, before he became king. Wyntown quoted in Sir William Fraser’s “Earls of Cromartie” (1395) from his “Cronykil” in Macbeth’s dream that he was first Thane of Cromartie, then Thane of Moray, and then King of Scotland. Macbeth was killed at Lumphanan by Macduff in 1056. In the 1200’s the family of Mouat (then de Monte Alto) were in possession but the estates accrued to King Robert the Bruce because the Mouats submitted to the English King Edward I.
In 1215 Pope Innocent the 3rd in his order for protection of the Church at Urquhart in Invernesshire wrote: “Ecclesiade de Urchard, ultra Invernys” and this place appears indiscriminately in various manuscripts as Orchoden, de Urquhartt, Urquhard, Urchard, Harchard, Wrghward, and Wruhurt. In the Register Epis Maraviensis, William de Hurchard is mentioned in the 13th century, and John de Urcharde, Lord of Cromarty in 1420.
Urquhart was certainly, a place name as early members of the family are often described as ‘de Urquhart.” There are three places of that name – Urquhart Castle on Loch Ness, the Parish of Urquhart near Elgin where there was a priory, and the parish of Cromarty on the Black Isle (Cromarty). So the Urquharts of Cromarty who formed the head of the family owned the greater parts of the shire lying in the Black Isle; they also had property to the south across the Moray Firth in Aberdeen, Nairn and Banff shires in addition to the property in Inverness and Ross shires further west.
Robert the Bruce granted these estates to Sir Hugh Ross in 1315 and by him afterwards in the reign of King David Bruce (1329-1370) given to an Adam of Urquhart (de Vrquhartt) with whose descendants they remained for many generations. In 1357 Adam of Urquhart received from the crown the hereditary sheriffdom of the Shire of Cromartie with accompanying powers of pit and gallows; also the “privilege f admiralty” of the eastern coast of Scotland from Caithness to Inverness. Eight years later the same Hugh Ross gave him the estates in Aberdeenshire. This Adam is the first of the family to emerge from the darkness of antiquity into the light of history and the founder of the Urquhart fortunes. There were several branches of Urquharts from Adam Urquhart. The Urquharts held the hereditary sheriffship almost uninterruptedly from 1357 to 1747 when as a consequence of the last Jacobite rising heritable jurisdictions were abolished. It is interesting to note that the name Urquhart is compounded of “air” and “Cardden” meaning before the wood, or simply “woodside.”
THE URCHARDS – URQUHARTS, 1300 – 1800
In this early period records are far from complete and indeed one finds many contradictions in the great number of various records in England, Scotland and America. It is very tempting, however, to sketch out the Urchard – Urquhart lineages and one can do this in great measure. The difficulties come in the fanning out into many families with the loss of records for sons not involved in inheritance of titles and/or estates.
Perhaps a reminder about pronunciation would be in order at this point: In the various spellings of this family name over the centuries the “Ur” was pronounced “Ahr,” the “qu” as “k” or hard “c,” and the “d” more or less as a clipped “t.”
LINEAGE OF THE TWO MAIN URCHARD – URQUHART FAMILIES 1300 – 1800 Cromarty and Meldrum Sir William, Earl of Ross granted Cromartie in 1315 by King Robert the Bruce
Son: Hugh
Sir Hugh, Earl of Ross m. Maud sister to King Robert the Bruce
Daughter: Lilias
Lilias m. William Urchard of Cromarty
Son: Adam
Adam Urchard, 1338 charter from Wm. Earl of Ross of Inch Rory (Cromarty)
1357 charter from King David Bruce heritable sheriffdom handed down for 300 years
Son: John
John Urchard, living in 1368
Son: William
Son: Thomas, descend Urquhards of Burdfards
Sir William Urquhart knighted by King Robert III
Son: William, living 1402, no issue
Son: Alexander
Alexander Urquhart 1503 charter from James IV
Son: Ancestor of Col. John Urquhart, gallantry in Swedish wars
Son: Thomas
Thomas Urquhart Claimed 25 sons, 11 daughters, 7 fell at Pinkie in 1547 (Queen Mary)
Son: Urquharts of Newhall, Monteagle, Kinbeachie and Braelangwell
Son: Alexander
Alexander Urquhart of Cromarty 1532 charter James V lands of Inch Rory, also in Ross and Inverness shires
Son: Walter Urquhart
Son: Thomas Urquhart, no issue
Son: Henry Urquhart of Cromarty
Son: Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromarty (1582 – 1642) heir 1603
Son: Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromarty b. 1611, charter by Charles I in 1641.
Author of famous “Pedigree and Lineal Descent” pub. 1652
No issue
Son: Sir Alexander Urquhart of Cromarty after his brother.
Died 1661 without issue and terminated the Walter line of Cromarty inheritance.
Son: John Senior Branch Passed to:
John Urquhart (1547 – 1631) of Aberdeenshire, known later as “Tutor of Cromarty – Guardian”
Son 1st Marriage: John Urquhart, heir 1631, d. 1634
Son: Sir John Urquhart of Craigfintry, knighted by Charles II
Succeeded to chiefdom and estates of Cromarty in 1662 by charter.
Son: Jonathan Urquhart inherited Cromarty
But sold to George Mackenzie Viscount Tarbet,
But afterward created Earl of Cromarty
Son: Col. James Urquhart, d. 174? (Date cut off page)
No issue, ended descendents of Tutor (Transcriber: Was this Tudor?) of Cromarty line by 1st marriage.
Chieftainship devolved on Wm. Urquhart, 3rd. marriage
3rd Marriage of Tutor John:
Son: Patrick
Son: Adam
Son: Walter
Son: James
Patrick Urquhart 1611 – 1664 Succeeded to Meldrum. Suffered by devotion to Chas. I
Son: Adam
Son: John
Son: James founded Cragston branch
Son: Alexander
Son: Patrick
Adam Urquhart, esq. of Meldrum 1635 – 1684
Capt. Army Chas. II
Son: John
Son: James
Son: Adam
Son: Lewis
All three younger boys went to France.
John Urquhart esq. of Meldrum 1668 – 1726
Member of last Scottish Parliament
Master of Works under Queen Anne
Son: Adam Urquhart, no issue
Son: William
William Urquhart, esq. of Meldrum b. 1698
Inherited in 1741 Chieftainship of the family at decease of Col. James Urquhart
1st Marriage Son: Keith Urquhart, esq. of Meldrum d. 1793
Son: James Urquhart, esq. of Meldrum b. 1759
No Issue
Chieftainship succeeded to cousin Beauchamp Colclough Urquhart
3rd Marriage Son: George (Never held chieftainship, so not bolded. His son received it from James. George is the
Lt. Col. next mentioned.)
Lt. Col. George Urquhart
m. 1784 to Bridget, daughter of Beauchamp Colclough, esq. of Bohermore
Son: Beauchamp-Colclough
Beauchamp-Colclough Urquhart, esq. of Meldrum and Blyth, b. 1795
Son: George b. 1821
Transcriber: F.S. Orcutt’s chart of the chieftainship referenced below on the right and his hand drawn map of Cromartie on the right.
There were four main areas on Scotland in which were located lands and estates given by charter to Urchard – Urquhart:
1. The peninsula of Cromarty also known as the Black Isle where the main seat lies of the chiefs or family heads for hundreds of years.
2. The area around Old Meldrum north-west of Aberdeen running north to Banff and encompassing Craigston and Turriff.
3. A parish of Urquhart with priory near Elgin.
4. The Urquhart Castle area west of Inverness on or near Loch Ness.
Although there is much known about the wives and families of the lineage it gets rather complicated to try to chart. A much abbreviated sketch would, never-the-less, aid in visualizing the descent; such a chart covering 5—years accompanies this text. From it one can see how the chieftainship is carried on as male lines become terminated. Even currently there is a dispute about who should be recognized as chief of the Urquharts. Information obtained orally (Barbara Orcutt Keeton) from Michael Nightingale of Cromarty (a Ross and current owner of the Cromarty Castle site) indicates that Lord Lyon recognized an American descendant as Urquhart chief and gave him rights to the old castle near Balflair on the Black Isle (see section on castles). The Urquharts now living in north-east Scotland, however, currently recognize Bruce Urquhart who lives in the area south of Banff outlined on the map as “Urquhart.”
To return to the 500 year period 1300 to 1800 outlined on the chart it seems interesting to note the repetition of given names:
Adam – 5
Thomas – 5
James – 5
John – 7
William – 4
Alexander – 3
Walter - 2
URQUHART CASTLES
There are two situations of Urquhart castles in the shires of Cromarty and Inverness, both of which are very ancient their origins reaching back so long ago that accurate records of their beginnings do not exist. Other castles farther east in the shires of Banff and Aberdeen are somewhat more recent but still very old and long since torn down.
1. The well known Urquhart Castle is located on a promontory of Loch Ness at a point where the Great Glen (Glen Urquhart or Airchartdan) comes into the Loch from the west. Lock Ness, part of the system of lakes that make up the Caledonian canal, since prehistoric times served as a main artery of communication across north Scotland. It is no wonder that fortifications have existed here since before recorded history; Urquhart Castle was one of the largest.
There are many artifacts that tell some of the story of this site at about the beginning of the Christian era and that it must have been a place of great importance. These fragments of the prehistoric Iron Age indicate that forts were built on this site with dry stone walls laced by bonding timbers. In more recent times since 1300 a number of structures have been built under charter from Kings of Scotland and held by various knights and royalty. There was little or no real connection with the Urquharts of Cromarty except previous to 1300 when predecessors of Lord Forbes of the same Urquhart stock previously mentioned and alter Galleroch de Urhart (1214-1249) had possession. So no extensive description will be given here.
2. The old Cromarty Castle at the eastern tip of the Black Isle (Cromarty) near the town of Cromarty has now long disappeared; the stones were used to erect a more modern structure in 1772 after the estate had passed by purchase to George Ross. The original fortalice was a family mansion converted to a castle of considerable extent. The castle towered over the ravine on the east and the edge of the bank of the other. It rose six stories in some places, battlemented at the top; one immense turret jutted out from one corner.
The following is from oral communication of Barbara Orcutt Keeton with the current owner of Cromarty, Michael Nightingale – a Ross: “Drawings were made of the old castle just before it was torn down. The crest of one branch of Urquharts was found in the mansion as a structural part of the staircase and turned in backwards half of which was painted over. There are plants to restore this only piece left of the original castle other than the stones. The original well is still functional. The graveyard nearby with stones of late 1600’s and 1700’s are of Ross; Urquhart stones have long since been thrown out. It is know, however, the location of the original chapel and where the oldest Urquharts are buried. This old Cromarty Castle was the seat of Urquhart Chieftains for generations.
3. There is still another castle in Cromarty to the west of the original castle. It is curious that nowhere in the extensive search by this author in many authoritative and standard references of various kinds (mostly written about 1800) could he find any reference to this second castle. Yet this Mr. Michael Nightingale told Barbara Orcutt Keeton (1971) of its existence and how it came to be there. He described it as a castle built by Sir Thomas Urquhart for his son. Since the castle is definitely there and since Mr. Nightingale is a Ross of considerable authority and experience in genealogy of the Urquharts this author feels that detailed but brief description of just where this castle is certainly is warranted.
To continue the directions given Barbara Orcutt Keeton: “if one goes west of the town of Cromarty along the northern coast and along the Cromarty Firth he passes the town of Balflair. Beyond that and less than four miles (but not as far as fork in road – B 9163 and B 9169) one comes to a road turning right (north) where a sign says “Cullicudden Old Church,” then past this a mile or less is a narrow paved road with cottage on north-west corner, north on this road to first narrow paved road to the left 9west), continue on this road short distance to end of paving, walk down two-run road to big field and then diagonally north-west to castle on Cromarty Firth coast. The castle still has an extensive tower standing; it is of sandstone and weathering badly.”
This author does not that he can find a castle at this location on a British Ordnance Survey map; the map is one mile to the inch and shows all structures among other details. The structure in question is titled “Castlecraig.” This is not particularly inconsistent because a number of things connected with Urquharts have the root “craig” in the name, viz., Urquharts of Craigston in Aberdeenshire – one of the main family branches established by James, son of Patrick Urquhart of Meldrum.
4. The elder Sir Thomas also built a fortalice-tower in Banff and there were other such fortified residences at or near Meldrum as well as a mansion house at Fisherie in the shire of Aberdeen.
THE REFORMATION AND MIGRATION OF URQUHARTS
Catholicism was strong in Scotland during the early centuries, but by the 1500’s Presbyterianism had become a strong opposing force. The strive between the two was very real and touched all levels of life – even royalty and Mary Queen of Scott. The confusion and struggle engulfed the Urquharts as well as others.
Henry VIII broke with the Pope in the early 1500’s and by establishing the protestant Church of England encouraged other protestants to settle in England. Many Urquharts (by whatever spelling) fled Scotland to escape persecution by Catholics. Quite a number went to Carlisle and became influential over the years, many others went to Warwickshire in the English Midlands where they were made quite welcome by the Earl of Warwick. Here too the people who spelled their name – Urchar, Urchard, Orquhart, Orquart, Urquhart, etc. – became well established and influential.
When Queen Mary (Bloody Mary) became one of her father’s successors – Henry VIII that is – she had an obsession to make a complete restoration of Catholicism in England. During her short reign, 1553-1558 she made a whirlwind attempt to wipe out all people ad things related to Protestantism. Besides mass killings there was wholesale destruction of building particularly related to protestants and attempts to wipe out completely all books and records that were not catholic. There are many stories of wild book burnings in the courtyards of Oxford and Cambridge Universities to say nothing of parish records.
Understanding all this one can see how difficult or impossible it is to trace anything through the period of reformation – 1500’s. So it is probably that the Urchar – Urchard – Urquhart families moved into Warwickshire during this period just before although we have no proof. The specific area of Warwickshire we are concerned with is the countryside around the small village of Fillongly about 13 miles east of Birmingham and about six miles north and a little west of Coventry.
About the earliest record of credence by which we can again trace the lineage is a baptismal record. Helen G. Judson received a letter 91965) from the Diocesan Archivist of Warwickshire which states: “There was a William, son of William Orchar (the name Orchar being a modification of the name Urchard and probably became Orcutt) baptized December 18, 1618 and recorded in the Old Parish Register of the parish Church of Saint Mary and All Saints (1538-1653) of Fillongley, Warwickshire, England.” This letter also states that the surname Edson occurs from about 1558. This is important to Orcutt genealogy because the two families’ destinies become intertwined, viz., there were eleven Orcutt – Edson marriages up to 1799.
The Edson family genealogy has been well researched and from it we can pick up some details of Orcutts in Fillongley. From the reference “Edsons in England and America” (1903) we learn that the Earl of Warwick was interested in the New England Company and encouraged the organization and planning of settlers from Warwickshire. A Samuel Edson (1613-1692) having returned from the colony of Massachusetts Bay described the “Natural attractiveness of the region and the many enticing advantages it presented to settlers. He realized that however long he might labor to acquire land or other property in England his efforts would be futile by reason of the unwillingness of the large and small land owners to part with any they possessed and the only opportunity he might have in England lay in a chance of becoming a tenant of a small farm of limited acreage.”
Samuel Edson had become engaged to Susanna Orcutt (born 1618) before his first leaving for new England. Now he had returned to become married and take his bride (1638) to the new world in 1639 (recorded in the parish register). Subsequently he and his wife became very prominent in affairs of Bridgewater, Mass., until his death in 1692 and her death in 1699. It if from these alter years in Bridgewater that we know without question that Susanna and William Orchar or Orcutt were sister and brother born the same year (1618) in Fillongley.
ORCUTTS IN AMERICA
Scituate How or in what capacity William came to New England nothing is known although great effort has been made by a great many people to unearth this information. All that is really know, as stated in a great number of standard references such as “First Families in America” and “Heads of New England Families” (Holmes), is that William Orcutt landed in America “at Weymouth in 1164, removed to Scituate in 1669, afterwards to Bridgewater.” All references read exactly alike and one wonders which was the original. We don’t even know for sure where he landed even though accurate records were kept of passengers aboard boats. All one can do is guess or accept the simple statement of his landing in Weymouth.
At any rate, we do know that William settled in Scituate, Mass., just south of Weymouth, but this requires explanation. Even though there is and was a very small harbor and village of Scituate one must not assume this is where he settled. Scituate refers to the “town” meaning township as used in other parts of America. The Town of Scituate is almost county size and there is evidence that William settled in the southern part called Marshfield at that time. The evidence is that the baptism of his children in the second Church of Scituate indicates that William was “of Marshfield.”
Today Marshfield is no longer in Scituate; the Town of Scituate has become smaller as other towns were formed partly from land formerly in Scituate. The “Second Church of Scituate” is no longer in Scituate but in the small village of Norwell in the Town of Norwell; it is now First Unitarian Church of Norwell. It was in this church that most of William’s children were baptized. Many of the original church records are in possession of the church archivist, the oldest of which is: “Cr. I 1645 –1689. A catalogue of the names of all such as have been baptized by Guilielmus Wetherall, paster to ye Second Church of Scituate.” This same record has recently been microfilmed and is in the Andover-Harvard Theological Library catalogued in the Mass. Church Records Collection.
It is important to know about these original records because there are errors in almost every one of the dozen or so other sources this author has checked. The principal types of error are dates and spelling of names. In addition to just straight miscopying there has been some confusion due to use of both the Gregorian or “new style” calendar and the Julian or “old style” calendar just before 1700. since errors in dates are so apt to appear in the copying of records of this period without indicating which calendar the quoter is using this author deems it pertinent to outline here the differences between these two calendars. The baptismal records given hereafter in the First Generation section are exactly as recorded in the original records of the “Second Church of Scituate.” Where there are two dates given in the original record they are both given in the First Generation section of this volume, so there can be no mistake in meaning. (Note from transcriber: I have not included the genealogical charts; they are simply too expansive for a Word document.)
SOME CONFUSION IN RECORDS OF DATES DUE TO CHANGE FROM JULIAN TO GREGORIAN CALENDARS
In the Julian calendar the year was made to commence on March 25th which was supposed to be the day of the Annunciation of the Incarnation of Christ. This system of counting years, known as “Old Style,” was continued until a change to the Gregorian calendar was adopted by various Italian states, Portugal, Spain and France in 1582 as well as Rome. Roman catholic states of Germany and Sweeden followed suit in 1583. Protestant countries clung consistently to the old Julian calendar form another hundred years. Russia did not adopt the Gregorian calendar until the advent of the Soviet government in 1917.
In England and her Dominions no official change was made until 1752 when, by Act of Parliament, eleven days were stricken from the month of September, the 3rd becoming the 14th. Provision was made to have the year begin January 1st, and that one day be added to February every fourth year (except every 400th year). As much as one hundred years before the Act of Parliament in 1752 many records were shown in both systems, so that any date between Jan. 1 and March 24 might be recorded for example as 1670/70. but in copying these records into genealogical writings sometimes one of the dates is used and sometimes the other. Since often there is no indication of whether the date is “Old Style” or New Style” many date errors persist as repeated copying continues. There is nothing complicated about it if one knows which system is used.
ORCUTTS IN AMERICA RESUMED
Bridgewater In the middle 1680’s William Orcutt and his family moved to Bridgewater, Mass., the first inland settlement in the Old Colony, Plymouth County. Here again there is some confusion in the later quotations as to just what is meant by “Bridgewater.” As this region developed the original Bridgewater became South Bridgewater as North Bridgewater ultimately became the sizable city of Brochton. The southern part of Bridgewater adjacent to “Old Bridgewater” in 1716 became known as just “Bridgewater” while the original “Bridgewater” has become West Bridgewater; and more recently there has developed an East Bridgewater.
To those of us not living in new England this is all a bit comical and a bit confusing but it is a very common development in villages of New England.
Before describing the part William Orcutt played in his move to Bridgewater as one of the first purchasers it would be of interest to know something of the beginnings of “Old Bridgewater.” In West Bridgewater there is a sizable brick building of the “Old Bridgewater Historical Society.” Just outside the entrance mounted on the brick wall there is a large stone plaque describing origins of the region. Its importance is obvious so it is here quoted in entirety:
Myles Standish, Samuel Nash and Constant Southworth in behalf of the townsman of Duxbury (author’s note: just south of Marshfield in Scituate and just north of Plymouth all in Plymouth County) A.D. 1649 purchased of Massasoit, otherwise called Ousamequin, Sacchem of the county of Pokonoket the lands about Missisaukitukut toward the west which were incorporated under the name of Bridgewater A.D. 1656. The original center of the plantation was the weir of the river Satucket. Nunkatateset, a name of the Great Pond and its outlet was the name of the settlement. Kehtetukut was the name of the lands of the great river, the land upon which this memorial building stands and contiguous to the site of the first meeting house and burying place of the planters.
It is of interest, I think, to note the end of the original deed: “In consideration of the aforesaid bargain and sale we the said Myles Standish, Samuel Nash and Constant Southworth do bind ourselves to pay unto the said Ousamequin for and in consideration of the said tract of land as followeth: 7 coats, a yard and a half to a coat; 9 hatchets; 8 hoes; 20 knives; 3 moose skins; 10 yards and a half of cotton.”
There were no inhabitants of Bridgewater, then known as “Duxburrow New Plantation,” until 1651. In 1656 there was enough growth of inhabited lots adjacent to both sides of the river so that it was incorporated as the town of Bridgewater. In 1668 the town purchased from the Indians additional land. The 49 purchasers met December 24, 1683 to lay out great division of land to every purchaser round the outside of the town in the four square miles from the center and done by casting lots. The 14 on the west included 13 residents of the town and names William Orcutt and others well known such as Deacon Samuel Edson (Williams brother-in-law), John Washburn, etc. So we know that William Orcutt and his family were resident in Bridgewater “Old Bridgewater, now West Bridgewater) by 1683 or before.
SUMMARY
We know that William Orcutt appeared in Weymouth in 1664, married Mary Lane in Hingham, somewhat east of Weymouth, where their first son William was probably born. There were 12 children as indicated in the first page on the First Generation (to follow). Some important sources (such as “Genealogical Guide to the Early Settlers of America” by Henry Whittemore, and in “Abridged Compendium of American Genealogy” as well as “The Orcutt Family” by Hinckley) consider that Mary died after the birth of her second son Andrew, and that the first William married Martha, daughter of John of unknown surname but thought to be also Lane.
This second marriage is refuted by most and thought that William called his first wife “Mary-Martha” and alter just “Martha.” At any rate William died in 1693 and the widow Martha along with the eldest son William are given in the administration of his estate. To any that may find it of interest various documents concerning the first family of American Orcutts can easily be observed in the records of Plymouth County, in Plymouth, Mass. From the records one can easily argue that Mary Lane and Martha were the same person. Samples of these documents are reproduced in the back of this volume. (Transcriber’s note: The appendix has been lost. It would appear in the copies registered with the various libraries referenced just below the title of this document.)
Even though the grave of Susanna Orcutt Edson (William’s sister) has been prominently restored in West Bridgewater along with her husband Deacon Samuel Edson the burial places of William and his wife Mary-Martha have not been found. This is not too surprising in view of the fact that most burials prior to 1700 were on land belong to the family; and also that the stone markers prior to 1750 have badly disintegrated or crumbled completely away.
This writer is naïve enough to think there is enough evidence to help him at least locate the original Orcutt land if not the gravesite. The “Old Bridgewater Historical Society” has a copy of “Mitchell’s History of Bridgewater” (a standard reference found in most genealogy libraries)’ this particular copy is profusely annotated in the margins in longhand. Mitchell states that “Thomas Orcutt (of which this writing is all about) sold land (more than half of the original) and a small house near Joseph Alden’s in 1700.” The current Secretary of the Bridgewater Historical Society, Mr. Wallace E. Johnson, believes he can help locate the Alden house from directions in these marginal notations. It would be worth a try!
(Note from transcriber: I have not included the genealogical charts; they are simply too expansive for a Word document.)
|
