BACK    BOTTOM

The "NATHAN/NATHANIEL Problem":
Who Married Patience Peet And Other Issues Concerning
The Nathan/Nathaniel Beaches In The Fourth Generation

By Eugene H. Beach, Jr.

Originally published in the Beach Family Journal, Vol. VII, No. 3 (Fall, 1999)

      Some time ago subscriber Frank W. Beach, Jr. sent us a copy of a Beach lineage found in William Richard Cutler, Genealogical and Family History of Central New York, Lewis Historical Publishing Co., 1912, Vol. I, pp. 446-448.   This claims that its subject, Otis Seth Beach of Owego, New York, was the son of William A. Beach7, Nathan6, Nathan5, Nathaniel4, Israel3, Nathaniel2, John1.  It also identifies Nathaniel4 Israel3 as the one who married Patience Peet, the daughter of David and Mary (Titharton) Peet.  Since the Beach Family Magazine disputes this claim, however, we decided to take a closer look at what the Magazine calls the "Nathan/Nathaniel Problem".  In the process we realized that "problem" goes beyond simply the question of who married Patience Peet but includes other issues which we touch on below.

Introduction

       The published sources give four men named Nathan/Nathaniel in the fourth generation of the New England family, i.e., (i) Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2, John1, born May 23(28?), 1721; (ii) Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2, John1, reportedly b. 1728; (iii) Nathaniel4, Noah3, Benjamin2, John1, b.c. 1734; and (iv) Nathaniel4, Israel3, Nathaniel2, John1, b. Jul 30, 1735.  Of these, Nathaniel4, Noah3 belongs to the New Jersey branch of the family and so does not figure further in this discussion.  The remaining three, however, have proved a source of considerable confusion.   

Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2, John1 

      Davis' History of Wallingford, Connecticut, p. 643, gives Nathan3, Thomas2 a son Nathan4, b. May 28, 1721, but does not trace him nor his descendants further.   The Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 2, p. 36 and Vol. I, No. 3, p. 61, also gives such a son, but claims his date of birth was May 23, 1721.  Note that the account at p. 61 initially declares this Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2 "... probably married Sarah, daughter of Judson Burton, b. Jan 11, 1722..." (emphasis added) Two paragraphs later, however, it states "There is every reason to believe that his first was Sarah, daughter of Solomon Burton, but no record of their children, if any, has been found..."  (emphasis added).   The entry goes on to note that Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2 married second, Desire (Herrick) Bixby/Bigsby and gives a list of the children by the second marriage only. 

      As can be seen, the Beach Family Magazine is clearly confused as to the father of Sarah Burton; calling him both "Judson" and "Solomon".  While claiming there "is every reason" to believe she married this particular Nathan4, such reasons themselves are not given and we are left with the unsatisfying statement that such a marriage "probably" occurred.  As noted below, however, others say (we think correctly) that Sarah, the daughter of Solomon Burton, in fact married Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2.

Nathan (Nathaniel)4 Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2, John1

      The earliest mention we find of this man is in Orcutt's History of the Old Town of Stratford, Connecticut, Vol. II.  At p. 1124 he presents an account Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 whom he says "m. Sarah, dau. of Solomon Burton, Nov. 3, 1720.  He died in 1734, and she m. 2d, William Odell."  Compare this with the Beach Family Magazine which suggests it was Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2 above, who "probably married" a Sarah Burton, born Jan 11, 1722, the daughter of either Judson or Solomon Burton.  Orcutt further gives Nathaniel3, Nathanial2 five children, including "Nathan, perhaps." (emphasis added). 

      Two pages later Orcutt presents a brief account of this "Nathan perhaps", whose name is now inexplicably given as "Nathaniel, 3d".   This declares:

86.            Nathaniel, 3d, son of Nathaniel, 2d, and Sarah (Burton) Beach, m. Patience Peet, Mar. 22, 1758.  He died Feb. 27, 1818.  She died May 6, 1792, in her 57th year.

 

                196.         Nathaniel, bapt. Feb. 11, 1759.

                197.         Abiah, b. Sept. --, 1760.

                198.         Nathaniel, b. Sept. --, 1764.

                199.         Phebe, bapt. Nov. 1, 1765.

                200.         Nathaniel, b. Oct. 21, 1772

                                (Error as to this family)

 

      The Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 3, p. 66 likewise gives a son Nathan4 to Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 and asserts he:

... was born in 1728 and had a guardian appointed in 1742.  He married March 22, 1758, Patience Peet.  This data is contrary to that given in Beach in America [Sic, but it seems clear the reference is to McClaughry's Beach In Connecticut] and in other authority.  It seems to me that this is right.  I find the children recorded in Stratford deeds, Vol. 5.  The other records following Early Connecticut Marriages give Patience Peet as marrying Nathaniel Beach, but their own record of their children is that the father's name is Nathan...

 

It then gives Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 eight children, i.e., (i) Nathaniel, b. 1756; (ii) Abel, b. 1758; (iii) Anna, b. 1760; (iv) Charity, b. 1762; (v) Mabel, b. 1764; (vi) Rebecca, b. 1766; (vii) Betty, b. 1768; and (viii) Thomas, b. 1770.  In Vol. I, No. 4, p. 109, however, the Magazine was forced to publish a "Correction" to this account, noting that "The children credited on this page (i.e., page 66) are not his (i.e., Nathan's) children but those of Thomas(4)  Nathaniel(3-2) John(1)..."  It further declares that "the children of Nathan(4) will not be added until the Nathan-Nathaniel problem is solved".  Note, however, that in Vol. II, No. 1, p. 123, the Magazine presents the following:

Abiah(5) Nathan(4) Nathaniel(3-2) John(1) was born September, 1760.

 

Phebe(5) Nathan(4) Nathaniel(3-2) John(1) was born November, 1765.

 

Nathan(5-4) Nathaniel(3-2) John(1) was bp. February 11, 1759, and died young.  A second NATHAN was born October 21, 1772, d. 1882, age 90 [sic] and married 1799.  The children of this man will be given in the next issue.  Confusion has existed in this line.

 

We do not find, however, where the Magazine subsequently addressed any issue of Nathan5, Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2.

Nathaniel4, Israel3, Nathaniel2, John1

      Orcutt's History of Stratford, Connecticut, Vol. II, p. 1124 gives to Israel3, Nathaniel2 a son Nathaniel4, b. Jul 30, 1735. Two pages later it gives this Nathaniel4, Israel3 his own account as follows:

93.            Nathaniel, son of Israel and Hannah (Burton) Beach, m. Patience Peet, Mar. 22, 1758.  He was a carpenter and lived at Bear swamp farm, where, on Feb. 27, 1818, he was killed by the overturning of a load of wood.  She died May 6, 1792, in her 57th year.

 

                202.         Son, bapt. Feb. 11, 1759.

                203.         Abiah, b. Sept. --, 1760.

                204.         Nathaniel, b. Sept. --, 1764.

                205.         Phebe, bapt. Nov. 1, 1765.

                206.         Nathan.

                207.         Nathaniel, b. Oct. 21, 1772

 

As can readily be seen, however, this is virtually word-for-word the same as what Orcutt says (on the same page, no less) about Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 above!  No wonder he felt forced to add the comment "Error as to this family" at the end of the earlier account. 

      For its part, the Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 3, p. 67 says that Nathaniel4, Israel3 "... was born July 30 and baptized August 3, 1735...  He is said by some authorities to have married Patience Peet. This may be so but I have credited her to Nathan...  No children are given for this man until the next issue..."  Thereafter, in Vol. II, No. 1, p. 124, the Magazine presents an account of Nathaniel5, Nathaniel4, Israel3, whom it says was:

... born in September, 1764.  This assignment is still in doubt but is placed here with the hope that those interested will assist in giving us a lead on the several Nathaniels of the fourth and fifth generations.  The confusion seems to still persist.

 

Whether such assistance was ever forthcoming is unknown.  It is interesting, however, that in Vol. III, No. 2, p. 252, the Magazine presented accounts for both Patience6, Nathaniel5, Nathaniel4, Israel3 and Nathan J.6, Nathaniel5, Nathaniel4, Israel3.  From this we conclude that the Magazine by this time acknowledged that Nathaniel4, Israel3 indeed had a son Nathaniel5.  Moreover, we think the name of Patience6 lends credence to the idea that it was Nathaniel4, Israel3 who married Patience Peet.

Discussion

      As a preliminary matter we can dispose of the Beach Family Magazine's claim that Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2 married Sarah Burton as his first wife.  Other sources indicate she was born Dec 29, 1696, the daughter of Solomon and Mercy (Judson) Burton [hence the Magazine's mistake about a supposed "Judson Burton"].  As such, she would be some 25 years older than her supposed husband, i.e., Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2.  Recall too that Orcutt (and others) say Sarah (Burton) Beach married second, William Odell, indicating she survived her husband, whereas the Magazine's account of Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2 suggests that Sarah (Burton) Beach died first, since he then married Desire Bixby/Bigsby as his (supposed) second wife.  In fact, we believe Desire Bixby/Bigsby was the only wife of Nathan4, Nathan3, Thomas2.

      Second, we believe there was a Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2, notwithstanding Orcutt's expression of uncertainty in this regard [i.e., "Nathan, perhaps"].  The Beach Family Magazine says he was born in 1728, which nicely fills the "gap" between the Elizabeth4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2, born in 1727, and Thomas4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 baptized in 1733.  The Magazine also notes a Nathan for whom a guardian was appointed in 1742, suggesting the death of one or both parents, which fits with the death of Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 in 1734 and the subsequent remarriage of Sarah (Burton) Beach to William Odell.

      On the other hand we find no firm evidence to suggest this Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 ever reach his majority, married or had issue.  If indeed born in 1728, this Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 would have been approximately 30 years of age when Patience Peet married in 1758 - unusually old for a first marriage, although not unheard of.  We also note the apparent lack of any records referring to this man after the 1742 guardianship, i.e., no deeds, wills, records of the birth of children, etc.  Our own guess - and it is admittedly that at this point - is that Nathan4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2 likely died in his late teens/early 20's, single and without issue.   Years later, when Orcutt was faced with the existence of two Nathan's (i.e., this man and Nathan4, Israel3, Nathaniel2) he was uncertain as to which was the husband of Patience Peet and thus assigned her and her children to both. 

      Lastly, we conclude that it was Nathaniel4, Israel3, Nathaniel2 who in fact married Patience Peet.   First, we find their ages more compatible, with both born in 1735 and so 22 at marriage.  Second, recall that the Beach Family Magazine itself recognized that Nathaniel4, Israel3 had a granddaughter named Patience6, likely named in honor of her grandmother.  Third, we note that both Israel3 and Israel4, Israel3 had daughters named Phebe whereas no Phebe is found among the immediate descendants of Nathanial3, Nathaniel2.  Since the Nathaniel who married Patience Peet likewise had a daughter Phebe, this suggests he is more likely the son of Israel3.   

      We wish we had better access to original Connecticut records which might either confirm or refute our conclusions.  Suffice it to say we would welcome any additional information bearing on the issues discussed above.  Meanwhile, we point out the following irony, i.e., that the family whose supposed lineage prompted this whole inquiry does not - it seems - descend from any of the Nathan/Nathaniel Beaches in the fourth generation.  Rather, the correct line for Otis Seth Beach of Owego, New York, appears to be Otis Seth8, William A.7, Nathan6, Nathaniel5, Thomas4, Nathaniel3, Nathaniel2, John1.

TOP