As you will note, the gravestone of Elizabeth Marsh says she died on Nov. 1, 1738 calling her the relict (i.e., widow) of John Marsh, Esq. John Marsh left a will dated Sept. 17, 1741, abstracted by Manwaring in vol. 3, p. 432 of his Hartford Probate District records, naming his wife Elizabeth as executrix. Hence, how can a wife die six years before her husband, call herself the widow of her husband, then be named as living three years later in her husband's will?
In Hoadley's 1853 inventory of readable gravestones at the Ancient Burying Grounds, copied by Mary K. Talcott and printed in 1898 in vol. IV of The Conn. Quarterly:
Marsh, John, 1744, age 76.
Marsh. Elizaheth, wife of John, 1742, age 72.
The same entries are included in "Restoration of the Ancient Burying-Ground of Hartford…" published by the Ruth Wyllys Chapter of the D.A.R. in 1904. This publication recounts the restoration effort of the cemetery between 1899 and 1903. It also indicates that "Seven Marsh stones were entirely restored and preserved by descendants." Unfortunately, both the original inventory by Hoadley, or as copied in 1898, and the restored gravestone must be an error.
The widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh left a will, abstracted by Manwaring [ibid.] in vol. 3, pp. 586-7, was dated Nov. 30, 1748. The same children named in the 1741 will of John Marsh, Esq. are repeated in the will of the widow Elizabeth Marsh in 1748. Elizabeth made her son Timothy Marsh executor, who presented the will to the court on Dec. 24, 1748. Timothy is also named in the earlier 1741 will of his father, John Marsh.
The only conclusion one can reach is that the original gravestone for the widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh was misread then restored with the wrong day, month and year of death. There is no other record the writer is aware of that states Elizabeth's correct date of death.
Don Blauvelt
In Hoadley's 1853 inventory of readable gravestones at the Ancient Burying Grounds, copied by Mary K. Talcott and printed in 1898 in vol. IV of The Conn. Quarterly:
Marsh, John, 1744, age 76.
Marsh. Elizaheth, wife of John, 1742, age 72.
The same entries are included in "Restoration of the Ancient Burying-Ground of Hartford…" published by the Ruth Wyllys Chapter of the D.A.R. in 1904. This publication recounts the restoration effort of the cemetery between 1899 and 1903. It also indicates that "Seven Marsh stones were entirely restored and preserved by descendants." Unfortunately, both the original inventory by Hoadley, or as copied in 1898, and the restored gravestone must be an error.
The widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh left a will, abstracted by Manwaring [ibid.] in vol. 3, pp. 586-7, was dated Nov. 30, 1748. The same children named in the 1741 will of John Marsh, Esq. are repeated in the will of the widow Elizabeth Marsh in 1748. Elizabeth made her son Timothy Marsh executor, who presented the will to the court on Dec. 24, 1748. Timothy is also named in the earlier 1741 will of his father, John Marsh.
The only conclusion one can reach is that the original gravestone for the widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh was misread then restored with the wrong day, month and year of death. There is no other record the writer is aware of that states Elizabeth's correct date of death.
Don Blauvelt
As you will note, the gravestone of Elizabeth Marsh says she died on Nov. 1, 1738 calling her the relict (i.e., widow) of John Marsh, Esq. John Marsh left a will dated Sept. 17, 1741, abstracted by Manwaring in vol. 3, p. 432 of his Hartford Probate District records, naming his wife Elizabeth as executrix. Hence, how can a wife die six years before her husband, call herself the widow of her husband, then be named as living three years later in her husband's will?
In Hoadley's 1853 inventory of readable gravestones at the Ancient Burying Grounds, copied by Mary K. Talcott and printed in 1898 in vol. IV of The Conn. Quarterly:
Marsh, John, 1744, age 76.
Marsh. Elizaheth, wife of John, 1742, age 72.
The same entries are included in "Restoration of the Ancient Burying-Ground of Hartford…" published by the Ruth Wyllys Chapter of the D.A.R. in 1904. This publication recounts the restoration effort of the cemetery between 1899 and 1903. It also indicates that "Seven Marsh stones were entirely restored and preserved by descendants." Unfortunately, both the original inventory by Hoadley, or as copied in 1898, and the restored gravestone must be an error.
The widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh left a will, abstracted by Manwaring [ibid.] in vol. 3, pp. 586-7, was dated Nov. 30, 1748. The same children named in the 1741 will of John Marsh, Esq. are repeated in the will of the widow Elizabeth Marsh in 1748. Elizabeth made her son Timothy Marsh executor, who presented the will to the court on Dec. 24, 1748. Timothy is also named in the earlier 1741 will of his father, John Marsh.
The only conclusion one can reach is that the original gravestone for the widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh was misread then restored with the wrong day, month and year of death. There is no other record the writer is aware of that states Elizabeth's correct date of death.
Don Blauvelt
In Hoadley's 1853 inventory of readable gravestones at the Ancient Burying Grounds, copied by Mary K. Talcott and printed in 1898 in vol. IV of The Conn. Quarterly:
Marsh, John, 1744, age 76.
Marsh. Elizaheth, wife of John, 1742, age 72.
The same entries are included in "Restoration of the Ancient Burying-Ground of Hartford…" published by the Ruth Wyllys Chapter of the D.A.R. in 1904. This publication recounts the restoration effort of the cemetery between 1899 and 1903. It also indicates that "Seven Marsh stones were entirely restored and preserved by descendants." Unfortunately, both the original inventory by Hoadley, or as copied in 1898, and the restored gravestone must be an error.
The widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh left a will, abstracted by Manwaring [ibid.] in vol. 3, pp. 586-7, was dated Nov. 30, 1748. The same children named in the 1741 will of John Marsh, Esq. are repeated in the will of the widow Elizabeth Marsh in 1748. Elizabeth made her son Timothy Marsh executor, who presented the will to the court on Dec. 24, 1748. Timothy is also named in the earlier 1741 will of his father, John Marsh.
The only conclusion one can reach is that the original gravestone for the widow Elizabeth (Pitkin) Marsh was misread then restored with the wrong day, month and year of death. There is no other record the writer is aware of that states Elizabeth's correct date of death.
Don Blauvelt
Gravesite Details
wife of John, age 72
Family Members
Siblings
Advertisement
Records on Ancestry
Advertisement
