Wells Family Genealogy

The study of my Family Tree

8 July 2014 – An interesting Article on the Rogers Family July 8, 2014

Filed under: Rogers Family — jgeoghan @ 7:41 pm
Tags: , , ,

To show you how behind I am on my reading …. I finally got around to reading my New London Historical Society Newsletter for March.

In it is an interesting article on the members of the Rogers Family buried in what they call the Antientest Burial Ground.  In my records I call in The Ancient Burial ground in New London.   One of the interesting things they discuss in the article is how many of the dates on the headstones are incorrect.

I scanned the article.  Click on the links to below to open up each of the pages ( 2 pages in all)

NLHS Newsletter March 2014 Article on Rogers Fam page 1

NLHS Newsletter March 2014 Article on Rogers Fam page 2

It’s interesting.  I have to say in all my travels in the area, I’ve never visited this cemetery that I recall.  I’m just now starting to prep my itinerary for my big genealogy road trip up to CT, RI, PA and NY in the fall.  I may have to add this on list of places to stop by and visit.







3 Responses to “8 July 2014 – An interesting Article on the Rogers Family”

  1. patrogers8 Says:

    Hi Jennifer, I couldn’t open the article url on my kindle… how can dates be wrong on the stones??? I’m also in the process of answering your email as well… 🙂

  2. patrogers8 Says:

    Ok finally opened on my computer ( dumb kindles), but wowwww, soooo confusing!!!! The first paragraph says that James( #1 which is how I am going to have to do this), arrived around 1656-1660… But yet Samuel the first born was born in 1640. So that’s incorrect… when and who wrote THIS article?? 

    Paragraph 2 “says James #1 has five sons, no mention of the two daughters??”

    pg.2 First paragraph, they talk about James senior ( is this #2 James?) 

    Boy genealogy can be so fun,lol   


    • jgeoghan Says:

      The article appeared in the March 2014 edition of the New London County Historical Society Newsletter and was written by Patricia M. Schaefer.
      James Rogers Sr (1615-1687) did have 5 sons and two daughters but since the daughters didn’t continue the Rogers’ name, it’s most likely Frances Caulkins (whose book is being quoted) probably didn’t bother to mention them.
      When they mention James Sr in that quote, they mean Capt James Rogers Jr (1652-1714) As James Jr’s father (who we call Sr) had already died, in the eyes of the author, James Jr had become the new Senior and Jr’s son (who we would call James 3rd) was now the new Jr. Everyone had moved up a level so to speak. The wife in question that is referred to here is Mary Jordan who died 8 Feb 1713.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s