Search billions of records on

This website designed by Clovis LaFleur


The Aaron Stark Family Chronicles



Genetic Project

Volume 1

Volume 3

Volume 4

Stark Family Yearbooks



Last Update: December 11, 2013 Webmaster: Clovis LaFleur <> Click HERE to see Copyright & Disclaimer.

Volume 1: The First Three Generations of Aaron Stark's Descendants in New England

Chapter 11: Ancestry of Isaac Lamb, Father of Experience Lamb

Part 4: The Third Generation; Children of William Stark (Senior)

Page 97


Chapter 11

Ancestry of Isaac Lamb, Father of Experience Lamb

Compiled 2003 by Clovis LaFleur from material contributed by:

Joan Best, Donn Neal, Gwen Boyer Bjorkman, Jay G. Lamb, and Carla J. Carrier



Beginning in April of 2003, an online discussion group tried to answer the question, "Who was the Father of Isaac Lamb?" Many theories were examined and in the process a considerable amount of source material was collected. My contribution to this effort has been to compile all we have learned about the possible ancestry of Isaac Lamb as a result of this investigation. I would like to thank Joan Best, Donn Neal, Gwen Boyer Bjorkman, Jay G. Lamb, and Carla J. Carrier for their many contributions which has most certainly improved our understanding of the Lamb families living in 17th century New England. The following publication would not have been possible without the dedication of their time and knowledge to this project.



Genealogist most often report the father of Isaac Lamb was John Lamb who first appears in the New London records in 1664 and further believe this John Lamb was the son of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony who arrived in New England in 1630 with the Winthrop fleet. Other New England research of the name John Lamb suggest there were two John Lambs of which one was, as stated, the son of Thomas Lamb and the other was the son of Edward Lamb of Watertown, Massachusetts Bay Colony who first appears in that place in 1633. Efforts of a recent discussion group trying to answer the question "Who Was The Father of Isaac Lamb?", have made a convincing argument there were three men living during this time frame named John Lamb and earlier research has combined the activities of these three men causing one of the men to loose his identity. The analysis which follows will prove the John Lamb who was first documented in New London County, Connecticut in 1664 was not the son of Thomas Lamb nor was he an offspring of Edward Lamb but in reality a third person named John Lamb who migrated to New London from Kittery, Maine and probably migrated to Maine from England. For clarity in the analysis which follows, these men will be identified as; 1) John Lamb of Maine, 2) John Lamb of Braintree, and 3) John Lamb of Springfield.

The first known record of Isaac Lamb in New London County, Connecticut is dated November 24, 1695 when his second daughter, Elizabeth Lamb, was baptized in the old Stonington Road Church. From this time to his death May 12, 1723 in Old Mystic, New London County, Connecticut, there is a more or less continuous record of his presence in this location. A search of the New England records before 1695 has revealed there was a man named Isaac Lamb baptized July 10, 1687 in Watertown, Suffolk County, Massachusetts but no documentation as been found which would prove these two men are the same person.[1]

Many of those researching the family of Isaac variously report his birth anywhere from 1660 to 1670 in New London County which would approximately coincide with the appearance of John Lamb in Connecticut. Because many Isaac Lamb researchers believe this John Lamb was the father of Isaac, there is a general presumption Isaac was born at about this time in New London. However, because no documented evidence of his actual year of birth has materialized, one has to believe these dates have no basis in fact. This narrative will examine the evidence and attempt to establish a range of years in which Isaac could have been born and with this information investigate families with the surname Lamb residing in New England from 1630 to 1675 from whom he may be a descendant.


Isaac Lamb

As stated in the introduction, Isaac Lamb’s second daughter, Elizabeth, was baptized in New London County, Connecticut in 1695. The marriage of Experience Lamb to William Stark, Junior in 1710 and the fact she is listed first in the order in which Isaac’s six daughters are mentioned in his will gives us rather convincing proof she was the oldest daughter and child and one would have to conclude she was probably baptized somewhere else, perhaps in Watertown, Suffolk County, Massachusetts, where there was an Isaac Lamb baptized in 1687.


1) Watertown Records: Comprising the Third Book of Town Proceedings and the Second Book of Births, Marriages, and Deaths to End of 1737. Quote: "Ye 10th of July 1687, I baptized 11, viz 4 of Caleb Church his children (who solemnly owned ye Covent), viz Caleb, Joshua, Isaac, & Rebekah, also a child of Jo. Balls called Abigail, also I baptized Isaac Lamb, Abigail Sanders & Mary Laurence, all wch 3 owned ye Covent, I baptized 3 of George Dills children, (he himself taking shame to himself for his sin) his children were called Thomas, Sarah and James."



Page 98


Because there appears to be no birth or baptismal record for Experience, we would probably be correct in speculating she was born in a prior place of residence where Isaac married, as we will come to know, a woman named Elizabeth. Because of the lack of evidence of the birth or baptism of Experience or a marriage record in New London or New England, we must consider the possibility these records have been lost or were not recorded, or these events occurred in England and Isaac was actually an immigrant.

Isaac was educated enough to write his own name and apparently was not a devout Congregationalist. He is known to have revealed his affiliation with the Baptist Church movement as early as September of 1704 when he and his wife were arrested along with John Culver, Senior and his wife "for their breach of law in not coming to meeten on the lords day to attend the publick worship of god here established."[1] It becomes quite clear that when Isaac joined the Baptist movement, he no longer baptized his children in the Congregational Church for Elizabeth, Alice, and Jacob are the only children with Stonington Congregational Church baptismal records.[2]

Isaac was probably influenced by John Culver, his Mystic River neighbor, to join the Baptist movement. John Culver, Senior was a well known dissenter and obstructionist to the Congregational Church and became a follower of John Rogers, founder of the Rogerenes movement. He and his wife, Sarah Culver, signed the October 5th 1704 petition requesting the Baptist be granted permission to practice their faith in New London County as did William Stark, Senior and his wife, Elizabeth Stark, and the Culvers were one of the couples who ignored a smallpox quarantine placed on the John Rogers resident and entered the home to administer to those suffering from this devastating disease. John Rogers succumbed to the disease October 17th, 1721 and John Culver was one of those who became a leader of the Rogerene movement after the death of John Rogers.

Isaac’s spouse, Elizabeth, was apparently still living as late as 1737 according to one of the documents cited in the timeline.1 Many Isaac Lamb researchers report, incorrectly, his spouse was Elizabeth Hempstead, a resident from birth of New London who was the daughter of Joshua Hempstead and Elizabeth Larrabee. Frances Manwaring Caulkins published a text in 1895 entitled “History of New London, Connecticut, From the First Survey of the Coast in 1612 to 1860” in which she frequently quoted the diary of Joshua Hempstead, Junior. In an introduction to the 1901 publication entitled "The Joshua Hempstead Dairy;" Miss Caulkins had these remarks concerning the author of the diary: "Its author was a remarkable man - one that might serve to represent, or at least illustrate, the age, country, and society in which he lived…….As the Hempstead descendants are numerous, and this publication should have an especial attraction to them, a genealogy of the immediate families of Robert, Joshua, and Joshua Hempstead, 2d is given.” In her brief genealogy presentation of the Hempstead family, she reported “Joshua Hempstead, married Elizabeth Larrabee. He died 1687.” Under children of this couple was listed Joshua Hempstead, 2d, the author of the Hempstead Diary and listed as the oldest child was “Elizabeth, b. September 2, 1672, m. John Plumb, 1689, died 1733.” The New London Town records also record, "1688/9 February 13- John Plumb & Elizabeth Hempstead were married..," which further confirms Elizabeth Hempstead married John Plumb. [The publication entitled "The Joshua Hempstead Dairy" was published in 1901 by the New London County Historical Society, New London, Connecticut, and printed by the Journal of Commerce Company, Providence, Rhode Island.]

Clearly, we have a conflict, for Elizabeth Hempstead, daughter of Joshua Hempstead and Elizabeth Larrabee could not have been married to both Isaac Lamb and John Plumb at the same time as has been claimed by the Isaac Lamb and John Plumb genealogical researchers. From the documentation cited above, I would rather strongly suggest Elizabeth, the spouse of Isaac Lamb, was not Elizabeth Hempstead, daughter of Joshua Hempstead and Elizabeth Larrabee because there is no documented evidence to support this marriage and as we continue to pursue the origins of Isaac, this lack of documented evidence of events before 1695 would further illustrate Isaac did not marry in New London but married someone named Elizabeth before he arrived and his daughter, Experience Lamb, was most likely born and possibly baptized before the couple arrived in Connecticut.

From the documented records we have on Isaac, we can establish the probable time of his birth within a range of years from which we can then investigate the three men named John Lamb living in New England during those years to determine if one of them was his father. We know Isaac bought property on January 15, 1696/7 from Peter and Christobel Crary.[4] To purchase property in Connecticut at that time, one had to be 21 years old which would place Isaac’s latest date of birth as January 1675/76. We further know his second daughter, Elizabeth, was baptized November 24, 1695 in New London[5], that his oldest daughter, Experience, married William Stark, Junior April 13, 1710,[6] and in Isaac’s Last Will & Testament, dated May 12, 1723, the name Experience appears first in the list of daughters suggesting she was the oldest daughter.[7] If Experience was born after Elizabeth Lamb was baptized, then she would have been under the age of fifteen in 1710, rather young even for those days.


1) See the loose files of the New London County Court for the September Term, 1704, in the Connecticut State Library.

2) Richard A. Wheeler, History of the First Congregational Church, Stonington, Conn., 1674-1874 With the Report of Bi-Centennial Proceedings, June 3, 1874 With Appendix containing Statistics of the Church (Norwich, CT: T. H. Davis and Company, 1875), page 200.

3) Groton, New London County, CT, Deed Book 4, page 61.

4) Research of Scott Swanson.

5) Richard A. Wheeler, History of the First Congregational Church, Stonington, Conn., 1674-1874 With the Report of Bi-Centennial Proceedings, June 3, 1874 With Appendix containing Statistics of the Church (Norwich, CT: T. H. Davis and Company, 1875), page 200.

6) Groton, New London County, CT, Vital Records, page 112, Records marriage of William Stark, Jr. and Experience.

7) See Transcribed copy of Isaac Lamb’s Will and scanned copy of original.



Page 99



Isaac Lamb Probate Record 

{FHL Film #1311925 New London County, Connecticut Probate Records Continued 1716-1734 ; pages 492-494}

{Scanned copy of Isaac Lamb's Will contributed by Carla J. Carrier}


May the twelf one thousand Seven hundred and twenty three. I Isaac Lamb of Groton in the County of New London in the Colony of Connecticut in New England being ill of body but of perfect mind and memory do make and ordain this my Last will and Testament first I comit my soul to God that gave it hoping through the merits of my redeemer to have everlasting Life and my body to the earth to be buryed by the descresion of my executers here after mentioned and as for those Goods and Chetells God hath blessed me with in this Life I give as foloeth

First I will that all those debts I Justly ow be first paid by my executrex.

Item. I Give to my wife alisaberth Lamb Half the house and half the homested during her widohood. I Give all so to my wife all my stock and housul stuff that are movables during her widohood and afterward to be equally devided among my six daughters, Exspearence, Elisaberth, Alis, Freelove, Ane and Doroty.

Item. I Give unto my sons Jacob and Daniell the other half of my house and homested and the hole after her that is my wife equally to be devided between them both and Jacob to have his Chois their paying their brother Isaac thirty pounds apeas that is three Score pounds for both when he comes to the age of one and twenty.

I ordain and appoint my wife Elisaberth Executrex and my son Jacob Executer of this my Last will and Testement and declare it to be my last will and Testement in witness hearof I have hearunto set my hand and seal the day and year above Riten. Signed: Isaac Lamb {Seal} Signed Sealed and delaivrid in the presense of us Robart Burrows, David Collver, Natll. N Collver, his mark.

Robert Burrows, David Colver appeared before a Court of Probates held in New London July 2d 1723 and made Solemn Oath that they saw Isaack Lambe of Groton the testator within mentioned sign and Seal the within Instrument &heard him declare the same to be his Last Will & Testament and that he was then of a Sound and disposing mind and memory according to the best of their Judgment and that they did together with Nathaniel Burrows at the same time. In his presence set their hands there unto as witnesses. Teste: Rosewll Saltonstall Cler; Recorded the 5th Book of Wills for the County of New London September the 12th 1723 Pr M.

Rosewell Saltonstall Clerk foll. 7 June the 29 1723: We the subscribers hath taken a true inventory of the Estate of Isaac Lamb Late Deceased of Groton as foloeth …Robert Burrows, David Collver. Apprizers Sworn in a Court of Probates held in new London July the 2nd 1723 Pr Chrtop. Christophers Esq. ?? Elizabeth Lambe Widdow and Relict of Isaack Lambe late of Groton deceased appeared in a Court of Probates held in New London July ye 1st 1723 and made oath that she made a true presentment of her deceased husbands Estate to the Apprizers according to the best of her knowledge and if any thing more that is considerable appears to be his Estate, She will cause the same to be added to this Inventory. Test: Rosewll. Saltonstall Clerk. 

Recorded in the 5th Book of Wills for the County of New London September the 12, 1723 pr me Rosewell Saltonstall. Clark foll 8




Page 100


John Lamb of Maine

Lets begin with the Genealogical Dictionary compiled by James Savage.[1] Much of the research of Savage was based on John Farmer’s earlier efforts published in 1829. In Savage’s preface to his volumes, he wrote, "In 1829 was published, by John Farmer, a Genealogical Register of the first settlers of New England. Beside the five classes of persons prominent, as Governors, Deputy-Governors, Assistants, ministers in all the Colonies, and representatives in that of Massachusetts, down to 1692, it embraced graduates of Harvard College to 1662, members of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company, as also freemen admitted in Massachusetts, alone, to this latter date, with many early inhabitants of other parts of New England and Long Island from 1620 to 1675." Every name compiled in this text comes from documents that existed at the time of Farmers earlier work which was expanded by James Savage to include documents on individuals lower in station in the New England Communities. The location of the documents for the individuals in this publication are suggested by where the recorded individual lived, for example, Thomas Lamb, Roxbury, came 1630, etc. One would expect to find a record or records on these individuals at those locations if they still exist or in publications which transcribed those records.

Savage reports "John Lamb, New London 1664 - 9, was offered in the latter year to be made freeman and in 1677 lost a son by being struck by a mill-wheel, as told in Bradstreet’s Journal. He perhaps was in 1712 in that pt. [?place?] made Groton." There was a John Lamb submitted before the Particular Court of Connecticut to become a freeman from New London on October 14, 1669.[2]

John Lamb of Maine was born in 1625,[3] most likely in England and first appears in the Kittery, Maine Court in March of 1651 accused of being a thief and a liar and appears before the Court again in 1653 accused of being a liar.[4] John "Lame" received a Maine grant of 20 acres in 1655 and another fifty acres in 1656 from the town of Kittery which was recorded as received from John Gard.[5] On July 7, 1666, York County, Maine Deed Book 2, page 49 records; "Be it known unto all men by these prsents that I John Lambe of New London Doe sell unto Edward Start of Gorgvane in the Province of Maine all my Land ...7 Jul 1666. Signed: The marke I of John Lambe. Wit: Nicholas Frost, Jos: Hamond Sr." This document provides rather convincing proof John Lamb of Maine and the John Lamb living in New London County, Connecticut July 7, 1666 are the same individual.

Disclosure is made on page 160 of the text titled "History of New London County, Connecticut", by H. D. Hurd, that on December 24, 1663, "John Lamb, now of Pockatuck, alias Southerton [Stonington]. He purchased land of Edward and Ann Culver at a place called in Indian ‘Wautobish‘ near the house of said Lamb. This land was in 1695 confirmed to Thomas Lamb, ‘oldest son of John Lamb, deceased‘ by John Culver, son of Edward Culver, and Thomas Lamb assigns a part of it to his brother, Samuel."[6] This is confirmed in a document dated November 26, 1694 which states "my Father Edward Colver of New London deceased did sell a piece of land lying & being in the Town bounds of New London … abut 14A unto John Lamb of New London Deceased & ye deed for the same being not to be found, Now Know ye by these presents that I John Colver ye Eldest Son of sd Edward Colver Deceased do Confirm unto Thomas Lamb ye Eldest son of ye sd John Lamb of New London Deceased … Acknowledging that my father Edwd. Colver deceased did receive of ye above mentioned John Lamb full satisfaction for ye same … 26 Nov 1694. Signed: John Colver. Wit: Samll. Chester, Joseph Latham. Ack: 26 Nov 1694 by John Colver and recd [Recorde] in ye fifth Book of Records folio:202 2 Apr 1696. Danll. Wetherell Recorder." The property mentioned in this deed is clearly the property H. D. Hurd reports was purchased from Edward Culver December 23, 1664.[7]

May 17th, 1649, the Connecticut Court recognized the formation of the "Plantation of Pequet" and ordered Captain John Mason to give the "oath of magistrate" to John Winthrop for the coming year until there could be an election of the freemen. He took as his assistants, Thomas Mynott [Minor] and Samuel Lathrop.[8] On October 15, 1652, Thomas Miner sold his property in New London and purchased the property of Cary Latham, which bordered property laid out to John Mason at the mouth of the Mystic River. Miner started a diary in 1653, which related activities and events that would occur in the region from 1653 to 1684. This region would later become the town of Stonington where Miner would be appointed to the same positions and titles he held in New London.


1) Savage, James, "A Genealogical Dictionary of The First Settlers of New England, Showing Three Generations of Those Who Came Before May, 1692, On The Basis Of Farmer's Register." Originally published in Boston, 1860-1862.]

2) Connecticut (Colony). The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from April 1636 to October 1776 ... transcribed and published by Hartford Brown & Parsons. 1850-1890, 15 volumes. Volume 2, page 116.

3) [CT Private Controversies Volume1, page 85] (History of New London Co., CT by D. H. Hurd, p. 160). Quote: "Sep 21 [1670] John Lamb age 45 years testified in behalf of Roger Plaisted. 'This deponeth sayeth, that he being at Mr Stantons, Sr., when Sir Robert Carr desired Mr. Stanton to go over to the Poecatuke River, with his man to disposes the Rhode Island people that lived upon Mr. Plaisted, his land and so give Mr. Plaisted possession of his land again, amongst which John Reynolds whom they disposed and gave Mr. Plaisted possession after which Mr. Plaisted let two farms, the house and land as the sayd Reynolds lived upon, unto the sayd Reynolds and the sayd Reynolds became tenant to Mr. Plaisted upon the above said land and further sayeth not. Sworn in Court 21 [or 27] Sept. 1670.'"

4) Maine Province & Court Records, Book 1, page 182 & Book 2, page 13.

5) Ibid. Book 1, page 163.

6) D.H. Hurd, History of New London County, Connecticut, 1882, reprinted Heritage Books, Inc., Bowie, MD, page 160.

7) Recorded in Book 1, page 743 of the Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Books.

8) The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, 1636-1776, Volume 1, page 186.



Page 101


There are many passages in the Minor diary about a man named "Lam" who was apparently a blacksmith. He records, for example, that "Captain Morice and lam spent the night" on March 27, 1664 and on August 18th, 1665 he wrote; "The Major {Probably Major John Mason} was heare & goodwife sha {She} P’msed to pay lam 30s." March 15, 1665/66, the diary entry records "I was at lams my wheeles came from Tagwoncke", and June 29th, 1666, "I fetched ?siths? from lams."[1] During this same timeframe, John Lamb was recorded on the rate list of New London in 1664 and, as already mentioned, he sold all of his property in Maine to Edward Start July 7th, 1666.[2]

Minor reports he was "at lams .10. Oaund of wool" on June 15th, 1667 and visited him again in August of 1667.[3] On October 14th of 1669, the Particular Court of Connecticut submitted a list of men who were approved to become freemen and one of the names on the list was John Lamb of New London.[4] John Lamb was on the April 11th 1670 New London Town list of those persons who were proper inhabitants of New London.[5]

As has already been mentioned, on September 21, 1670, John Lamb, age 45 years testified as follows on behalf of Roger Plaisted: "This deponeth sayeth, that he being at Mr Stantons, Sr., when Sir Robert Carr desired Mr. Stanton to go over to the Poecatuke River, with his man to disposes the Rhode Island people that lived upon Mr. Plaisted, his land and so give Mr. Plaisted possession of his land again, amongst which John Reynolds whom they disposed and gave Mr. Plaisted possession after which Mr. Plaisted let two farms, the house and land as the sayd Reynolds lived upon, unto the sayd Reynolds and the sayd Reynolds became tenant to Mr. Plaisted upon the above said land and further sayeth not. Sworn in Court 21 [or 27] Sept. 1670."[6]

Therefore, from the above documented evidence, it would appear John Lamb was a resident of New London from December of 1663 to September of 1670. Later entries in the Minor diary reveal he continued to live in this community for on June 4th, 1672, he wrote "I came ?Home? I had my horse shewed at Lams"; December 17th, 1772 the dairy entry says "?Spent? Day Lam had the steere"; February 15th, 1672/73 "I fetched all the Iron workes from lam there was due to him"; and August 14th , 1673 "I made Goodman Lam his will." Other publications interpret this entry as "I made Goodman Lamb his will, but nothing has been found of it." Not having seen the original, both have been included. October 31st, 1674 Minor reports he "was at Lams with ?Corne? Minor." These entries further illustrate the presence of the man named Lam/Lamb in Stonington through 1673.[7]

On June 18th, 1674, Stonington records show Roger Plaisted was granted permission to build a mill at the head of the Mystic River for the sons of Major John Winthrop which was then leased to John Lamb, Sr. for seven years on November 5th, 1674, his spouse, Ann Lamb, signing the lease document as a witness. On May 14th, 1675, Minor makes an entry in his diary which says "wee Looked Hanahs mare and was at manasses meadow and found Lams horse."[8] Bradstreet’s Journal reported on November 6th, 1677 that "Nove. 5 or 6. Goodman Lamb his Sonne was killed by being drawn in by the Coggeswheel of a wheel while he was busy grapling ye loggs, or some such employment.  This Lamb belonged to N. London and belonged upon ye Skirts of ye Town."[9] This diary entry clearly reveals one Goodman Lamb's son died in a mill accident and was apprently living on the "skirts of ye town" which would probably be a reference to Stonington. This event is confirmed and the name of the son is given in Minor's diary for on November 9th, 1677 he writes "Thursday the .8. the .9. brother Avery and sister were heare John Lam was buried..."[10] The Bradstreet and Minor reports of the death of John Lamb, son of Goodman Lamb, imply he had a son named John which is confirmed by the lease of the Winthrop Mill in which John Lamb is referred to as "Senior."


1) Miner, John A., The Minor Diaries, Stonington, CT Thomas Minor 1653 to 1684, Manasseh Minor 1696 to 1720 (1976); Original publishers of the Diaries Sidney H. Miner and George D. Stanton, publishers of Thomas' Diary in 1899; and Frank Denison Miner and Hannah Miner, publishers of Manasseh's Diary in 1915; pages 69, 73, 74, & 75. [Note: Contributed by Joan Best, 8/6/2003: "siths" is no doubt scythes, an instrument for cutting hay ~ used on the farm I grew up on!"]

2) Colonial Records, Volume 2, page 116.

3) Minor, pages 79 & 80.

4) Connecticut (Colony) The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from April 1636 to October 1776 ... transcribed and published by Hartford Brown & Parsons. 1850-1890, 15 volumes. Volume 2, page 116.

5) Film #5083 New London Town Meetings Book 1A, page 76.

6) CT Private Controversies Volume1, page 85. History of New London Co., CT by D. H. Hurd, p. 160.

7) Minor, page 110, 114, 115, 119, 125.

8) Minor, page 129.

9) NEHGR, Vol. 8, Pg 330 (published 1854).  Bradstreet's Journal, year 1677.

10) Minor, page 145.



Page 102


Those researching the Colver/Culver families of New London found documents which they interpret as recording the following: "In 1654 Edward Colver was granted land at Mystic near that of William Wellman. He exchanged it for other land belonging to Robert Park, Robert Burrows, and Hugh Roberts. He built a house with accommodations for travelers and a water power grist mill. In 1668 his son Joshua built a house north of Edward's. John Winthrop, Esq., was granted twenty rods of land on both sides of the Mystic River to bring down "tymber" from Lantern Hill. In 1674 Winthrop's two sons had a mill built at the head of Mystic River. John Lamb was to run it. The Winthrop’s decided they needed the land on which Joshua Colver's house stood for a mill house. In 1681 Governor Winthrop's son, Major John Winthrop, sued and lost the case, but sued again and again until John Winthrop won the case. Many of the people around testified--some for the Winthrops --some for the Colvers. Thirty-five year old John Gallup, cousin of the Winthrop’s, said that Joshua Colver's house stood about eight rods from the brook of the Mystic River and affirmed it was above the high water mark. John Bennet testified that he paced the distance with Gallup and could testify to the truth of his statements. For the Colvers, the testimony was quite different. It indicated that not only the house, but also the mill was below the high water mark and that the land did not belong to the Winthrops. William Hough worked on the mill. He said he had been unable to do the lower work because of the tides. Joseph Colver testified that the tide had flowed up to the mill, many times even to the ditch of the mill wheel. John Packer said that John Lamb and John Bennet told him the wheel did wade in the back wash and that he himself had seen the wheel wade in the back wash." If there was such a case in the New London Records, we then have a John Lamb documented has running this mill before 1681.[1]

In the Connecticut Public records will be found "Major Winthrop is Plntf. By way of appeale from the Court of Assists, May 31, 1681, Edward Cullver is Defnt, which action was an action of the case, for that the sayd Culver doth unjustly keep possession of some part of the Plntf’s land, to the damage of ten pownds and a surrender of the sayd lands. In this action this Court doe find for the plntf. A surrender of the house and land in controversy and cost of court. The cost of court allowed is seven pownds ninteen shillings and six-pence. Execution dd, Octobr 24, 1681."[2]

While this court case about flowing tides as they relate to ownership of land is most interesting, of importance to this discussion is the fact John Packer testified "The wheel did wade in the back wash…" which was told to him by John Lamb and John Bennet. Therefore, John Lamb did not testify to this statement indicating he may have been deceased. This would seem to be confirmed for on May 29th, 1683, Ann Lamb bought back fours years of Ebenezer Lamb’s apprenticeship to Henry Stevens of Stonington with one Thomas Lamb signing as a witness to this document.[3] Records have revealed the family moved to Norwich where the marriage of Ebenezer Lamb to Mary Armstrong was recorded. Further, these records say Ebenezer died in Norwich in 1694. If John Lamb was still living, one would suppose John Lamb himself would be buying back his son’s apprenticeship. The family, as implied by the events related to Ebenezer, moved to Norwich.

As already disclosed, Thomas Lamb, witness to the above, was the son of John Lamb for in the New London Record dated November 26, 1694 will be found: "Confirm unto Thomas Lamb ye Eldest son of ye sd John Lamb of New London Deceased …"[4] We find the name of another son in a document prepared December 10, 1695 which states; "Thomas Lamb of New London, Eldest Son to my Late father John Lamb of New London Deseased do for good & valuable considerations … assign over unto my Loving Brother Samll. Lamb of New London all my right title & interest of this deed of sale as it is mentioned on the other side to ye said Samll. Lamb … 10 Dec 1695. Signed: Thomas TL Lamb his marke. Wit: Daniel Wetherell, John Clerk. Ack: 10 Dec 1695 : and recd 13 Apr 1721."[5] From the above documents, we now know John Lamb of Maine was married to a spouse with the given name "Ann" and they had sons named Thomas, the eldest in 1694, Samuel, the middle son, Ebenezer, the youngest son, and John Lamb, Jr. who died in the mill accident in 1677 as mentioned above.

In summary, the above discussion shows there was man named John Lamb who first appears in Kittery Maine in 1651 where he later purchased land which he sold to Edward Start in 1666 after becoming a resident of New London. From 1664 to 1674, he appears to be continuously living in Stonington, New London County, Connecticut. He probably died as early as 1674 and as late as 1683, for records after 1674 do not necessarily confirm he was still living. From the records we know he married a lady with the given name Ann and had sons named John Lamb, Jr., Thomas Lamb, Samuel Lamb, and Ebenezer Lamb. Having established the identity of John Lamb of Maine who moved to New London, lets now investigate the other two men living in New England named John Lamb.


1) Collver/Colver/Culver Website;,%20John%202.

2) Connecticut (Colony). The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from April 1636 to October 1776 ... transcribed and published by Hartford Brown & Parsons. 1850-1890, 15 volumes. Volume 1, page 88. At the bottom of this page will be found this quote: "Priv. Controv. I, 282-290: Records of Co. of Assts, I. 29, 33. Edward and Joshua Culver lived at or near the head of Mystic river, on the west side, near Gov. Winthrop’s mill. Major Fitz John Winthrop claimed the land occupied by the Culver’s, by virtue of a deed from Joshua Culver (son of Edward), and also as within the bounds of a tract granted to Gov. Winthrop by the town of New London, in 1652-3, of "twenty pole (rod) on each side of the river from the place where the flowing tides end."

3) Query from Hartford Daily Times; 996---C. M. G., Nov. 2, 1935.

4) Recorded in Book 1, page 743 of the Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Books. 

5) Recorded in Book 1, page 744 of the Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Books.



Page 103


Could John Lamb of Maine be a Descendant of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury?

According to Savage "Thomas Lamb, Roxbury, came, 1630, in the fleet with Winthrop Brothers with Elizabeth and two children, Thomas and John, required admission 19 Oct. had Samuel, b. in October, baptized that year at Dorchester…" Thomas Senior became a freeman in May of 1631 and his fourth son, Able, was born in October of 1633. His daughter named Decline was born in April of 1637 and would later marry Stephen Smith December 7, 1666 and in 1639, the fifth child born to Thomas Senior and Elizabeth was named Benjamin who died soon after being born as did his mother, both being buried November 28th of 1639. Thomas, Senior then married, second, Dorothy Harbottle in 1640 and on April 19, 1641 they had a son named Caleb. A second son named Joshua was baptized November 28, 1642 and their daughter named Mary was baptized September 29, 1644. Thomas Senior died March 28, 1646 and his last child, Abiel, was baptized August 2 of 1646.[1]

On March 3, 1697/8, letters of administration were granted to "Abiel Lambe, son of Thomas Lamb sometime of Roxbury…. Yeoman, deceased intestate, James Bayley and Mary his wife, daughter of said Thomas Lamb, and Joshua Lamb his grandson." Numerous documents were collected by the court to attempt to determine the disposition of the estate of Thomas Lamb Senior and within these documents is the name John Lamb, mentioned in an affidavit, which states that on May 27, 1652, "John Lamb of Springfield, wheelwright, son of Thomas Lamb late of Roxbury, deceased…acknowledged receipt of his share of his father’s estate from Thomas Halley of Roxbury my father-in-law." Thomas Lamb Senior’s second wife, Dorothy, married Thomas Hawley February 2, 1652 who later died without leaving a will and the above is only one of many documents submitted to the court to resolve ownership of Thomas Lamb’s and Thomas Hawley’s property by their children. From this document we know John Lamb, son of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury, lived in Springfield, Massachusetts in May of 1652. Combining the data provided by Savage with this May 27, 1652 document provides conclusive proof the John Lamb of Springfield, Massachusetts in 1652 was the son of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury.[2]

The Savage text provides data on a John Lamb of Springfield which says "John [Lamb], Springfield 1653, prob. s. of Thomas, came 1630, with his f." Savage believes but is not committed this John is the son of Thomas Lamb Senior and as indicated above, doesn’t speculate on the parentage of John Lamb of New London. The Savage data reports children born to John Lamb of Springfield were "John, b. 1654, died soon; John and Thomas, twins 1655, of which John died at 21 years.; Joanna, 1657; Sarah, 1660; Samuel, 1663, Daniel, 1666, Mary, 1669, died young; Abigail, 1670; and Joshua, 1674." We can safely say no male child of John Lamb of Springfield named John could have been the John Lamb reported in New London in 1664 to 1669. Savage only mentioned the name of one wife for John Lamb, son of Thomas Lamb, Senior. He records "He for second or third wife in 1688 married Lydia, widow of John Norton which before [Marriage to Norton] was widow of Lawrence Bliss and daughter of Deacon Samuel Wright…" Savage then reports John Lamb of Springfield died September 28, 1690.

John’s first wife, who bore the children listed by Savage, was named Joanna, her surname speculated to be Chapin not to be proven in this discussion. The following, which seems to confirm her given name is Joanna, is an account found in "Henry Burt of Springfield" and is taken from John Pynchon's records. (with some editing) "At a court held in Springfield, March 20, 1662, before Elizur Holyoke, Samuel Chapin and John Pynchon: Upon ye examination of Thomas Miller, John Scot, Edward Foster, and John Bagg; also John Henryson and his wife, concerning Theire Playing at that unlawful game of Cards: William Brookes testifying agt them, said that one Night at John Henryson's house he saw Edw. Foster, Thos. Miller, John Bagg, & John Scot, all foure of ym playing at cards, & I staying in the house neere an hour they continued theire playing at Cards all the while……John Bagg testified agt Martha, ye wife of John Henryson, yt he had seen her Play at Cards, wch she owned. Whereupon, John Lamb & his wife, Joanna, both of them gave in theire Testimony upon oath, That at a tyme (since they had herd these reports were about Towne,) they asked Goodwife Henryson concerning her Playing cards; & then she denyed it; & said, moreover, in theire hearing, that she never saw any Cards but once at a Dinnare, & she knew not that they belonged to them; & also she said, that she brought up noe Cards to this Towne,--all which by her former confession, and other persons, appears to be a most grossly, for it appeared That card playing had bin comonly used at John Henryson's house by his own confession." This court case clearly reveals Joanna was the name of John Lamb’s wife.

To confirm the research of Savage, the following was reported in the text titled "The First Century of The History of Springfield, Mass", published in 1899, Volume l2, pages 596 & 597: "John Lamb was here as early as 1651, when his name first appears in the Town Records. He was married twice. His wife, who came with him was Joanna. She died September 8, 1683, and he married Lidia, widow of John Norton, January 27, 1687. He died September 28, 1690, and his widow married Quartermaster George Colton. His {John Lamb} children born here were: John, b. February 20, 1654, d. July 13, 1654; John, b. May 15, 1655, d. June 5, 1676; Thomas, b. May 15, 1655, may have gone to Stonington; Joanna, b. September 20, 1657, m. Samuel Stebbins; Sarah, b. June 15, 1660, m. Jonathan Bush; Samuel, b. September 28, 1663, m. Rebecca Bird; Daniel, b. November 24, 1666, m. Elizabeth Atchinson; Mary, b. July 19, 1669, d. September 6, 1669; Abigail, b. September 20, 1670, m. James Lawton; and Joshua, b. October 3, 1674." In addition, Volume 1 of the above cited text has the following passages: a) Page 85: "Highway surveyor ffebr 3rd 1662: Lawrence Blis & John Lamb were chosen Surveyors for ye high ways for ye yeere ensueinge."; and b) Page 127: "Seat in meeting-house February 23, 1662:In ye 5th Seate: - John Matthews, John Clarke, John Lamb, Lawrence Bliss, Thomas Miller, Thomas Day." 


1) James Savage Publication.

2) Supreme Judicial Court, Massachusetts, Case #3762.



Page 104


If we compare these events with those of John Lamb of Maine, it becomes rather convincing John Lamb of Springfield and John Lamb of Maine could not be the same person. For example, John of Springfield has twins born in Springfield May 15, 1655 in the same year John Lamb of Maine purchases property in Kittery, Maine. In another record May 27, 1652, John Lamb is described as the son of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury and a resident of Springfield while we have records revealing John Lamb of Maine appeared before the Kittery, Maine court in March of 1651 and again in 1653. Would it be possible for John Lamb of Springfield to be in Maine in 1651, accused of being a liar and thief, then a resident of Springfield in 1652, and back in Maine in 1653, accused of being a liar? I would summit this scenario would appear to be most unlikely.

We find other events which conflict. John Lamb of Springfield has other children born in Springfield from September of 1663 to October of 1674 at the same time Thomas Minor records events in his diary related to "Lam" which start in March of 1664 and with little discontinuity, continue to 1677. Are we to believe that John Lamb of Springfield traveled back and forth between New London and Springfield? How does one explain the spouse named Joanna in Springfield who supposedly gave birth to the children in Springfield and the spouse named Ann, who signed as a witness in New London on the 1674 John Lamb lease of the Winthrop Mill? Are we to believe John Lamb of Springfield was married to both women at the same time?John Lamb, son of Goodman Lamb, died in New London in a mill accident November 6, 1677, as reported by Bradstreet. If we are to believe this John Lamb was the son of John Lamb of Springfield, how to we explain the death of his son named John in Springfield June 6, 1676? Again, it becomes difficult to believe these two men are one person.

In July of 1666, John Lamb, clearly described as a resident of New London, sold all of his property in Maine to Edward Start. The John Lamb who signed was unable to sign his name. The appointment of John Lamb of Springfield as Surveyor of Highways with Lawrence Bliss in 1662 would most certainly indicate he could write his own. Are we to believe for some reason the surveyor of 1662 who most assuredly could write his name, has lost the ability to sign his own name by 1666? How does one explain the birth of Daniel Lamb in Springfield in November of 1666 to John Lamb and Joanna with the above July deed which describes John Lamb as a resident of New London selling his property in Maine? It would seem improbable these two men could be one person.

One may be tempted to conclude the sons of John of Springfield named Thomas and Samuel are the Thomas and Samuel named in the Groton, New London County Deed books. Most certainly, researchers appear to have no additional information on Thomas, but there is considerable research of Samuel which reports he was born September 28, 1663 in Springfield, married Rebecca Bird December 1, 1687 in Springfield, and this couple had 12 children, all born in Springfield from September 10, 1688 to March 26, 1712. They further report Samuel died December 5, 1729 in Springfield.[1] Therefore, this Samuel, son of John Lamb of Springfield, appears to have lived his life in Springfield indicating he could not have been the Samuel who was given property by his brother named Thomas in Stonington, and is documented in various land transactions in Groton, New London County up to 1721 as a resident of New London and was married to a spouse named Mercy Lamb who witnessed the 1721 sale of there property in New London before moving to Glastonbury, Connecticut.

Could Thomas, son of John Lamb of Springfield have been the Thomas who was a witness to Ann Lamb’s buying back the apprenticeship of Ebenezer? If this Thomas was the brother of Ebenezer, then why do we not find a record of birth for one Ebenezer Lamb in Springfield and why would it appear in this document his mother’s name is probably Ann? Most certainly, Ebenezer is over 14 years old when this document was prepared in 1683 indicating he would have been born no later than 1669 when we know Joanna Lamb was still living. Further, we have establish there was a Thomas Lamb granted land in New London which belonged to his father, John Lamb, Deceased. However, if we must conclude from the above John Lamb of Maine and John Lamb of Springfield are two different men, we have to make a choice. I would contend Thomas Lamb, who received the land grant from New London, was the son of John Lamb of Maine and his spouse Ann Lamb and was probably the brother of Ebenezer Lamb because Thomas named one of his sons Ebenezer.[2] 

In summary, the births of the children of John Lamb of Springfield from 1654 to 1674 would seem to confirm he lived in this community continuously between these dates and one record cited above confirms John Lamb of Springfield was the son of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury. Because John was living in Springfield during these years it is highly unlikely he could have simultaneously been a resident of Maine, Springfield, Massachusetts and New London County, Connecticut between the years 1651 to 1674 and movements back and forth between these locations would be highly unlikely. Therefore, one must conclude John Lamb of Maine and John Lamb of Springfield are two different men and John Lamb of Maine who was documented in New London as early as 1664 was not a descendant of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury.


1) New England Marriages Prior to 1700, page 448. "Some Descendants of John Lamb of Springfield, Massachusetts", by Donna Valley Russell, C. G., of Middletown, Maryland, Published in The Detroit Society for Genealogical Research Magazine 48 (1984), pages 33-37.

2) January 25, 1739/40, "John Lamb and Ebenezer Lamb both of Groton for natural affection and love we bare unto Caleb Lamb our Brother of Groton … quit claim … right to tract of land laid out to our Honoured Father Thomas Lamb late of Groton deceased for his second division in the Common land as may appear by a survey 26 Feb 1730/1 … Dated 25 Jan 1739/40 … Recd 8 Jun 1741 … Signed John X Lamb his marke, Ebenezer Lamb … Wit Humphrey Avery, Samll Morgan." This deed reveals Thomas Lamb died before the date of this transaction and he had two other sons besides John Lamb named Ebenezer and Caleb. Ebenezer was most likely named for the brother of Thomas of the same name who died in 1694 in Norwich. [Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Book 4, page 182]



Page 105


Could Isaac Lamb be the son of John Lamb of Springfield? If Isaac was an undocumented son born after the oldest child and before the last child, then he would have been born between a pair of the children which would not have been impossible. Looking at the births of the children and assuming all of the children were carried to full term, he could have been an undocumented son born between births as follows:

• The first John was born February 20, 1653/54 and the twins, John & Thomas were born May 15, 1655 indicating Isaac couldn’t have been born between these births.

• Joanna, born September 20, 1657 was conceived in December of 1666 making it is possible an undocumented son could have been born between the twins and Joanna as late as November of 1666 and as early as March of the same year.

• Sarah, born June 15, 1660, was conceived in September of 1659 making it possible for a son to have been born between Joanna and Sarah as late as August of 1659 and as early as July of 1658.

• Samuel, born September 28, 1663, was conceived in December of 1662 making it possible for a son to have been born between Sarah and Samuel as late as November of 1662 and as early as April of 1661.

• Daniel, born November 24, 1666 was conceived in February of 1665/6, Making it possible for a son to have been born between Samuel and Daniel as late as January of 1665/6 and as early as June of 1664.

• Mary, born July 19, 1669 was conceived in October of 1668, making it possible for a son to have been born between Daniel and Mary as late as September of 1668 and as early as August of 1667.

• Abigail, born September 20, 1670 was conceived in December of 1669 making it impossible for a son to have been born between Mary and Abigail.

• Joshua, born October 3, 1674 was conceived in January of 1673/4 making it possible a son could have been born between Abigail and Joshua as late as December of 1673 and as early as July of 1671.

All of these possible intervals for the birth of a son to John and Joanna would be within our range of dates for the birth of Isaac. However, if Isaac was born to this couple in one of the above intervals, how do we explain his not being documented? The births of his children were faithfully recorded and one would presume a record of Isaac’s birth would have been found if it existed. Another reason to wonder why this birth or baptism wasn’t recorded is the discovery John Lamb of Springfield was assigned the fifth seat in the Church. Congregationalist Churches during the early years in New England arranged the pews in the meeting house to reflect the local hierarchy of family wealth and status.[1] It would seem unlikely the birth or baptism of one of John’s children would go unnoticed or not be recorded if his position within the Church was highly regarded which is quite apparent from the pew he was assigned and the status in that community of the men with whom he shared the fifth pew.

The above analysis would rather strongly suggest John Lamb of Springfield was not the same John Lamb who appears in the New London County Records as early as 1664 and although John Lamb of Springfield would most certainly be a likely candidate to be Isaac‘s father, records have not been located which would support he had a son named Isaac. Because of the questions raised in this discussion, I would conclude it improbable John Lamb of Springfield is John Lamb of Maine nor was he the father of Isaac unless documents can be found to prove otherwise.


Could John Lamb of Maine be a descendant of Edward Lamb of Watertown?

Edward Lamb was first reported living in Watertown, Massachusetts in 1633. The name of his wife was Margaret and they had children named Hannah, born December 27, 1633, Mary, born September 10, 1635 who died soon after, Samuel, born April 3, 1637, another Mary, born April 30, 1639, Twins named John and Increase, born February 13, 1640/1, who both died within a week. After the birth of these last recorded children or at a later time, Edward moved to Boston where a daughter, Elizabeth, was baptized August 27, 1648 when she was 11 days old.[2] Edward Lamb died after August, 27, 1648 and before October 16, 1650. His widow married Samuel Allen for on the latter date the General Court granted administration on the estate of Edward Lamb to Samuel Allen, so that "a certain house" might be sold to Thomas Boyden, the petition for administration made by "Margaret Allen, late wife of Edward Lamb."[3]


1) American Colonies, The Settling of America, by Alan Taylor, published by Penguin in 2002, page 341.

2) James Savage Publication.

3) "The Great Migration Begins: Immigrants to New England, 1620 - 1633"; by Robert Charles Anderson; New England Historic Genealogical Society, Massachusetts; 1995 (974.A549 LAPL) (F7.G74 1995 CSL). Volume II, page 1151-2.]



Page 106


Some researchers have suggested John Lamb of Maine could have been a son of Edward. However, this would not be possible for Savage reported there was a son named John, the twin of Increase, born February 13, 1640/1 who died soon after his birth which strongly suggest if there was a later son born to Edward and Margaret whom they named John he couldn’t have been born before February of 1641/2 making him no older then nine in 1651 when John Lamb of Maine appeared in the Kittery, Maine Court. Therefore, we can say with certainty that John Lamb of Maine was not a son of Edward Lamb. Because of the gap in the Savage recorded births between the twins and Elizabeth, one could say there may have been other children born to Edward and Margaret and cannot rule out there may have been a second son named John. Records in Braintree, Massachusetts would seem to confirm Edward had a son named John, for a John Lamb is well documented in this community. Margaret, the widow of Edward Lamb, married second Samuel Allen of Braintree and she would have most certainly moved there with the underage children of Edward Lamb.[1] We can also say with certainty that John Lamb of Braintree and John Lamb of Maine were two different men. 

However, on May 12, 1703, a man named John Lamb of Stonington, New London County, Connecticut prepared his Last Will & Testament and the existence of this document has created some confusion for many present day Lamb family researchers. Some have concluded, incorrectly, the John Lamb of Maine and the John Lamb who made this will were the same person but documents conclusively reveal they are two different gentlemen. This Last Will & Testament named a wife, Lidiah, sons named Joseph and David, both underage, and a son named John, and reported he had seven daughters, the four eldest, apparently being children of an earlier wife not named of which one is named Margaret who was to receive 30 shillings.[2]

Records in Braintree report John Lamb and his spouse, Mary, had children named John, born November 5, 1677, Margaret, born February 26, 1678, twins named Grace and Mary, born October 15, 1680, Hannah, born October 19, 1683, and Samuel, born February 17, 1686. Apparently, Mary died soon after the birth of Samuel, because in "Records of the First Church of Braintree", Samuel was shown as a son of John Lamb and no mother was listed.  He was baptized April 17, 1687. Braintree records show John had children with his second spouse, Lydia, named Joseph, born June 25, 1690 and Jemimah, born June 14, 1693. The birth of another daughter, Jemima, was not recorded in Braintree records; however, she was baptized the 24th day of the 2nd month 1692 at the First Church of Braintree.  Thus, she died sometime before the 1693 birth.[3]

The records in Braintree provide us with several clues to the possible identity of John Lamb of Stonington who made his will in May of 1703. First, the name of his wife was Lidiah which can be compared to the second spouse named Lydia in Braintree who gave birth to Joseph, who would have been an underage male in 1703. By his first wife, Mary, he had a son named John, the name John also appearing in the will and he gives 30 shillings to Margaret which is the same name of one of his four daughters he had with Mary in Braintree.


1) The publication, "The Great Migration Begins," reports "That there was a son [Of Edward Lamb] named John who survived, probably born in the late 1640’s, is based upon several pieces of circumstantial evidence. First, there was a John Lamb who married in Braintree about 1677 Mary (French) Poole, widow of Samuel Poole (NEHGR 12:353). Second, the widow of Edward Lamb remarried to Samuel Allen of Braintree. Third, John Lamb had among his children a son named Samuel and a daughter Margaret, possibly named for his Mother and Stepfather."

2) FHL Film #1311924 New London CT Probate Records Item 2 Book A and Item 3 Book B, page 248 & 253.

Probate Record of John Lamb of Braintree

Page 248, Inventory: Inv of John Lamb of Stonington who deceased the 10th of Jan 1703/4. Inv taken 26 Jan 1703/4 by William Billins and John Safford. John Safford overseer of the last will & testament of John Lamb late of Stonington deceased personally appeared at a Preogative Court held in New London June the 7th 1704 … Recorded in the Book of Wills fol. 39 Sept 20th 1704.

Page 253, Will of John Lamb: 12 May 1703 John Lamb of Stoningtown … wife Lidiah… son Joseph under age… son David under age… son John …but if my son John never return again then that part of my Land to return unto Joseph and David Lamb to be divided equally….my seven daus: four eldest daus, Margrat having already recd 30s … also the reson why I have given no more to my four eldest daus is as followeth: there mother dieing while they were young they were brought up by their unkels and also have received all that was there mothers. Signed: John Lamb. Wit: Jonathan Tracy, Jons Renalls, Sarah Denison. Ack: 7 Jun 1704. Recd in the Book of Wills fol 38 this 31 Aug 1704. Codicil: John Lamb of Stonington … it is to be understood that I do give unto my sons Joseph and David all the lands on the west side of the Brook … and my son John Lamb the other part that is on the east side of the brook … appoint beloved friends William Billins and John Safford overseers 9 Jan 1703. Signed: John Lamb. 

Wit: John Renalls, Hopstill H Silen? His mark, Abygall Ranalls. John and Abigail Renolds personally appeared at a Court of Probate held in New London june the 7th 1704 … Recd in the 3rd Book of Wills fol. 38 the 31 Nov 1704.

3) Source 1: "Records of the Town of Braintree", Pg 654, 662, 663, and 669. Source 2: NEHGR Vol. 59, Pg 271.  [Note:  Per the Julian calendar, the baptism date for Jemima was April 24th, 1692.]



Page 107


As additional confirmation, on October 17, 1695, John Lamb of Stonington purchased 100 acres in Stonington from Thomas and Jane Holbrook of Braintree, Massachusetts[1] and records in Braintree report a baptism "18th of 8th month 1696 Sarah, daughter of John and Lydia Lamb."[2] Other records in Stonington reveal that David Lamb, son of Jno Lamb, was baptized by Reverend Treat April of 1699 who would certainly be the underage David mentioned in the Will.[3] Because of the similarities in the names of children in the will and those born in Braintree and Stonington to John Lamb, one must conclude the John Lamb who made his will in Stonington in May of 1703 was John Lamb of Braintree.

On November 26, 1694, this Groton, New London County deed states "…that I John Colver ye Eldest Son of sd Edward Colver Deceased do Confirm unto Thomas Lamb ye Eldest son of ye sd John Lamb of New London Deceased …"[4] This document clearly reveals there was a John Lamb living in New London before the date of this document who had a son named Thomas who was his eldest son. The property mentioned was purchased from Edward Culver December 23, 1664, as revealed earlier in this text, indicating the deceased John Lamb in this document was John Lamb of Maine. Because of this document, we can say with certainty John Lamb of Maine was deceased well before May 12, 1703, the day John Lamb of Braintree made his will and was also deceased before October 17, 1695, when a John Lamb of Stonington purchased property from Thomas and Jane Holbrook of Braintree, Massachusetts.

We can not completely dismiss John Lamb of Braintree as Isaac’s father for if he was born after 1641 and before 1648, then he was 21 years old sometime between the years 1662 and 1669 which is within the range we’ve established for Isaac’s birth. However, the first recorded date of birth of a child by John Lamb of Braintree was John, born November 5, 1677. This would indicate John Lamb of Braintree most likely didn’t marry until about 1675, unless there are children born earlier who were not documented. If Isaac were a son born before John, his possible birth would have been in the later part of our range. A more compelling argument against Isaac being a son of John Lamb of Braintree would be the knowledge Isaac was living in Stonington when John Lamb of Braintree made his will in Stonington in 1703. If Isaac was the son of John Lamb of Braintree, living in the same neighborhood, why wouldn’t his name also be included in the will? The other sons were mentioned, even his son John Lamb, who appears to be dead, missing, or traveling. Considering there is no proof of birth or baptism of Isaac indicating John Lamb of Braintree is his father, these arguments, although most certainly circumstantial, are valid enough to cause one to question John Lamb of Braintree is Isaac’s father.

Therefore, the above documentation provides conclusive proof that John Lamb of Maine, living in New London as early as 1664, was deceased by the time John Lamb of Braintree moved to New London around 1694/5 and we can again say with certainty they were two different men.


Which of the John Lambs could be the father of Isaac?

John Lamb of Maine would seem to be the most likely candidate to be Isaac’s father at first glance because he was living in New London before we see the first record of Isaac in that place. We know the eldest son of John Lamb of Maine was named Thomas and in another record, dated December 10, 1695, Thomas assigned the Edward Culver property he was granted by New London to his younger brother, Samuel Lamb. The deed states "Thomas Lamb of New London, Eldest Son to my Late father John Lamb of New London Deceased do for good & valuable considerations … assign over unto my Loving Brother Samll. Lamb of New London all my right title & interest of this deed of sale as it is mentioned on the other side to ye said Samll. Lamb … 10 Dec 1695. Signed: Thomas TL Lamb his marke. Wit: Daniel Wetherell, John Clerk. Ack: 10 Dec 1695 : and recd 13 Apr 1721."[5]

The timeline for John Lamb of Maine would most certainly indicate he could have had a son named Isaac during the window years we’ve established for Isaac’s birth, and it would also seem quite possible the birth was not documented, for we cannot find records of birth or baptism for Thomas or Samuel Lamb. From the timelines of John Lamb of Maine and his sons named Thomas and Samuel Lamb, we have been able to learn Thomas Lamb had brothers named Ebenezer and Samuel, Thomas' father’s name was John, and the name of Thomas' mother was Ann. Ebenezer died in 1694 at Norwich and in 1695, Thomas inherited property in New London from his father which he deeded to his brother Samuel. Samuel apparently married Marcy Unknown and was involved in several deed transactions before moving from New London around 1721. No documents have been found identifying the names of Samuel’s children, which may be listed in the place he moved to in 1721. Thomas had sons named John, Ebenezer, and Caleb. The name of the wife of Thomas is not known and we can presume Thomas named John and Ebenezer after his father and brother. When we compare these names to those of Isaac’s children, we find Isaac named his sons Daniel and Jacob. Except for naming a daughter Ann, there appears to be no similarity in the children’s names, which is most unusual for that period.


1) "Stonington, Connecticut Deeds", Vol. 2, Pg 346.

2) NEHGR Vol. 59, Pg 273 [Note: Using the Julian calendar in 1696, this date would be interpreted as October 18th,1696.]

3) Source: Card file, Connecticut State Library, Hartford, CT

4) Recorded in Book 1, page 743 of the Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Books.

5) Recorded in Book 1, page 744 of the Groton, New London County, Connecticut Deed Books.



Page 108


The records presented do reveal Isaac interacted with Thomas and Samuel Lamb. They lived adjacent to each other after Isaac purchased the property of his son-in-law and participated in the activities of the Baptist movement along with the Stark and Wightman families and all three seem to have had a close relationship with the Culver Families. When we say John Lamb of Braintree is most likely the son of Edward Lamb and his spouse Margaret because of place and the fact he named a daughter Margaret, can we not say the same for Isaac and his association with Thomas and Samuel? Although no documentation reveals these three men are brothers, in the documentation we do find Isaac associated with the sons of John Lamb of Maine and Ann Lamb. Would it not be possible Isaac is the son of John and Ann Lamb?

In all of the documentation presented thus far, Isaac doesn’t appear to be associating with family members of the John Lamb of Braintree who moved to New London in 1696. However, one thing appears to be true, if Isaac was a brother of Thomas and Samuel, he was most certainly better educated. It is possible Isaac could be a son of one of the other sons of Thomas Lamb of Roxbury or Edward Lamb of Watertown, but extensive research of these men would seem to show the possibility to be rather remote.



Until a record can be found of Isaac’s birth or a document which reveals he is a relative of one of the Lamb families of New England, there is no positive proof of his parentage nor is the circumstantial evidence strong enough for us to assign his parentage with any degree of accuracy. Although many researchers have attempted to assign parentage, it is quite clear from the above, Isaac cannot be the child of all three of the John Lambs presented in this text and until proof is forthcoming of his parentage, all researchers should refrain from assigning his ancestry until more proof becomes available.

Without documentation, we must conclude Isaac Lamb was either a late migrant from England to New England or he lived in Massachusetts before moving to New London County. Extensive research in these locations may lead to answers to Isaac’s activities before 1694. In closing, I must conclude Isaac’s parentage is most likely not solvable until more evidence can be found of his earlier activities.



Top of Page


Other than that work created by other acknowledged contributors or sources, the articles and genealogical data presented in this publication were derived from the research of Clovis LaFleur; Copyright © 2007. All rights are reserved. The use of any material on these pages by others will be discouraged if the named contributors, sources, or Clovis LaFleur have not been acknowledged.


This publication and the data presented is the work of Clovis LaFleur. However, some of the content presented has been derived from the research and publicly available information of others and may not have been verified. You are responsible for the validation of all data and sources reported and should not presume the material presented is correct or complete.


[Return to Top]