202 AGE OF JOHN LOVEWELL.
and ending in 1733, contained, as I be- lieve, every existing written document relating to the doings of the town and church during that period. I made a careful copy of everything in this book and these papers which I thought could be of any interest in illustrating the do- ings of the town and church or the names and fortunes of the residents and owners of lands in the town.
Col. Ebenezer Bancroft, my mother's father, born April 1, 1738, was then re- siding on his farm in Tyngsboro', the second house south of the State line. I had frequent conversation with him dur- ing my residence in Nashua, as well as in previous years, in which he was fond of relating incidents of the early history of the town and region and of the early inhabitants. The substance of these con- versations I was careful to make minutes of at the time, and to make a record of in the same book. This book is now be- fore me, and I propose to resort to it and other documents in order to contribute my mite towards solving the problem of
��the age of John Lovewell.
I find in the "ministers rate for the year 1686," the names of the tax-payers in town, residents and non-residents. I find no record of the rate in any preced- ing year. In this rate the name of Love- well does not appear, but in the rate for the year 1687 the names of Joseph Love- well and John Lovewell are entered, each rated at seven shillings. No town rate is set against any name, though sev- eral others have the same rates. This is the first appearance of the name in the records. In 1688 John Lovewell, Jr., is one of the surveyors of the highways. In 1689 John Lovewell, Sen., is one of the selectmen. In 1690 Joseph Lovewell is a fence viewer. In 1691 John Love- well is a hog constable. In 1693-4 John Lovewell is a fence viewer. In 1698 John Lovewell is a surveyor of highways. In 1715 John Lovewell is a field driver. In " 1718, Feb. 3, Voted that the selectmen make a Kate of seventy pounds, also that there shall be a committee of five to sarch the town books to see what each proprietors grant was, and that no man might have more than his grant was, and to see that justice be done on that ac-
��count. The committy was Lt. Farwell, John Lovewell, Joseph Blanchard, Jon- athan Robens and Thomas Cummings." I find no entry of the name of Lovewell after this date except in the record of births, which are as follows :
"John Lovewell, son of John Love- well, was born 14th of Oct., 1691, (this was Capt. John Lovewell who was killed at Pequacket), Zacheous Lovewell, son of John and fauna lovewell, was born 22 of July, 1701."
If he was 120 years old in 1754, he was born in 1634 and was 24 years old when Cromwell died in 1658. He might then have been an Ensign in Cromwell's army according to the family tradition, as stated by Fox, but at that early age it is not probable that he was one of the "Ironsides;" and if it was, that circum- stance furnishes no reason why he should flee from his country on the occupation of Charles II., for it was only those who had taken an active part in the adminis- tration of civil affairs, who were exposed to punishment by the new rulers.
Fox states that he settled in town some years before 1690. His deposition, taken in 1744, states that he was an inhabitant in 1680. His name first appeared in the record in 1687. In the record, the name of his wife in one place is Fanna, in an- other Hannah, and in the deposition Anna, all being in fact the same name. The birth of his son Jonathan, the Judge, is entered May 14, 1713. If he was 120 when he died, he was 79, and his wife (by the deposition, ten years younger) 69, when this child was born. That a husband 79 and a wife 69 should at that age have a son born who would be smart enough to become a judge, and who lived until 1792, is incredible.
There is no doubt that Jonathan, the judge, was the son of John, and the brother of Captain John. Fox so states, and Col. Bancroft, who knew him well, so stated to me. Now, bearing in mind that for several years after 1687, there were taking an active part in the town affairs, John Lovewell, Sen., and John Lovewell. Jr., tradition may readily have borrowed some twenty from the years of the son to add to the father.
What additional facts are there that
�� �
