| 
 
  1618 - 1688 
 
 
Home   
Search   
Print   
Login   
Add Bookmark
 
 
| Suffix | Jr. |  
| Birth | 1618 | Preston Capes,Rodborough,Gloucestershire,England   |  
| Gender | Male |  
| Died | 15 Apr 1688 | Springfield,Hampden,Massachusetts   |  
| Person ID | I97316 | Brainard (Brainerd) / Foster / Fish |  
| Last Modified | 04 Jun 2005 00:00:00 |  |  |  
| Father | Thomas BLISS, b. Abt 1588, Painswick,Perh,Gloucestershire,England   |  
| Mother | Margaret Lawrence HULINS, (Hulinges), b. 15 Jul 1595, of Rodborough, Gloucestershire, England   |  
| Family ID | F42468 | Group Sheet |  |  |  
| Family | Elizabeth BIRCHARD, b. 1 Nov 1621, Belstone, County Devon, England   |  
| Married | 30 Oct 1644 | Lyme,New London,Connecticut   |  
| Children | 
|  | 1. Elizabeth BLISS, b. 20 Nov 1645, ,Saybrook,Middlesex,Connecticut  |  |  | 2. Mary BLISS, b. 7 Feb 1649, Saybrook,Saybrook,Middlesex,Connecticut  |  |  | 3. Thomas BLISS, b. 3 Mar 1652, Saybrook,Middlesex,Connecticut  |  |  | 4. Elizabeth BLISS, b. 20 Nov 1654, Saybrook,Ct  |  |  | 5. Deliverance BLISS, b. 10 Aug 1655, Saybrook,Saybrook,Middlesex,Connecticutt  |  | > | 6. Samuel BLISS, b. 9 Dec 1657, Saybrook,Middlesex,Ct  |  |  | 7. Anne BLISS, b. 15 Sep 1660, Norwich,Norwich,New London,Connecticutt  |  | > | 8. Rebecca BLISS, b. 18 Mar 1663, Norwich,New London,Connecticut  |  |  
| Family ID | F34750 | Group Sheet |  |  | 
| Notes | 
He was at Hartford with his father and shortly after his father's death, hemoved to Saybrook.
 
 !History of Norwich, Connecticut: From its Possession by the Indians, to the
 Year 1866, Frances Manwaring Caulkins, 1976, page 167:  Thomas Bliss, Senior
 and Junior, had house-lots and divisions of land in Hartford, as early as 1640.
 The senior died in Hartford, leaving nine children, and his widow, Margaret,
 apparently a woman of resolute, independent character, removed with the younger
 part of the family to Springfield.  Thomas Bliss, Junior, is afterwards found
 at Saybrook, where his marriage and the births of six children are recorded.
 The list is repeated with some variation of date and the addition of two more
 children, at Norwich.  The wife's family name is not given in either place.
 "Thomas and Elizabeth Bliss were married the latter end of October, 1644."
 The allotments of Thomas Bliss in Saybrook were eastward of the river in
 what is now Lyme.  His house-lot of thirty acres lay between John Ompsted
 (Olmstead) on the north, and John Lay south.  He sold it, July 23, 1662, to
 John Comstock.  His home-ot in Norwich was also near to that of John Olmstead,
 extending originally, at the north-west, to the pent highway.  That part where
 the house stands, has never been alienated.  Seven generations have dwelt on
 the same spot, and the house is supposed not to have been entirely rebuilt
 since it wa erected by the first proprietor.
 Thomas Bliss died April 15, 1688.  His will, executed two days before his
 death, was proved at New London, before Edward Palmes, June 13, and allowed by
 Sir Edmun Adross at Boston; this being the period when that delegated despot
 arrogated to himself supreme authority over the courts of New England.  The
 will recognizes wife Elizabeth, son Samuel, and six daughters.  His oldest son,
 Thomas, had died without issue, Jan. 29, 1681.  Elizabeth the relict, died Feb.
 28, 1699-1700.
 Samuel Bliss married, Dec. 8, 1681, Anna, daughter of John Elderkin.  Five
 of his daughters married as follows:  Elizabeth married Edward Smith of New
 London, June 7, 1663.  Sarah married 1st, Thomas Sluman, Dec., 1668; 2d,
 Solomon Tracy.  Deliverance (recorded also Deliver and Dolinda) married Josiah
 Rockwell, 1688.  Rebecca, the youngest daughter, born in 1663, had not been
 traced.
 In the inventory of Thomas Bliss, his estate is estimated at 182.17.7
 pounds.  He had land, besides his home-lot, over the river, - on the Little
 Plain, - at the Great Plain, - at the Falls, - in Yantie meadow, - in meadow at
 Beaver Brook, - in pasture east of the town, - and on Westward hill.
 This illustrated the prudential course of the early rulers of the
 plantation in regard to the common lands.  They were divided in small
 quantities at short intervals, corresponding to the growth and necessities of
 the town and the ability of the owners to clear them up and place them under
 cultivation.
 |  |  |  
 |