Family History
Barzillai Lew's story began with Primus Lew of Groton, Massachusetts ( a former servant of Captain Jonathan Boyden), and Margret Lew (a former servant of Samuel Scripture). As free-blacks, Primus and Margret Lew married in 1742 and they had two sons and two daughters. Primus served as a musician in the French and Indian War in 1747. In 1752, Primus married again to Rose Canterbury and bought a farm on the west side of Nashua River in the Pepperell section of Groton, Massachusetts and they had two children.
Primus and Margret Lew's oldest son Barzillai (pronounced BAR-zeal-ya) often called "Zeal" or "Zelah," was born a free-black in Groton, Massachusetts November 5, 1743,. Following in his father’s footsteps, Barzillai Lew was a fifer in Captain Thomas Farrington’s Company from Groton, which marched northward for “the total reduction of Canada." From March 10, 1760 to December 1, 1760, he served with the English forces against the French and Indians and was probably present at the capture of Montreal, Canada by the British. Lew was known as "big and strong with an extraordinary talent as a musician."
In the mid-1760s, Lew sold his family farm in the Pepperell section of Groton and moved to Chelmsford, Massachusetts where he worked as a cooper making barrels. About 1766, he bought the freedom of Dinah Bowman (1744–1837), born a slave, who was fair skinned and described as "bleached by the sun," from Major Abraham Blood for 400 pounds (today's value about $28,000) and married her.
Read more about this topic: Barzillai Lew
Famous quotes containing the words family and/or history:
“Being in a family is like being in a play. Each birth order position is like a different part in a play, with distinct and separate characteristics for each part. Therefore, if one sibling has already filled a part, such as the good child, other siblings may feel they have to find other parts to play, such as rebellious child, academic child, athletic child, social child, and so on.”
—Jane Nelson (20th century)
“To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)