Bear in mind that some genealogical researchers question some of the statements of this work about the earliest generations of this family. For one example, although the surname of Deacon Samuel's wife is baldly given as Orcutt (possibly cribbed from the often unreliable "History of the Early Settlement of Bridgewater"), she was likely Susanna Bickley, aunt of William Orcutt of Bridgewater, whose marriage to Samuel Edson on 01-Mar-1638 is recorded in the parish registers of Holy Trinity Church, Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, England.
For another example, the births of Deacon Samuel's children are given with approximate years (except for Susanna, given as "born 1640"), but no evidence is given to support the birth order or those years.
In his will [Plymouth Co. Probate Old Series case #7152, no file papers; records 1:143-144] his sons are twice named as Samuel, Joseph and Josiah, and once named as "my Eldest son Samuel Edson ... my other two sons Joseph Edson and Josiah Edson." His daughters are named as "Elizabeth Susanna Sarah Mary and Bethiah." In New England at that time it was common for a man's will to list his children, first the sons and then the daughters, in birth order within each group. Approximate years derived from other contemporary records support a birth order consistent with the will, and differing from that given in the book.
As with any genealogical work I would suggest questioning all statements not supported by citations to contemporary records or reasoning based upon cited contemporary records, and I would further suggest verifying all statements with citations of contemporary records by examining those records.
Dale H. Cook, Member, NEHGS and MA Society of Mayflower Descendants;
Plymouth Co. MA Coordinator for the USGenWeb Project
Administrator of
http://plymouthcolony.net