Note: The Rootsweb Mailing Lists will be shut down on April 6, 2023. (More info)
RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 1/1
    1. [CARPENTER] Re: Request [English Ancestry of the Rehoboth Carpenters]
    2. << Would appreciate any info on Following: William Carpenter, born Nov 22 1631; William Carpenter, born May 23, 1605; Richard Carpenter, 1575; Richard Carpenter 1535; Wiliam Carpenter, abt 1510; John Carpenter, 1494. Thanks, John Chears>> The birth date of the first-listed William Carpenter (generally referred to as William3 of Rehoboth) is unknown; 22 Nov. 1631 is his baptismal date. Neither a birth nor baptismal date has been confirmed for his father (William2 of Rehoboth); a calculated birth year of *about* 1605--based on his age (33) as recorded on the BEVIS passenger list on 2 May 1638--is all we have. The father of William2 of Rehoboth was not Richard but William1 of Shalbourne, Wiltshire/Berkshire, and the BEVIS (not to be confused with William1 of Providence, whose father was Richard of Amesbury, Wiltshire); William1's age is given on the BEVIS passenger list as 62, producing a calculated birth year of *about* 1576. The importance of treating these calculated birth years as nothing more than approximations is brought home by the fact that while the age of William2's wife, Abigail (Briant), is given on the BEVIS passenger list as 32, the record of her baptism (at Shalbourne, on 27 May 1604) indicates that she was actually 34 or within days of being so. THE PARENTAGE OF WILLIAM1 CARPENTER OF THE BEVIS HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. It is often said that his father was Robert (not Richard) Carpenter (d. Marden, Wiltshire, 1607), but this is based on the unsubstantiated claim that William1 of the BEVIS and Richard Carpenter of Amesbury (see above) were brothers; Marden's proximity to Amesbury (about 10 air miles); and the fact that among Robert's legatees were sons William and Richard (not the most distinctive names) and a grandson William (through which of his five sons is unknown). This hardly constitutes genealogical proof. While the extensive ancestry claimed for William1 breaks down at many points, what matters at present is that the very first link in the chain--Robert of Marden--simply cannot withstand scrutiny. Only when/if William1's parentage is identified will there be good reason to investigate earlier generations--one at a time. Gene Z.

    03/13/2004 07:44:16