I am re-posting this for archives as I failed to re-format into "plain-text" for proper posting earlier today... CORRECTION: I incorrectly typed in name "Staploe" for wife of yet one more "James & Elizabeth" pairing (the 4th one) I found from lists given me by Eltisley historian Mike Sawyer. This surname should have been "NAPLE" for that additional JAMES/ELIZABETH Disbrowe at Eltisley, married "23rd Jan 1639," as I indicated in previous post "Carl: Sorry, No Go" Anna "Staplooe" married to "John Disbrowe" 1st Nov. 1636, from a listing immediately above my mistaken transcription! RE: Further explanation of ONE goal for my book project: I want to encourage Carl Dunn to "hang in there" with this debate and with his stunning analysis as to which Eltisley family Thomas Disbrow(e) may belong. This is the first good debate on this List in my memory and could NOT be of greater importance to my own project, as well as to the general history of the family (as I'm sure most List members agree!). Since I do not happen to agree with most of CarI's previous arguments just posted on this question, that does NOT mean there is NO merit to his overall speculations, which certainly DO have merit. I am, therefore, continuing my own accelerated examination of "confusing" Elizabeth Disbrow(e) wives: maiden named "HATLEY" & "MARSHALL," which names also certainly raise these issues directly. I will have something more on this, by way of Carl's speculations, very soon and he may NOT be disappointed. Meanwhile, this current "back & forth" has stimulated me to dig out my box of thick VR source material collected from micro-films at public library, "downtown" Cambridge, last December. I reviewed this material as copied then and also once just after my return, finding nothing immediately "startling." However, this was meant as a living resource (to "live" with) and not just to store away, & for my continued review now anticipating a return trip to England (made now more important in light of our debate and Carl Dunn's very new directions for us to go in). I, for one, have made the mistake recently of relying too heavily on the accepted "givens" from secondary family & historic resources: the past researchers & that 18th "history" by Mark Noble. The Dictionary of National Biography, for example, even while citing Noble's "Protectoral House of Cromwell" for General Disbrowe's late 19th/early 20th c. article, also said that resource was "full of the grossest errors." Meanwhile my history research also was indicating that their own long published article on the General (& even their "additions & corrections" of this article published in 1965!) was, itself, full of the grossest 'bias,' clearly inherited from a too long, past era of royalist "demonization" of the General. The General had been vilified, & for long after the Restoration, even along lines of the witchcraft-type persecution of my own Mercy Disbrow! This was evident in several contemporary 17th c. published pamphlets I collected at the British Library (to be dealt with in my book). All of this too is a lesson for me/us always to "check primary source" material whenever possible (& to constantly re-check it since NEW patterns constantly emerge in light of new information!). My book project about Mercy Disbrow's 1692 CT witch trial has, in part, also been dependent upon a significant new orientation in the "historiography" of the early settlement era, especially at CT and New Haven Colonies. This re-orientation is as Kevin Phillips has also outlined it in his recent book: "The Cousins Wars" (though I had already begun to see explicitly this same "startling" pattern in my research long before learning of his book!). This pattern presents the long overlooked notion that the American Revolution was the inevitable outgrowth of the settlement of New England by all those rabble rousing anti-monarchists of 17th century olde England (and specifically of its "Puritan Revolution," one significant leader of which was "our" Major General John Disbrow!). I have felt certain that this "notion" also must explain all those dozen or more CT/NY Disbrows who served as "loyal" patriots in the American Revolution (& "loyal" it would seeem to the "Good Old Cause" of our famous Major General!)! Author H. F. McMains wrote in 2000, when describing poet Andrew Marvell in the book "The Death of Oliver Cromwell," how the word "patriot" originally began in the era of this 17th c."Puritan Revolution" and to "denote monarchies critics"! This fact, among other such, is inevitably pregnant with meaning for us... So then, this debate will have very important consequences for me since I have most certainly began to see the pattern of southern New England settlement in just such terms of this new historiography in now re-considering the influence of Cromwellians directly in early American history. I too have discovered countless examples of immediate/extended family members closely allied to influential Cromwellians among settlers of southern New England, specifically, only some yet outlined on this LIST. There is, for example, that of Cromwell's nephew, a Col. John Cromwell (believe he was without checking my notes), himself settled in Westchester County, New York by 1660's (just after the Restoration) not far from our two significant Disbrows there: Henry & Peter, who themselves are otherwise associating with interesting families! Other examples include the author of "History of the Colony of New Haven" (1838), Edward R. Lambert, whose ancestor Jesse settled at Milford in 1680 (just about the time my Thomas Disbrow settled at nearby Fairfield too), claims an extended family relationship to General John Lambert, a close political ally to General John Disbrow back in England. I will soon post several interesting "new" findings re: extended Strickland families, with their direct & intimate association with TWO CT area Disbrows (Henry & Nicholas) and then also with Major General John Disbrow via Stricklands at the highest councils of English government. I am currently tracking down an IGI report that John Strickland also was married to a "Jane Fenwick," claimed to be the dau. of that George Fenwick I posted recently as associating with Samuel Disbrowe in Scotland, and who was founding settler at Saybrook too, etc, etc, much/much more likewise. So saying, I was disappointed on my last trip to England NOT to have collected virtually any new information on Thomas Disbrow's career in England as I should expect would be there if he was prominently well-connected. There was nothing for example at the National Army Museum in London, which perhaps is NOT very surprisingly since they had very little anyway as to army roster/muster lists for the Commonwealth forces---"royalist bias" undoubtedly having done its work even after these intervening centuries!). While I also did not find anything to upset the Thomas Disbrowe of Eltisley "apple cart,"...it is ALSO very important to find out more about such of Mike Disbrow's alternative "Thomas Disbrows" as that one he lists for 1657: "tailor of Kings Lynne, Norfolk, left a will. (index to P.C.C Wills 1657-60, VIII, per Donald W. Disbrow)" from Mikes v. I, p. 19. Perhaps someone may have already collected this will or abstract, & can kindly post it here, or otherwise pass on to me in fairness for my project objectivity... Kings Lynn, BTW, turns out to have particular significance since Lynn, MA (which some believe may have been named for the English Norfolk town, & is also place in England where a "Captain John Mason" of New Hampshire was born,...CT Masons also very closely associated with Fitch who are related by marriage to Samuel Disbrowe too, ...whew!). I'm delighted to see in "stored" VR resources I copied that Eltisley is very well covered in official "Bishop's Transcripts" from Cambridge Library. These transcripts do not diverge in any 'vital' ways crucial to my previously posted arguments: derived then from lists I reported via village historian Mike Sawyer. BTW, these records also interestingly report a Joane "Pumfrett" m. William "MYCHELL. Recall too that "Pomfret" is surname noted in a Disbrowe will just discussed ("John Disborowe the younger" 1610, believed father of JAMES of our debate) and another "Pomfret" (Miles) who m. Eliz. Disborowe at Saffron Walden, place of those "other" somehow related Disbrowes (eg: Nicholas of Hartford, CT too). Mitchells of unknown relation to many Mitchells in Eltisley record were associating with both the Cambridge Mass. Shepard/Stricklands and also these same Mitchells with Coes/Disbrows at Westrchester Co., NY (such is just the sort of information I have been too feebly trying to track down). Other interesting surnames in 17th c. Eltisley records: Stow, Chapman Woodward, Russell, Marshall, Hall, Pecke, Greene, Wells, Ward, Stocker, Johnson, Browne, Crowch, Carrington, Cooper, Ludloe, Squire(!!), Andrus/Andrews, Taylor, Gray, Bull, Barnes...for such a tiny village it has an impressive roll-call of names for most of the 17th c., aho also turn up in southern NEW England! More on the OVER & Burrough Green material as I can find time soon... STSquires