Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
Bruce:
<< Where can I view an example of William's handwriting? I assume you have
an example from your statement. Could you JPEg me something? >>
I have a superb, lengthy example of William2's handwriting from the Rhode
Island Historical Society's manuscript collection--much clearer than his
entries in Rehoboth records. The page, however, is oversized, and to scan it all,
I'll first have to go to the copy shop and make a copy of reduced size. In
the meantime, I'll send you a partial copy that includes the statement that
the original document is "in the hand and Custodie of mee William Carpenter of
Rehoboth" and that he made the copy for William Carpenter of Pawtuxet (one of
four parties of the second part including William of Rehoboth) for his
"ashourance."
<< First you doubt that William could write at all and then you tell me
below that you have examples of his handwriting and he was Town Clerk. >>
No, I doubt that William1 ("ye elder," as he is described in Thomas
Wisemans's will) could write and am certain that Wiseman's inventory is in a hand
other than that of William2 (whom you had proposed as the one who wrote it).
<< Then you mention the third person in the inventory who appears to have
been Wiseman's "wife." She certainly didn't pen the document. >>
I have yet to see an inventory in which one of the appraisers is a woman,
let alone the decedent's widow. As executrix or administratrix, she would
swear to its accuracy, but that's all. It was a conflict of interest for anyone
who stood to receive a portion of the decedent's estate to participate in its
itemization/valuation. But more to the point, Wiseman's wife was named
Elizabeth (see his will). The reference to the third appraiser, which you read
as "wife," is a forename beginning "ruf-" or "rus-" (lower-case "r"); the
surname, immediately below and slightly to the left of this, ends "-ptan,"
perhaps "-uptan."
<< If people like Pearson were perfectly capable of scripting a will, why
coult't they script an inventory? Why does there have to be someone else? >>
I never said there had to be someone else. I said it could just as easily
have been someone else as one of those who took the inventory.
<< However your implied point that the calligrapher might have been William
Carpenter Sr. is well taken. >>
I implied no such thing. I contended that the William Carpenter named with
vicar Rowland Hill in 1628 as Thomas Wiseman's overseer was also the church
warden of that name ("Crpener" or, more likely, "Crpentr") who had signed by
mark the 1628 glebe terrier, and that this was William1. Implied (if I
didn't say it outright) was that inventory-taker William Carpenter was the same
man. I don't believe for a moment that either William1 (who couldn't write)
or William2 (whose handwriting is significantly different) penned the
inventory.
<< Thanks for your reference to "the elder." I had missed it entirely. This
would indicate the the inventory "William Carpenter" could be William sr. >>
It strongly suggests that the William Carpenter named as one of the three
appraisers was "the elder" (i.e., William1), named in the Wiseman will; it
indicates nothing as to who wrote the inventory.
<< The "Glebe Terriers" individual was probably not a William Carpenter. >>
You were quite content to think so until now. If you've altered your
interpretation so as to argue that there's no evidence that William1 was
illiterate, it would help prop up your newly adopted notion that it was William1
Carpenter (rather than William2, your initial choice) who wrote the inventory.
More important, it would remove a major conflict with your Wikipedia pieces
claiming that William1 had been a scribe at Culham Manor Court before arriving at
Shalbourne. But you can't have it both ways: William1 could not have
written the inventory AND have been the Culham man: the inventory's handwriting is
hardly that of a scribe. And if William1 was illiterate, as the glebe
terrier indicates, you don't have it either way: he was neither the Culham scribe
nor the writer of the inventory.
Sorry, Bruce, but I'm going to bed. I'll send you the scan tomorrow.
Gene Z.
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Gene:
Although I do not have the records with me at the moment, my recollection
is that the Carpenters were tenants of Westcourt Manor and Talmidge and a
William Capner (or something close) were tenants of the Eastcourt Manor.
The church served both and Reverend Hill (Hyll) was a witness to documents
of both communities. The "Glebe Terriers" individual was probably not a
William Carpenter. This I will check.
BC
Gene:
Thanks for your reference to "the elder." I had missed it entirely. This
would indicate the the inventory "William Carpenter" could be William sr.
BC
"<< Even if [William Carpenter] had been able to write, he was but one of
three men who took Thomas Wiseman's estate inventory. Either of the
other two
or someone else entirely could just as easily have prepared the inventory's
final draft. >>
Sorry, the last sentence is a misstatement. I had momentarily forgotten
that William Peerson, one of three men who took Thomas Wiseman's estate
inventory and the only witness to his will, appears to be the one who
wrote the
latter document; its handwriting differs significantly from that of the
former.
This, however, scarcely improves the odds that the inventory was prepared by
William Carpenter "ye elder," let alone William Jr., who, as Rehoboth town
and proprietors' clerk from 1643 to 1649, wrote in a discernibly
different hand.
Gene Z."
Gene:
First you doubt that William could write at all and then you tell me below
that you have examples of his handwriting and he was Town Clerk. Then you
mention the third person in the inventory who appears to have been
Wiseman's "wife." She certainly didn't pen the document. If people like
Pearson were perfectly capable of scripting a will, why coult't they
script an inventory? Why does there have to be someone else? Again, the
problem of who composes inventories and related problems is still unclear.
And yes, of course, someone else could have penned the inventory. But whu
didn't someone else pen the will? However your implied point that the
calligrapher might have been William Carpenter Sr. is well taken.
BC
Gene:
"who, as Rehoboth town
and proprietors' clerk from 1643 to 1649, wrote in a discernibly
different hand."
Where can I view an example of William's handwriting? I assume you have an
example from your statement. Could you JPEg me something?
Bruce
<< Even if [William Carpenter] had been able to write, he was but one of
three men who took Thomas Wiseman's estate inventory. Either of the other two
or someone else entirely could just as easily have prepared the inventory's
final draft. >>
Sorry, the last sentence is a misstatement. I had momentarily forgotten
that William Peerson, one of three men who took Thomas Wiseman's estate
inventory and the only witness to his will, appears to be the one who wrote the
latter document; its handwriting differs significantly from that of the former.
This, however, scarcely improves the odds that the inventory was prepared by
William Carpenter "ye elder," let alone William Jr., who, as Rehoboth town
and proprietors' clerk from 1643 to 1649, wrote in a discernibly different hand.
Gene Z.
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Donna wrote:
<< Looking over the wills, some mention aliases. As example it may say John
Bell alias Carpenter.
<< Does it mean the persons REAL NAME was Bell or that it was Carpenter? >>
"REAL NAME" is not a useful distinction when an alias was used with (rather
than instead of) another surname. Often, though by no means always,
illegitimacy was behind the use of two names; one was the father's surname, the other
the unmarried mother's. Adopting an alias might be done for reasons other
than illegitimacy (to honor someone, for example), but regardless of the
reason, there doesn't seem to have been an established pattern as to which name
(father's or mother's, original or adopted) came first. A man might be known
by two surnames, one an alias, throughout his life and so might his
descendants; ultimately the word _alias_ might be omitted and the two surnames
combined into a single, hyphenated one.
Gene Z.
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Bruce wrote:
<< The 1628 Wiseman inventory gives every impression (to me) as being an
original document with a notarization at the bottom in another ink and hand. >>
No question about it. The three images of which record P5/1628/104 consists
are of the "original" inventory and will (i.e., those presented to the
court).
<< It would seem that the possibility the inventory was from the hand of
William Carpenter are high. >>
How are we to reconcile this with the signature--by mark--of church warden
William "Crpener" on the 1628 glebe terrier? (The other church warden, John
"Tallmage," also signed by mark; as one would expect, vicar Rowland "Hyll"
signed his name.) That this was someone other than the eventual William1
Carpenter (_Bevis_, 1638) is highly unlikely, particularly in light of the Wiseman
will's naming Mr. Rowland Hill and "Will[ia]m Capender ye elder"--almost
certainly two of the three signatories of the glebe terrier--as his overseers.
William1 Carpenter was unable to put pen to paper except to make his mark.
Even if he had been able to write, he was but one of three men who took Thomas
Wiseman's estate inventory. Either of the other two or someone else entirely
could just as easily have prepared the inventory's final draft.
Gene Z.
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
I looked at wills for long period this morning. My own conclusion is that
the situation was a mixture. Some wills were officially rewritten and some
were kept in their original form and basically notarized at the bottom.
The same for inventories. The 1628 Wiseman inventory gives every
impression (to me) as being an original document with a notarization at
the bottom in another ink and hand. It would seem that the possibility the
inventory was from the hand of William Carpenter are high.
Bruce Carpenter
Clinton, WA
Mandy E. Carpenter, born 21 June 1873 in Mississippi, married Dee C. McNatt
in the early 1900s in Mississippi. Mandy died 21 June 1970 and is buried in
the Hebron Baptist Church Cemetery in Grenada County, Mississippi. She had 7
children. Anyone know who Mandy's parents are? Thanks ~ Gloria
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
I am making an assumption that the individuals who “prize” or valuate the
objects in an inventory are also the individuals who pen the document
itself. In the case of the Wiseman inventory either William Pearson or
William Carpenter might have written the document. If we look at how
“William Pearson” is written on the first page and how it is written as a
signature on the following page, we can conclude that the document on the
whole was not written by Pearson, but rather by Carpenter. I would also
assume that the William Carpenter in the Wiseman inventory is William
Carpenter jr.
Gene Zubrinsky might stick with his original evaluation of the “Glebe
Terriers” problem. From Shalbourne manor documents there is a name that is
extremely close to the “Crpener.” I can clarify this at a later date.
BC
Looking over the wills, some mention aliases. As example it may say
John Bell alias Carpenter.
Does it mean the persons REAL NAME was Bell or that it was Carpenter?
Thanks,
Donna
Once a man is united to God, how could he not live forever?
C. S. Lewis
Someone clarify the following if possible. English wills were as a rule
completely copied. What we see are not the originals. However an inventory
seems to be an original document and the signatures originals. Is this
correct? The John Bryant signature indicates that John scripted the
inventory itself and the document is in his hand.
BC
The signature of John Bryant appears on the inventory of Thomas Winning.
Please beware that will and inventory can be in two separate places in the
will list.
Bruce Carpenter
Please look at image no. 2 for a Thomas Winning of Shalbourne for 1622.
There you will see the bold and nicely scripted signiture of John Brian
(Briant). I do not have my Manor records here in Washington, but I do
recall that John Brian (Briant) was the father of Abagail Briant our
ancestor. Interestingly this sheds a little light on the Briants in that
John was literate. The manor records I have sort out the Briants fairly
well and I will report on this again in September. They had lived in
Shalbourne from Queen Elizabeth's time. John was the son of a William or
vice-versa.
Bruce Carpenter
Clinton, WA
Another point to keep in mind re. the Shalbourne problem is the Alice
Carpenter who died there right before the Carpenter move to Massachusetts.
Gene Zubrinsky rightly concluded their departure and her demise should
have been related. What Gene failed to notice, and I am not trying to be
mean here, is that the only Alice Carpenter in the area lived in the next
town of Hungerford. Hungerford and Shalbourne are basically city and
suburb. Alice’s husband was a Hungerford businessman. The pair had no
children. The Hungerford parish registers are very detailed. There is no
mention of any Carpenter children and no mention of an Alice Carpenter
death. Alice’s husband dies c. 1625/6, the same time as the Carpenter
wedding in Shalbourne. Possibly William jr. may have arrived to settle
down in the area and likewise take care of AUNT Alice. Alice was the wife
of an important town business leader. If she died in town there would have
been a record.
Alice Carpenter and her husband Thomas were likewise late comers to
Hungerford. He was not born there and surely arrived in town for business.
Actually he was a cloth dyer which should not be understood too literally.
Thomas should have had a finger in all aspects of the local cloth
production. An important point is that the local farm people were the
sheep raisers and the weavers. A few were full time weavers. The name
William Carpenter appears in one of the Wilshire wills with a Great Bedwyn
weaver who owed him money. There was a business connection for sure. It
would seem to me that William Carpenter the elder went from town to town
and gathered woven cloth for finishing in Hungerford with his uncle and
associates. That might not be all he did. He might have farmed a bit and
had another trade. Remember the “carpenter” note on the Bevis manifest?
Even a few facts may tell all.
BC
If anyone looks through the Wiltshire wills an discovers an additional
reference besides a 1609 reference to a Robert Carpenter in Shalbourne
please post your finding. From the 1608 document that I introduced the
other day it would seem that the two Williams, possibly plus a relative
named Robert, first arrived in Shalbourne in 1608. Another set of
documents that I own is a very interesting manor survey of 1628ish.
Basically the manor belonged to the infamous Seymour family and due to a
death the property changed hands. A survey was in order. The interesting
point in all this was that the survey noted all family members on the
various properties, but only the two Williams are noted for the Carpenter
property. Thus it would seem that Robert appeared with the two Williams,
stayed for a time and left. It would seem also that the Carpenters did not
make a permanent move to Shalbourne. Other family members were left behind
somewhere else. William jr. may not have stayed in Shalbourne after the
paperwork was completed. In 1608 he was just a baby. Also William sr.
would likely have traveled to and from his main home to Shalbourne.
Another point in the manor documents is that the property William rented
from the Seymours was the legal minimum.
In other words William had enough land for a kitchen garden. My suspicion
is that he wanted just the house because he used it as a base for some
other business. In another document a William Carpenter is owed money by a
Great Bedwyn weaver (next town to Shalbourne). A point to remember is that
William jr. is named in the manor documents because that would give the
Carpenters property rights to the end of William jr's lifetime. Thus we
can be sure William jr. was William sr's youngest child. More later.
BC
Bruce E.,
Please cite web page for image 2.
Please cite web page links or better quotes and cites for the items you are
submitting.
Thank you.
John R. Carpenter
La Mesa, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce E. Carpenter" <carp(a)tezukayama-u.ac.jp>
To: <Carpenter-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: [CARPENTER] DISCOVERY 3
> Please look at image no. 2 for a Thomas Winning of Shalbourne for 1622.
> There you will see the bold and nicely scripted signiture of John Brian
> (Briant). I do not have my Manor records here in Washington, but I do
> recall that John Brian (Briant) was the father of Abagail Briant our
> ancestor. Interestingly this sheds a little light on the Briants in that
> John was literate. The manor records I have sort out the Briants fairly
> well and I will report on this again in September. They had lived in
> Shalbourne from Queen Elizabeth's time. John was the son of a William or
> vice-versa.
>
> Bruce Carpenter
> Clinton, WA
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> CARPENTER-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Gene Z. wrote on or about the 18th of August concerning the "glebe terrier" that listed William 1 Carpenter. He also mentioned Bruce Carpenters "Rehoboth Carpenter Family" in a Wikipedia posting.
This morning on Good Morning America, a segment talked about Wikipedia and how it can be EDITED by almost anyone who choses to do so. I think that we should all be careful of what Wikipedia puts forth as who knows the intent of that particular "editor" and might concern a Carpenter Family.
Doesn't sound as if that is completely trustworthy to me. Interesting to know, at least.
Bette
Hello list,
I just found that my Guy Carlton Carpenter b. 1807 in Chautauqua Co., NY was
the son of Ezra Joneth Carpenter (1769-1842) and Susannah Button b. abt 1876
in NY. Guy Carlton married Polly Smith. I have much descendent information
to share.
Polly Smith's parents were Wheeler Branch Smith and Priscilla Sturdevant. I
have not been able to find my Smith or Sturdevant family lines.
Joyce Carpenter Sharpley
joycesharpley(a)comcast.net
Information
This is the Carpenter Cousins Rootsweb. Since many Zimmermans became Carpenters, Both are discussed here along with related DNA information.