Gene & All,
All Wikipedia articles generally stand alone, with the exception of links to other
articles. Adding a line or paragraph to each indicating a no genetic or genealogical
connection to the Carpenters in America would likely be removed by other editors. It is
difficult to prove a negative without any lack of evidence to the contrary.
Many years ago we went through and eliminated references, comments and such referring
directly or indirectly to any Carpenter related Wikipedia article that did not have a
verified genealogical connection to either of the two William Carpenter immigrants that
came to America in the 1630s. For a few authors this was acrimonious, especially for one
editor regarding the Culham, Oxfordshire article on Wikipedia, which was eventually
cleaned up.
See history at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culham
See also A) below citing this article and which provides support for that which follows.
That said, a recap is occasionally appropriate to newer members.
12/2004: A revised transcription of the WILL OF REV. RICHARD CARPENTER-2781 of Homme,
Herefordshire (bur. Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 1503) indicates that LEGATEE ROBERT was not his
son but his SERVANT. The CARPENTER LINEAGE FROM THIS POINT BACKWARD -- as presented in the
CE CD 2001 and herein -- is thus INVALID.
This is from our old, no longer updated, and unable to update or fix broken links (thank
you
Ancestry.com), web page at:
http://www.genealogy.com/ftm/c/a/r/John-R-Carpenter/index.html – Further down this cited
page are ...
a.. NEW Update Dec 2004 - English Line Nullified! (3 KB)
The Carpenter English ancestry has been proven to have many errors in it.Please read this
important Carpenter Family Update.Dec 2004.
a.. Handwritten Will of Robert Carpenter-14708 (576 KB)
Handwritten Will of Robert Carpenter-14708 AKA Robert of Marden. This is a copy of the
will sent by Gene Zubrinsky of Ojai, CA. He provided the copy this was made from.
a.. Will of Rev. Richard Carpenter who died in 1503 (402 KB)
This is the will of the Rev. Richard Carpenter who died in 1503.Careful reading will show
that the sons are really servants.
Review of English wills and genealogy of the two William Carpenter immigrant ancestry
found significant errors that cut the ancestral connection and lineages for both
immigrants William Carpenter-662 (b. abt 1610 & who settled in Providence, RI –
represented by Group 2 of the Carpenter Cousins Y-DNA Project) and William Carpenter-584
(b. abt 1605 & who settled in Rehoboth, MA – represented by Group 3). This includes
the once proposed connection between the two.
With the Carpenter Cousins Y-DNA Project, the Y-DNA markers compared between Group 2
(Descendants of William Carpenter-662) and Group 3 (Desc. of William Carpenter-584) show
they are clearly not first , nor second cousins. The genetic separation between the two,
based on the number of DYS marker differences over 111 markers tested, indicate a
separation of about or between 2 and 11 generations of probability. While some may
indicate 5-7 generations before the immigrants, this can not be confirmed because there is
no genealogical confirmation. See the Group 2 & 3 discussion of the separation
markers at:
http://carpentercousins.com/carpdna.htm#toc006
The CE CD 2001, which I produced, was a gathering of what was out there, while the CE 2009
DVD was a pruning that clearly indicated the genealogical changes to the lineages of the
two William Carpenters cited above.
But, as Gene has mentioned, there are still people out there that copy ad nausea from the
internet without checking sources, notes and posted warnings.
John R. Carpenter
La Mesa, CA USA
Carpenter Cousins Project
http://carpentercousins.com
A)
The following is from the Carpenter Sketches article on William Carpenter-98, father of
William Carpenter-584 the immigrant who settled in Rehoboth, MA.
See:
http://carpentercousins.com/Wm1_Shalbourne.pdf
COMMENTS: The will of Robert Carpenter of Marden, Wiltshire, dated 12 January 1606[/7?]
and proved 21 May 1607, names (among others) adult sons William and Richard. It has been
claimed that these brothers were William1 Carpenter (father of William2 of Rehoboth) and
RichardA Carpenter of Amesbury, Wiltshire (father of William1 of Providence, R.I.). While
it is not impossible that William1 of Shalbourne was the son of Robert of Marden, evidence
of it has not been found; it is unlikely that Richard of Amesbury was Robert’s son.
Genetic testing of agnate descendants of William of Shalbourne and Richard of Amesbury has
established with a high degree of probability that the two were in fact related but far
more remotely than generally believed. For more-detailed discussions of these matters, see
NEHGR 159 (2005):64–66, 67n63; William2 of Rehoboth sketch, COMMENTS.
In Carpenters’ Encyclopedia of Carpenters 2001 (CECD 2001), compiler John R. Carpenter
presents an extensive ancestry for the subject William1 Carpenter and RichardA Carpenter
of Amesbury, beginning with the aforementioned Robert Carpenter of Marden and his widow,
Elinor, as their parents. Most of this ancestry—back from Rev. Richard Carpenter of
Herefordshire and Wiltshire (d. 1503)—has been proven invalid (NEHGR
159:65n53–66n53[contd.]); as above, the remainder is unsubstantiated and, particularly for
the Amesbury man, dubious. Earlier versions of this ancestry, which differ from it for the
first few generations (beginning with parents), are even more improbable than the CECD
2001 version (see, for example, Carpenter [1898] 1, 34). The ancestry of William1
Carpenter, including his parentage, is unknown (as is that of RichardA).
Amos Carpenter, the first to assert that RichardA Carpenter was William1s brother, further
claims that AlexanderA Carpenter of Wrington, Somersetshire, and Leiden, Netherlands, was
another brother (Carpenter [1898] 34). There is absolutely no support for this.
A Robert Carpenter was among those who took the estate inventory of William Shefford of
Shalbourne in 1609 (Shefford Inv). Although it seems reasonable to suppose that he is
related to William1 (perhaps a brother [born by 1688]), evidence linking them has not been
found. Robert is not a Rehoboth Carpenter forename.
A Wikipedia article about Culham, Oxfordshire, states that “[r]ecords from Culham Manor of
the late 1500s to the early 1600s . . . show a William Carpenter senior and his son
William Carpenter junior, who emigrated to Weymouth, Massachusetts, in 1638 and helped
found Rehoboth, Massachusetts, in 1645 [sic]” (Wikipedia1). Another Wikipedia article,
about the Rehoboth Carpenters (the same person is the main contributor to both), asserts
that “[m]anor records from Culham . . . contain various references to a father-son William
Carpenter whose activities conform to Shalbourne records. The Carpenters [of] Culham
[were] a prosperous yeoman family . . . William Carpenter Sr. served as assessor of fines
in the 5 Culham Manor Court. Many pages of Latin records bearing his name are now in the
Bodleian Library at Oxford. William Carpenter Sr. educated his eldest son Robert at Oxford
for the church. Many of what were perhaps Robert’s books made there [sic] way to
Massachusetts in the possession of Carpenter’s son William Carpenter Jr. (b. 1605)”
(Wikipedia2).
These passages reflect one of the most common types of error in genealogy: “right name,
wrong man,” the merging of different persons of the same name into a single identity; in
this case, four are reduced to two. The author of the above-quoted statements ignores
important evidence refuting his identification of the Carpenters of Shalbourne, Weymouth,
and Rehoboth with those of Culham. Far from being the scholarly yeoman (land-owning
farmer) who sat on a manorial court at Culham, William1 Carpenter of Shalbourne (35 miles
distant) was an illiterate carpenter and husbandman (see OCCUPATION, EDUCATION/OFFICES,
above). And as such, he was in no position to send a son to Oxford. (There is no evidence
that the Robert Carpenter recorded at Shalbourne in 1609 was a clergyman; in any case, he
was too old to have been William1’s son [see above].) On 22 November 1636, moreover,
William Carpenter of Culham was appointed to administer the estate of his son Thomas of
London, whose will failed to name an executor (PCC Probate Acts 83). By this time,
William1 Carpenter and his only known son, the eventual William2 of Rehoboth, had been
living at Shalbourne for twenty-eight years! In summary, there is absolutely no basis for
the claim that the two immigrant William Carpenters formerly of Shalbourne were identical
to a Culham father and son of the same name—or that the two pairs of men were connected at
all.
From: GeneZub(a)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:13 PM
To: CarpenterCousins(a)yahoogroups.com ; jrcrin001(a)cox.net
Cc: Rootsweb Carpenter
Subject: Re: [CarpenterCousins] John Carpenter, the Noted Town Clerk of London & the
use of Junior and Senior in that time
John,
I'm troubled that neither the Wikipedia item to which you provided a link in the
message below nor the message itself makes clear that accounts claiming London town clerk
John Carpenter as an ancestor of either the Rehoboth or Providence Carpenters have been
definitively discredited. The mistaken belief that these families' ancient ancestry
has been established survives in some quarters and should be explicitly contradicted at
every opportunity. The parentage of William1 Carpenter of Shalbourne, Wiltshire, and
Weymouth, Massachusetts (father of William2 of Rehoboth), is unknown, and his wife's
identity (perhaps Alice ______, bur. Shalbourne 1637/8) is uncertain. The known ancestry
of William1 Carpenter of Providence stops at his father, Richard Carpenter of Amesbury,
Wiltshire, whose wife was perhaps Alice Knight.
To clarify the use of so-called generational identifiers or suffixes: Sr., Jr., 2nd, 3rd,
II, III, etc., were used to distinguish, according to relative age, same-named persons
typically living in the same town, whether related or not. Use of the elder was typically
within families, often to distinguish a father from his namesake son (in wills and deeds,
for example); the latter, however, was rarely called the younger. The elder was otherwise
used, as was the younger generally, to distinguish same-named siblings from each other;
these were frequently half-siblings, having different mothers.
Gene Z.
Sent from my iPad
<snip>