margenUSA seeking Starbucks (the family)
- Thread starter margen
- Start date
I think we have some direct hits. I have seen (somewhere) an Edwardius Starbrook was christened at All Saints Derby in February of 1603, a full 12 months before Edward was said to have been born and 2-3 months before the wedding date of Edward Sr. and Anne Barnes. William Starbuck, Edward Jr.'s brother, has a listed birthdate of 7 June 1607 so he was either baptised the day he was born or "they" are using the baptism date as his birthdate. Sara Starbuck is Edward Jr's firstborn and the year correlates with the birth year I have. The mother is either Susannae Hardwick or, more likely, Katherine Reynolds. I'm guessing Edward might have married Katherine in 1629. Did you see any records for Edward and Katherine? Either way, we now know Edward was still in England in March of 1630/31. Edward and Katherine's next child is Nathaniel born 20 February 1634 either in the UK or Dover, New Hampshire.
I have also seen an Edwardi Starbucke and Edwardi Starbrook (somewhere) during the late 1500s early 1600s but I only have my handwritten notes and no exact source and don't know if it applies to Edward Sr., Jr. or somebody else.
I'm thinking Anne Barnes daughter of William Barnes baptised 9 August 1577 seems to most likely be Edward Sr.'s wife but the birth year is 6 or 7 years earlier than 1584 which has been cited and repeated. That might make Edward Sr.'s birth year earlier, but more in line with typical marrying age for that time period.
This information is seeming so much more likely than some far flung arranged marriage in Leicester. Geographic knowledge can sure be handy.
I have also seen an Edwardi Starbucke and Edwardi Starbrook (somewhere) during the late 1500s early 1600s but I only have my handwritten notes and no exact source and don't know if it applies to Edward Sr., Jr. or somebody else.
I'm thinking Anne Barnes daughter of William Barnes baptised 9 August 1577 seems to most likely be Edward Sr.'s wife but the birth year is 6 or 7 years earlier than 1584 which has been cited and repeated. That might make Edward Sr.'s birth year earlier, but more in line with typical marrying age for that time period.
This information is seeming so much more likely than some far flung arranged marriage in Leicester. Geographic knowledge can sure be handy.
So helpful. I spent about 40 minutes with a magnifying glass in the Hmmond Explorer Atlas of the World and could not find Draycott, Lockington or Attenborough.
If you have a look at GENUKI, you will be able to check the counties, towns and their close neighbours. Not only will it show you what place is close to another, but also gives you a little history about them as well. 
Just pick a country, then a county and then click on the towns and parishes list for that county.
Just pick a country, then a county and then click on the towns and parishes list for that county.
Flook
A True Gentleman. Rest in Peace.
The current St Nic's only dates from the 1670s as the previous one was destroyed during the Civil War in 1643. We're lucky that the parish registers survived the destruction. As for the rivalries, well all rivalries are irrational. I can criticise Nottingham because I've lived here for 40 years but woe betide anyone from Leicester or Derby who does the same!!!
http://www.
stnics.org/Groups/213870/Our_History.aspx
janetbooth
Top Dog Stalwart
Phillimore's Marriage Index for St Mary, Nottingham, shows the following marriages for Edward STARBUCK (or variants):
10 April 1621 Edward STARBUCK & Susannae HARDWICK
22 September 1625 Edward STARBUCK & Mary KIRK
Both these marriages are confirmed by the Notts FHS Marriage Index. However, I cannot find a baptism for Nathaniel c1634 nor can I find a marriage between Edward STARBUCK & Katherine REYNOLDS at the moment.
Janet
10 April 1621 Edward STARBUCK & Susannae HARDWICK
22 September 1625 Edward STARBUCK & Mary KIRK
Both these marriages are confirmed by the Notts FHS Marriage Index. However, I cannot find a baptism for Nathaniel c1634 nor can I find a marriage between Edward STARBUCK & Katherine REYNOLDS at the moment.
Janet
Flook
A True Gentleman. Rest in Peace.
From findmypast there are 2 entries from (1) ''York Registry Wills, 1594-1602"; (2) ''York Registry Wills, 1603-1611"
1594-1602
In the second, Toton is only 1.5 miles from Attenborough and just over 4 miles from Draycott. 'husbn.' may be an abbreviation for husbandman i.e. a farmer.
We need someone more expert than me to understand what these entries mean. I know of one such on TD but they're on holiday but if anyone else can throw some light on them it would help.
1594-1602
- "Oct. 9, 1595. Starbuck, Edward, Thomas Pepper, and Agnes Thompson, Tuition to Thomas Pepper their Father, Nottingham."
- "May 19, 1603. Starbucke als. Johnson, William, Toton (Notts.), husbn., Jan 17, 1602."
In the second, Toton is only 1.5 miles from Attenborough and just over 4 miles from Draycott. 'husbn.' may be an abbreviation for husbandman i.e. a farmer.
We need someone more expert than me to understand what these entries mean. I know of one such on TD but they're on holiday but if anyone else can throw some light on them it would help.
Last edited:
Huncamunca
The Knowledgeable One
Indeed it is, Flook. There's a useful guide here:
www.
york.ac.uk/media/borthwick/documents/5tuitions.pdf
Sorry for the delay in repsonding to all of you. We've had a chimmney fire and are curretly wiping down the residue of the downdraft. It was extinquished before the fire department responded...but there is/are still "residual consequences". We're fine, the internet works, but we're in the process of dealing with the rest of this. Our only communication is a desktop with a very old hard drive so we catch as catch can. Your attention and wonderful insight into this family is more than we ever hoped for. Thankyou so much for putting this puzzle together- it is far more than we've ever been able to conjure online with our feeble "google search bar". Again, as always, thank you so much.
Flook
A True Gentleman. Rest in Peace.
I've spent the afternoon wandering through the previous posts and everything points to Edward being baptised in All Saints Church, Derby. Janet has done sterling work finding lots of entries including Willms[?] Starbucke in All Saints, 7 June 1607. Edward's entry is on Family Search as "Edwardus filius Edwardi Star[?brook?]" in February 1603. The date is illegible but is the 26th or after as the previous entry is for the 26th of the month.
I had a look at quite a few of the biographies of Edward Starbuck on the internet and wasn't wholly convinced by any of them when it came to where he was born. What did impress me was GrannyBarb's find [post 4] of the Starbuck family papers in Pembrokeshire Archives>
http://records.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/calmview/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=D-BT&pos=1
There are 2 documents that caught my attention:
1. A draft pedigree of the Starbuck family>
http://records.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/calmview/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=HDX/380/4&pos=122
2. A manuscript history of the Starbuck history>
http://records.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/calmview/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=HDX/380&pos=121
It would be interesting to see them.
I suspect that the archivist used one of these to make the statement "The Starbuck family, originally from Derbyshire, emigrated to Dover in the North American colony of New Hampshire in about 1635", which adds credibility to Derbyshire being where Edward was born.
I'm Starbucked-out now so I'll leave it there for the moment.
.
GrannyBarb
Custodian of the Family Accounts
Oh, Flook! You have such a way with words!
Huncamunca
The Knowledgeable One
Sometimes all is not as it seems with dates in this period. Before the calendar changes of 1752, the new year began not on 1 January but on Lady Day, which was 25 March. Thus January and February 1603 and the first 24 days of March 1603 came after December 1603:
December 1603
January 1603
February 1603
1-24 March 1603
then the next day is 25 March 1604
To avoid confusion over dates in January/February/1-24 March before 1752 it is customary to use 'double dating', so an event that occurred in the January after December 1603 would be written as January 1603/4. Unfortunately many entries in FamilySearch and elsewhere do not use this convention. When you are just presented with a single entry out of context, it can be hard to be sure of the exact date. To be sure which year is really intended it is crucial to see where the entry fits in the sequence of entries in the parish register.
As this explanation posted by @Huncamunca is so clear, I have copied it over to the Church Records section as a sticky.
Huncamunca
The Knowledgeable One
I have been away for a while and then busy catching up with work, so am coming to this intriguing question rather late. Here are a few thoughts on the Starbucks . . .
It's important to discover if there's any definite evidence that the Edward baptised in Derbyshire is the one who emigrated, or whether people have assumed he is because he's the only one of the right age whose baptism is on FamilySearch.
The survival of parish registers from this period is very patchy - and those which have survived can have large gaps. Not all registers have been transcribed. Therefore there may have been other Edward Starbucks who are not on FamilySearch etc. There's the added complication that he may have been a non-conformist, like many of those who emigrated at this time. This reference to him in a record of the General Court of Massachusetts in 18 October 1648 is of particular interest in that regard:
I only have a very hazy idea of what Anabaptism is, but from the point of view of a genealogist it may well make life even harder because I think Anabaptists did not believe in infant baptism.
So where to go from here? It may be easier to rule out people than to rule them in - for example by showing that they died young, or were still in England after your Edward had arrived in America.
This all sounds very negative, sorry. To make up for that I will have a think about what sources you could use, other than parish registers, for investigating the English Starbucks, and get back to you in a little while . . .
It's important to discover if there's any definite evidence that the Edward baptised in Derbyshire is the one who emigrated, or whether people have assumed he is because he's the only one of the right age whose baptism is on FamilySearch.
The survival of parish registers from this period is very patchy - and those which have survived can have large gaps. Not all registers have been transcribed. Therefore there may have been other Edward Starbucks who are not on FamilySearch etc. There's the added complication that he may have been a non-conformist, like many of those who emigrated at this time. This reference to him in a record of the General Court of Massachusetts in 18 October 1648 is of particular interest in that regard:
'This Court, being informed of great misdemener committed by Edward Starbucke, of Dover, with p[ro]fession of Anabaptisme, for which he is to be p[ro]ceeded agaynst at the next Court of Assistants . . .'
Quoted from Alexander Starbuck's Nantucket Genealogies, which is on Google Books.
I only have a very hazy idea of what Anabaptism is, but from the point of view of a genealogist it may well make life even harder because I think Anabaptists did not believe in infant baptism.
So where to go from here? It may be easier to rule out people than to rule them in - for example by showing that they died young, or were still in England after your Edward had arrived in America.
This all sounds very negative, sorry. To make up for that I will have a think about what sources you could use, other than parish registers, for investigating the English Starbucks, and get back to you in a little while . . .
Huncamunca
The Knowledgeable One
As promised, here are a few ideas for the sorts of records you could check besides parish registers.
Probate records have been mentioned already in this thread, but make sure you locate and check all indexes that might cover the dates/areas of interest. Many indexes are online now but not all. Images of some of the probate records are online, for example the one for William Johnson alias Starbuck mentioned by GrannyBarb in post #4 which you should be able to see on Ancestry if you have a subscription, otherwise you can pay to download from the National Archives' site. Re. the tuition bond(?) found by Flook, you should be able to order this from the Borthwick Institute in York.
(By the way, it's interesting that there is a 'Johnson alias Starbuck': it might be just this William who was known by both these names, but I would also bear in mind the possibility that there will be other people who were for some reason sometimes called Johnson and sometimes Starbuck.)
Apprenticeship records - there's not one central list so again you'll have to investigate what records have survived. When googling I happened to find this entry from records of the Tylers & Bricklayers Company, London (from the excellent Wirksworth website, http://www.
wirksworth.org.uk/B45-APPR.htm)
If aged 14 when apprenticed he might be around the same age as your Edward. (What happened to this Edward? Did he go to London or is it just that his master belonged to a London livery company?)
Interestingly in the same set of records is the apprenticeship of George son of Thomas Tarbock, husbandman, Long Eaton [apprenticed to] Thomas Greene, 1 May 1625. George may well be Edward's brother: the names 'Thomas Starbuck' and 'Thomas Tarbuck/Tarbock' would be hard to distinguish when spoken. (If you haven't already done so then it might be a good idea to search for Tarbuck and variants as well as Starbuck.)
Lists of tax payers - these don't help with genealogy as such, but can help establish whether someone was in a particular parish at a particular time. Mostly not online. There are many at the National Archives.
Deeds
Manorial records
If you would like any more advice on where to look for such records, please ask. (I should say that many won't be online.) Good luck!
Probate records have been mentioned already in this thread, but make sure you locate and check all indexes that might cover the dates/areas of interest. Many indexes are online now but not all. Images of some of the probate records are online, for example the one for William Johnson alias Starbuck mentioned by GrannyBarb in post #4 which you should be able to see on Ancestry if you have a subscription, otherwise you can pay to download from the National Archives' site. Re. the tuition bond(?) found by Flook, you should be able to order this from the Borthwick Institute in York.
(By the way, it's interesting that there is a 'Johnson alias Starbuck': it might be just this William who was known by both these names, but I would also bear in mind the possibility that there will be other people who were for some reason sometimes called Johnson and sometimes Starbuck.)
Apprenticeship records - there's not one central list so again you'll have to investigate what records have survived. When googling I happened to find this entry from records of the Tylers & Bricklayers Company, London (from the excellent Wirksworth website, http://www.
wirksworth.org.uk/B45-APPR.htm)
Edward son of Thomas Starbucke, yeoman, Long Eaton [apprenticed to] Anthony Bristow, 24 June 1619.
If aged 14 when apprenticed he might be around the same age as your Edward. (What happened to this Edward? Did he go to London or is it just that his master belonged to a London livery company?)
Interestingly in the same set of records is the apprenticeship of George son of Thomas Tarbock, husbandman, Long Eaton [apprenticed to] Thomas Greene, 1 May 1625. George may well be Edward's brother: the names 'Thomas Starbuck' and 'Thomas Tarbuck/Tarbock' would be hard to distinguish when spoken. (If you haven't already done so then it might be a good idea to search for Tarbuck and variants as well as Starbuck.)
Lists of tax payers - these don't help with genealogy as such, but can help establish whether someone was in a particular parish at a particular time. Mostly not online. There are many at the National Archives.
Deeds
Manorial records
If you would like any more advice on where to look for such records, please ask. (I should say that many won't be online.) Good luck!
Greetings to all and sorry for the long delay in responding. The new internet line was installed Wednesday afternoon (the old one was wrapped across the chimney that caught fire April 27th). I get Starbucked out myself, Flook; so much hearsay gets repeated and perpetuated. Fortunately, the Starbucks in the United States are pretty well sorted out.
Huncamunca, my understanding of Anabaptism is limited. I believe their objection was to the baptism of infants due to their lack of conscious understanding of what they were being dedicated to. Ye olde Massachusetts Bay Colonists were a pretty tyrannical bunch; ordering the severe beating and bannishment of non-beleivers and the subsequent selling of their offspring into slavery. Although Edward Starbuck was charged, there does not appear to be any record of conviction or punishment. In Dover, NH he had become pretty successful and respected and perhaps the Massachusetts Bay Colony was looking for a hefty fine. Early on, he had voted against the territory being absorbed into the Colony so there was probably some simmering tensions.
Although infant baptism was a point of contention the records in Quaker family bibles were pretty complete and copied accurately from bible to bible:
Nathaniel Starbuck, born 1634 is Edward Starbuck's son and my 8x great grandfather. Nathaniel's son Jethro, born 1671, is my 7x ggf.
I have been in touch with a descendant of Edward Starbuck's brother, William, who has shared his branch of the family tree that remained in England, remarkably, mostly in Derbyshire until the early 1900s. Since he retains the name he participated in genetic testing (same team that verified Richard III's remains) and is of proven Viking descent. The last update I sent was a recap of discussions from this forum:
William Starbucke: married Agnes Bradshaw in Attenborough 12 December 1561 and then married Ellen Allcocke in Attenborough on 3 November 1567. I think there is a good chance he might be the father of Edward Starbuck Sr. (Edward and William's father). A string of female Starbucke marriages in Attenborough begin with Elizabeth marrying Roger Boot 31 July 1597, Jane marrying Thomas Cooke 8 November 1597 and Alice marrying John Pim 27 January 1601. It is possible these are Edward Sr.'s older sisters.
They also found a baptismal record for an Anne Barnes 9 August 1577 at Wilne, Derbyshire (daughter of William Barnes) which I think is probably Edward Sr.'s wife. She was born 6 years earlier than the year listed on the sheet I sent you (1584) which may or may not make Edward Sr.'s birth year earlier
Edward Starbuck, Sr. did attend the baptism of daughter Elizabeth on 13 August 1608 so there is a sister for Edward Jr. and William. They have not been able to find a baptism or christening record for Edward Jr. but there is a baptism at Derby All Saints on 7 June 1607 of a Willimus Starbucke son of Edwardi Starbucke.
I think the spelling variations on the names have to do with the slow transiton from Latin to English record keeping that was required once the Church of England was established.
I have managed to research some Nottinghamshire history and may have uncovered a reason why a church in Attenborough was not available for weddings in the early 1600s (see the last paragraph):
http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/articles/mellorsarticles/attenborough1.htm
I had begun writing about the Starbuck family when I convinced myself that something didn't ring true about Edward Starbuck and Anne Barnes being married in Leicester, May 8, 1603. I have seen the birthdate for Edward Jr. listed as 1603/04 so a birthdate of February 3, 1603 does not make him illegitimate; thank you Huncamunca! However, the Starbuck tree still in England begins with Edward's brother, William, and I have been unable uncover any record for Edward Sr.'s death in 1608 or Anne's death in 1609 but those years have been cited and repeated. According to the baptism record Edward was still alive on 13 August 1608. If Edward, William and Elizabeth were orphaned at 5,2 and + or - 1 year, what became of them unti adulthood?
I will share the website information about the Starbucks in Milford Haven with my Starbuck cousin in England as he his interested in researching them further. The rebuilding of the chimney commences next Monday so I may have another delayed response. Please feel free to correct any inaccurate assumptions I have made. As always your tremendous insight and the generosity of your time and knowledge shared is very much appreciated.
Starbucking out for now...
Huncamunca, my understanding of Anabaptism is limited. I believe their objection was to the baptism of infants due to their lack of conscious understanding of what they were being dedicated to. Ye olde Massachusetts Bay Colonists were a pretty tyrannical bunch; ordering the severe beating and bannishment of non-beleivers and the subsequent selling of their offspring into slavery. Although Edward Starbuck was charged, there does not appear to be any record of conviction or punishment. In Dover, NH he had become pretty successful and respected and perhaps the Massachusetts Bay Colony was looking for a hefty fine. Early on, he had voted against the territory being absorbed into the Colony so there was probably some simmering tensions.
Although infant baptism was a point of contention the records in Quaker family bibles were pretty complete and copied accurately from bible to bible:
Nathaniel Starbuck, born 1634 is Edward Starbuck's son and my 8x great grandfather. Nathaniel's son Jethro, born 1671, is my 7x ggf.
I have been in touch with a descendant of Edward Starbuck's brother, William, who has shared his branch of the family tree that remained in England, remarkably, mostly in Derbyshire until the early 1900s. Since he retains the name he participated in genetic testing (same team that verified Richard III's remains) and is of proven Viking descent. The last update I sent was a recap of discussions from this forum:
William Starbucke: married Agnes Bradshaw in Attenborough 12 December 1561 and then married Ellen Allcocke in Attenborough on 3 November 1567. I think there is a good chance he might be the father of Edward Starbuck Sr. (Edward and William's father). A string of female Starbucke marriages in Attenborough begin with Elizabeth marrying Roger Boot 31 July 1597, Jane marrying Thomas Cooke 8 November 1597 and Alice marrying John Pim 27 January 1601. It is possible these are Edward Sr.'s older sisters.
They also found a baptismal record for an Anne Barnes 9 August 1577 at Wilne, Derbyshire (daughter of William Barnes) which I think is probably Edward Sr.'s wife. She was born 6 years earlier than the year listed on the sheet I sent you (1584) which may or may not make Edward Sr.'s birth year earlier
Edward Starbuck, Sr. did attend the baptism of daughter Elizabeth on 13 August 1608 so there is a sister for Edward Jr. and William. They have not been able to find a baptism or christening record for Edward Jr. but there is a baptism at Derby All Saints on 7 June 1607 of a Willimus Starbucke son of Edwardi Starbucke.
I think the spelling variations on the names have to do with the slow transiton from Latin to English record keeping that was required once the Church of England was established.
I have managed to research some Nottinghamshire history and may have uncovered a reason why a church in Attenborough was not available for weddings in the early 1600s (see the last paragraph):
http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/articles/mellorsarticles/attenborough1.htm
I had begun writing about the Starbuck family when I convinced myself that something didn't ring true about Edward Starbuck and Anne Barnes being married in Leicester, May 8, 1603. I have seen the birthdate for Edward Jr. listed as 1603/04 so a birthdate of February 3, 1603 does not make him illegitimate; thank you Huncamunca! However, the Starbuck tree still in England begins with Edward's brother, William, and I have been unable uncover any record for Edward Sr.'s death in 1608 or Anne's death in 1609 but those years have been cited and repeated. According to the baptism record Edward was still alive on 13 August 1608. If Edward, William and Elizabeth were orphaned at 5,2 and + or - 1 year, what became of them unti adulthood?
I will share the website information about the Starbucks in Milford Haven with my Starbuck cousin in England as he his interested in researching them further. The rebuilding of the chimney commences next Monday so I may have another delayed response. Please feel free to correct any inaccurate assumptions I have made. As always your tremendous insight and the generosity of your time and knowledge shared is very much appreciated.
Starbucking out for now...
Huncamunca
The Knowledgeable One
Hello Margen - I'm glad you've made it back to us! Unfortunately I am rather overloaded with work and other problems at the moment so cannot answer your post as fully as I'd like to. I will come back soon, I hope!
For the time being all I can offer is what I hope will explain some of the spelling variations you've encountered in transcripts of Latin parish register entries. In Latin some words change their endings depending on context. A typical entry from a parish register might be:
Edwardus filius Edwardi Smith baptizatus est 17 die junii
I would translate this as 'Edward son of Edward Smith was baptised the 17th day of June'. Note that I didn't say Edwardus son of Edwardi - the Edwardi means 'of Edward' rather than being a different name. Similarly the ending of 'junii' tells me that it means 'of June' (the Latin version doesn't need to include a separate word for 'of' - the meaning is built into the word ending).
Some names had more than one Latin version, so William may be recorded as Gulielmus or Willelmus among others. Then besides changes in ending (according to context) the name can also be abbreviated. The original register may have subtle marks to indicate that letters have been left out, but these are often 'lost in transcription'. So the original might have said Willus with a superscript 'us' and a dot or line underneath.
Many Latin versions of names are very similar to their English counterparts but some are less obvious. For example,
Carolus is Charles
Jacobus is usually James (though might be Jacob)
Johannes is John (the version meaning 'of John' is Johannis; commonly abbreviated to Johes and Johis respectively)
Some Latin names can have more than one possible translation:
Anna can be Ann(e), Anna, Hannah, etc.
Maria can be Mary or Maria
Johanna can be Jane, Joan, Joanna, etc.
For a much more comprehensive list see this page:
http://www.
freereg.org.uk/howto/latinnames.htm
Right, had better get back to work now . . .
For the time being all I can offer is what I hope will explain some of the spelling variations you've encountered in transcripts of Latin parish register entries. In Latin some words change their endings depending on context. A typical entry from a parish register might be:
Edwardus filius Edwardi Smith baptizatus est 17 die junii
I would translate this as 'Edward son of Edward Smith was baptised the 17th day of June'. Note that I didn't say Edwardus son of Edwardi - the Edwardi means 'of Edward' rather than being a different name. Similarly the ending of 'junii' tells me that it means 'of June' (the Latin version doesn't need to include a separate word for 'of' - the meaning is built into the word ending).
Some names had more than one Latin version, so William may be recorded as Gulielmus or Willelmus among others. Then besides changes in ending (according to context) the name can also be abbreviated. The original register may have subtle marks to indicate that letters have been left out, but these are often 'lost in transcription'. So the original might have said Willus with a superscript 'us' and a dot or line underneath.
Many Latin versions of names are very similar to their English counterparts but some are less obvious. For example,
Carolus is Charles
Jacobus is usually James (though might be Jacob)
Johannes is John (the version meaning 'of John' is Johannis; commonly abbreviated to Johes and Johis respectively)
Some Latin names can have more than one possible translation:
Anna can be Ann(e), Anna, Hannah, etc.
Maria can be Mary or Maria
Johanna can be Jane, Joan, Joanna, etc.
For a much more comprehensive list see this page:
http://www.
freereg.org.uk/howto/latinnames.htm
Right, had better get back to work now . . .