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...