MYTHS OR MISTAKES
The Elinor Myth
As posted to the Knapp-L list by Fritz Knapp - reprinted here with permission.
Elinor, was given name
of the first wife of Nicholas Knapp and is documented twice - 1-in a land record
at Cambridge, MA, and her death recorded at Stamford, CT.
She is also identified in the "Winthrop Fleet", by Charles Edward Banks, as the
wife of Nicholas, all without citing a surname.
The protest I have maintained over the years, is against labeling Elinor, first
wife of Nicholas Knapp, as any of the three surnames indicated
below:
Elinor, called "Lockwood", "Disbrow", & "Waterbury"
Elinor, first wife of Nicholas Knapp of Watertown, Middlesex Co, Massachusetts
and Stamford, Fairfield Co, Connecticut, has been called "Lockwood", "Disbrow"
and at times, "Waterbury", in older genealogies. No known record supports such
claims!
Extant records identify her as "Elinor" only, and ancestry unknown. Her origin
and ancestry remain unknown, though no doubt her origin was England.
Many early publications state she was born at Combs, Co Suffolk, England, though
do so without benefit of supporting evidence. At best we can say "she was (of)
England."
It is expected that the surname "Lockwood" was assumed as a result of the known
relationship between the Knapp's and the Lockwood's, at Watertown,
Massachusetts. Thus, many believe she was a probable sister of Sergeant Robert
and Edmund Lockwood. On 23 Oct 1943, a query appeared in the "Hartford Times",
genealogical page, Query, A-2695, authored by Judge H.
Stanley Finch, a Surrogate Judge, Stamford, Connecticut, who gave his opinion
that Elinor, wife of Nicholas Knapp, was a daughter of Edmund Lockwood
(1594-1635) of Combs, Co Suffolk, England, but done so without supporting
evidence. While this would seem possible, proof remains lacking.
Later research in 1978, and again in 1995, failed to identify that Elinor, was
of any identifiable surname in the early Colonial Records. At any rate, in
today's jargon, the "virus" began to spread. Eventually after having been
repeated enough, Pedigree Charts sprung forth claiming her as a daughter of
Edmund Lockwood, yet a cited source for the entries remain lacking. Unless an
extant document can be produced, to label Elinor with any surname, records
should reflect her given name of Elinor, only. To do otherwise would only
perpetuate the original "atrocious genealogical blunder"!
As a result of Mr. William Pelham and Mr. Edmund Lockwood, paying the fine of
Nicholas Knapp, in 1630, the assertion was made that Edmund Lockwood, was his
brother-in-law. Nothing could be further from the truth. Research identifies,
Mr. William Pelham, as the person responsible for Nicholas Knapp, who belonged
to his company, and that Mr. Edmund Lockwood, was his Deputy, thus the reasons
for paying the fine of Nicholas Knapp. Again, the "virus"
was perpetuated and became fact without attending proof.
As of this writing [2004], her surname remains UNKNOWN. For further discussion
on the subject of Elinor, first wife of Nicholas Knapp, consult:
1-The American Genealogist (TAG), 10:45
2-Some Descendants of Edmund Lockwood (1594-1635) of Cambridge, MA and his son,
Edmund Lockwood (c1625-1693) of Stamford, CT (1978), by Harriet Woodbury Hodge,
C.G., Appendix 5:82 3-The Great Migration Begins Immigrants to New England
1620-1633 (1995), by Robert Charles Anderson, F.A.S.G., II:1136.