Edmund Chandler - Origins ?

From the https://www.chandlerfamilyassociation.org/dna-project/cfa-chapters/...

Myths, Mix-ups and Questions
Last Updated: 5/8/2014

The following are some of the myths, mix-ups and questions that have been frequently encountered while researching Edmund Chandler and his family. We have tried to point out the obvious impossibilities, but questions remain. If you have any clues or answers with proof, tell us! ...

Was Edmund Chandler married to Elizabeth Alden?
Sugar Plantation Myth
Where did Edmund Chandler Originate from?

—-

Edmund Chandler and Elizabeth Alden
by Carol May, Research Director, Chapter13
Last Updated:May 8, 2014

Was Edmund Chandler married to Elizabeth Alden? The answer is yes, but it was not the immigrant Edmund who married her. It was his grandson, also named Edmund, who married Elizabeth Alden. Edmund, the immigrant, was married twice that we know about, but his wives’ names are unknown. ...

—-

The Edmund Chandler Sugar Plantation Myth
by Carol May, Reserach Director, Group 13
Last updated May 8, 2014

One of the persistent myths about Edmund Chandler, and there are many, is that he owned a sugar plantation in 1625 before he came to Plymouth. There are old books and stories on the Internet that perpetuate this. There were no colonists, nor was there sugar in the Barbados in 1625.

Barbados wasn’t settled until 1627 according to the Barbados Department of Archives. Captain Henry Powell brought a group of colonists from England that year. After trying to grow other crops, sugar was tried. Small plots gave way to large plantations as time went on.

Edmund Chandler appeared in records in Leiden, Holland in 1613, when he was admitted for citizenship. He appeared again in Leiden records in 1615, 1619, 1623, and 1626. On July 31, 1628 he witnessed the Will of Catherine Edmonds, wife of William Cubitt. This document is also in the Leiden archives. The year that he arrived in Plymouth is not known, nor is the name of the ship on which he sailed. However, he was first recorded as a freeman in 1633 in Plymouth. At that time church membership was a requirement to be admitted as a freeman, according to “The Genealogy of Edward Small,” by Lora Altine Woodbury Underhill.

However, all myths start somewhere. Edmund died between May 2, 1662 when he made his Will and June 2, 1662 when the inventory of his estate was taken. His Will was proved June 4, 1662 (Plymouth Colony Probate, Book 2: pt. 2: 75, 76 as referred to in “Small”, see above) When he died, he bequeathed to his daughters, Sarah, Anna, and Mary “three thousand and five hundred of sugar which belonges to mee at Barbadoes.” Only the sugar was said to have been in Barbados, not the daughters also, as some have asserted.

Edmund could have acquired the sugar in trade as sugar was used as money, or it could have something to do with his son John, who died about 10 years prior to his father’s death. John’s Will is in the Barbados archives and was proved July 11, 1653. ....

https://www.chandlerfamilyassociation.org/dna-project/cfa-chapters/...

CFA Chapter 13
Descendants of Edmund Chandler
born c 1588 England, died 1662 MA USA

Chapter 13
home page

Where did Edmund Chandler Originate?
by Dick Chandler, CFA Vice President

The honest answer to this question is “we don’t know”. It is regrettable that some family historians seem unable to say those words, preferring to invent an answer that roughly fits the few facts available. The original English parish register extractions performed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) as part of their International Genealogical Index (IGI) were performed to a very high standard of verification. Equally, the early submissions by LDS church members were subjected to scrutiny by Elders. Regrettably the IGI now contains a large number of submissions which have not been subjected to any meaningful scrutiny and contain no source references, and as a result contain “inventions”, thereby corrupting and devaluing what was previously a very valuable genealogical resource. A number of the records displayed by the LDS FamilySearch facility claim to state details of Edmund’s origins and parentage. Many are based on old books which contain incorrect statements. Some are plainly wrong. Others, though plausible, are not corroborated by any source reference and cannot be independently verified by a church record or similar document. The purpose of this paper is to document the Edmund brick wall and state what has been studied to date, to form a basis for further research.

The Edmund Chandler timeline (on another page of this web site) identifies that Edmund was probably born in the 1580s before 1584 and no later than 1592, as he had to have been an adult when he was admitted to citizenship of Leiden, Holland in 1613, probably older than 60 in 1643, yet born late enough to have lived until 1662.

One of the most common errors seen regarding Edmund’s origins arises from the writings of Dr Mary Chandler Lowell, who asserted that he was born in London, England in 1588/9, the son of John and Jane (Gilton) Channdeler (later Chandler) of St Margaret Moyses (the name of a parish in London). This has spawned a host of LDS patron submissions placing the birth of Jane, her marriage to John, and their parenting of Edmund at various widely scattered locations around England. The truth is that the John Channdeler who did marry Jane Gyttin on 15th January 1581 at St Mildred, Poultry with St Mary Colechurch (another parish in London) was the same person as John Chaundflower alias Chaundler who died in 1585. In his Will, John mentions his two fathers-in-law Robert Cole and Robert Gyttens, his second wife Jane and his three children (by Elizabeth Cole, not Jane) named as Robert, John and Martha – no mention of Edmund. It has been suggested that this was because Edmund was a child “in esse”. This term strictly means “in existence”, that is, a child born but not yet named, but it is often incorrectly used to describe a child conceived but not yet born, for which the correct expression is “in posse” – a possible child. If Edmund had been a child in esse or in posse it might have explained how Edmund could be John Chaundflower’s child but excluded from his Will. But Dr Lowell said that Edmund was born in 1588/9, three years after John died – too long for him to have been unborn/unnamed.