166x - aft 174x
Elephel Fitzgerald is the mystery woman of Slocum genealogy - much more so than any of the various Unknowns. First, her name. It is supposed to be Biblical, but the Bible spells it Eliphal and it refers to a man - Eliphal the son of Ur, one of the valiant men of the armies of David. [Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary says it means "a miracle of God."] The Slocum book also suggests it might be a form of the Anglo-Saxon Eahlfled, meaning hall, all, or increase - although I think it unlikely that an Irish woman would be given an Anglo-Saxon name. It doesn't seem to be an Irish word. So it remains (for me) still a mystery.
Second, her background. Family tradition "agreeing in families widely separated for generations" (The Slocum book, p. 56, note) says she was a lady of high birth, but disagrees about how she came to be married to an ordinary (if wealthy) American.
One group says she was one of a number of young women forcibly brought to America and sold for wives "to respectable purchasers." According to this group, she was sold for about $600. There is apparently no documentary evidence surviving, but The Slocum book provides a lot of support for the practice.
See the book entitled "The Original Lists of Persons of Quality; Emigrants; Religious Exiles; Political Rebels; Serving Men sold of a number of years; Apprentices; Children Stolen; Maidens Pressed; and othere who went from Great Britain to the American Plantations from A.D. 1600 to 1700 etc," compiled from MSS preserved in the State-paper Department of Her Majesties Public Record Office, England, by John C. Hotten, 1874. This publication includes the names of but a part of those who removed to America in the seventeenth century . . .
The Slocum book, p. 26 noteThe "children stolen," "maidens pressed," and political prisoners from England were in great demand in the American Colonies and many women were brought who were "young, handsome, and well-recommended for their virtuous education and demeanour, and were sold as wives to the planters fetching from one hundred and twenty to three hundred fifty pounds of tobacco . . ." See Stith's History of Virginia, page 197. "This traffic continued for many years. The battles consequent on the civil wars of the Kingdom furnished large numbers for the trade. Scots taken at Dunbar [A.D. 1650] and two hundred and seventy of the royalist prisoners taken by Cromwell at the Battle of Worcester [A.D. 1651] were landed and sold in New England." John Cotton, the minister at Boston, wrote to Cromwell that they were "kindly used, having been sold for a limited servitude in a country where their labour was welcome, and not ill-rewarded." The insurrectionists of Penruddock, Roman Catholics from Ireland, and nearly one thousand state prisoners engaged in the Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion, A.D. 1685, were shipped to the colonial freeholders. See Knight's History of England. Also A History of Georgia, by Rev. William B. Stevens . . .
The Slocum book, p. 56 note
Elephel's first child was born in 1689, so if she was at least 15 when Meribah (the child) was born, that gives her a birth date of 1674 or earlier, possibly as much as 10 years or so. Her last child, Ebenezer, was born in about 1705, so if she were 40 when he was born, that gives her a birthdate of 1665. I don't think she would have been much older than that. It is assumed Elephel was Irish, and the years 1660-1690 were relatively peaceful ones in Ireland (one historian - Nicholas Canny, in the Oxford History of Ireland - has characterized them as a "breathing space"). So there is nothing that jumps out and cries, "Here! The Fitzgeralds were in trouble here - she might have been shipped off because of this!" There were always minor troubles in Ireland, however, and I don't know how the "maidens pressed" were pressed, so this theory is still a definite possibility.
Another group, apparently unhappy at the thought of Elephel being bought and sold, holds that she was the daughter of Earl Edmund Fitzgerald of Dublin, and that her sister (unnamed) fell in love with an English soldier (not a good thing for an Irish woman to do) and eloped. The couple went to America and they brought Elephel with them. It is not clear to me why they would bring her along. (The Slocum book says "perhaps to further the success of their plans." - note p. 56.) It also does not explain why a "lady of high birth" ended up marrying a farmer, however wealthy. There does not seem to be an EARL Edmund Fitzgerald, although there were of course various Edmund Fitzgeralds who were not Earls. And the Fitzgeralds who were earls were Earls of Desmond and of Kildare. Their lands were south and west of Dublin, toward Cork.
Another group, perhaps an offshoot of the first, says she was a domestic in the household of Giles Slocum (Eliezer's father). [Collections, New Hampshire Historical Society, Vol. 4, p. 503; Vol. 5, p. 86; Vol. 7, p. 158; Vol. 31, p. 578.47 - this was cited in Pioneer Irish in New England, chapter 9, p. 152 - which I have not seen, but which is cited in several trees on Rootsweb - so there is a lot of checking up I need to do.] It seems reasonable that if she were a "maiden pressed," she might work as a domestic - where she might catch the eye of the son of the family - and marriage to him would not then be such a terrible comedown, however high her birth had originally been.
A final group has provided a genealogy for her, quite a lively fiction, which makes her a native born American. It goes like this:
Elephel, b. 1668, Dartmouth, Bristol, MA
parents: Earl Edmund Fitzgerald and Marie Whittaker
This is cute, no? Like my grandfather Earl Bothwell.Earl Edmund, b. 1645, Dartmouth, Bristol, MA
parents: Silas Fitzgerald and Millie Palmer
The town of Dartmouth was settled in about 1652, and incorporated in 1664. It did not exist in 1645.Silas, b. 1620 Dartmouth, Bristol, MA
parents: John Fitzgerald and Ann Green
See above, for the town of Dartmouth. The first English in New England arrived in 1620 - and they did NOT land at Dartmouth!John, b. 1609 Richmond County, GA
Another cutie - John becomes a father at age 11. Also, Georgia was not chartered until 1732, so his birth there is even less likely than the ones of his supposed descendants in Dartmouth.
The same people who provided this "information" also say Elephel had two sisters, Meribah and Katherine, and that she married again after Eliezer died - in 1745/6 (March 14), to John Wanton. She would have been (probably) in her 70s then, so this is of a piece with the rest. Her will was proved in 1748.
My personal guess is that she was a "maiden pressed," and that she did serve as a domestic in Giles's household. She may have been a member of a minor branch of the Fitzgeralds - I hate discounting family tradition entirely - but she probably was not the daughter of Earl Edmund, who probably did not exist.
That's it.
Back to husband, Eliezer Slocum
To children (not a lot of information)
To next ancestor, Ebenezer Slocum
Back to Slocum Home Page
Back to Lee's Genes Home Page
Questions, comments, additions, corrections? Contact me at: lee@leesgenes.com
Page last updated 12 June 2006