Dutch-Colonies-L Archives

Archiver > Dutch-Colonies > 2002-11 > 1037559092


From:
Subject: Re: [D-Col] Penelope Stout----a legend
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:51:32 EST


In a message dated 11/16/2002 7:45:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

> If Penelope was supposedly married to Richard Stout in 1642 or '44 (as I
> have
> seen cited without references), would she have been cited in the Gravesend
> Town Book above by her maiden name?
>
> Regards,
> Rick
>

Rick,

Good question. I don't know what the custom might have been among the
English. Among the Dutch, she might well have been known by her maiden
name---but not, I would think, by the name of her previous husband.

By 1648 she was married to Stout, I think we can agree. If, as has been said
in some versions, she was first married to a van Princis/von Printzen or
whatever, but was now married to Stout, I find it hard to believe that she
would be known around town as Prince or van Princis or whatever.

Of course, if she was herself a van Princis, as other versions have it, then
yes, she might have been known as Penelope Prince, conceivably.

I would have to ask, though, whether there is some chance that the Penelope
Prince cited in these passages might have been someone else altogether? I
have never had occasion to study Gravesend, and so am not familiar with the
names there.

Regards,
Ted Snediker


This thread: