John Hopkins
Privacy Level: Open (White)

John Hopkins (abt. 1606 - 1654)

John Hopkins
Born about in Englandmap [uncertain]
Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
Husband of — married before 1632 [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died at about age 48 in Hartford, Hartford, Connecticutmap
Profile last modified | Created 25 Sep 2010
This page has been accessed 11,312 times.
The Puritan Great Migration.
John Hopkins migrated to New England during the Puritan Great Migration (1621-1640). (See The Great Migration (Series 2), by R. C. Anderson, vol. 3, p. 411)
Join: Puritan Great Migration Project
Discuss: pgm

Contents

Biography

John Hopkins, of unknown parents, was born about 1606. This is based on his estimated first marriage by about 1631.[1]

John married Jane _____ by about 1631. She married (2) by 1657 Nathaniel Ward and married (3) Oct 1670 Gregory Wolterton.[1]

  • :Question of wife's maiden name:
    The identity of John Hopkins's wife as Jane Strong, daughter of Thomas & Joanna (Bagge) Strong, is controversial, and I have yet to find any hard evidence proving Mrs. Jane Hopkins is Jane Strong of Chardstock. The reason for its importance is that Jane Strong's grandfather, George Strong, has some illustrious descendants. The temptation to make the connection, despite lack of a firm connection, is very strong. On the other hand, there is no evidence disproving it, either. That is, the fate of Jane Strong of Chardstock in England appears to be unknown. Her parents died in England, so she could not have come to America with them. Social taboo would have prevented a single woman from making the journey on her own, so many have assumed she and John were married in England. That no record of their marriage has been found in New England supports that theory, though many marriage records have, of course, been lost. There is another possibility. Jane Strong's first cousin, John Stronge (aka "Elder John Stronge"), came to Hartford in 1635 on the Hopewell "with his family," which could have included Jane. An arrival of Jane Strong in Hartford in 1635 puts her in a position to meet and marry John Hopkins when he moved to Hartford in 1636. However, these circumstances only mean that it is possible that John's wife was Jane Strong. But we now have a Stephen born in 1637, which would make him four years younger than his wife, Dorcas. Not impossible, but unlikely.

John migrated to Cambridge, Massachusetts about 1634.[1] He was a freeman 4 March 1634/5[2]

4 Aug 1634, John was granted four acres in the Westend Field in Cambridge, and had other grants in Cambridge between 1634 and 1636.[CaTR 9, 11, 13, 15, 19].[3] The Cambridge land inventory, 10 Oct 1635 listed three parcels "in the town one house with garden and backside about half a rood"; "by Pine Swamp about four acres": "and "by the Pine Swamp about one Rood"[4] He sold his house and property about 1636.[4]

John and family went to Hartford in 1636, where he is considered a Founder of Hartford and is memorialized on the Founder's Monument.

In the Feb 1639/40 Hartford land inventory, John Hopkins held fifteen parcels, some of which were acquired after his death. [HaBop 225-228][5]

7 May 1640 "John Hopkins of Hartford is also freed from watching until further order be taken by the Courte."[6]

4 Sep 1643, John Hopkins served on the jury of the Particular Court.[6]

Last Will & Testament

The Will of John HOPKINS of Cambridge, 1634[7][8]

I, John Hopkins of Hartford, do make this my last will and Testament: I make my wife Jane Hopkins my sole Executrix of my whole estate, out of it she to pay my daughter Bethiah Hopkins £30. And my will alsoe is that the one-half of all my Lands and howsing should be my son Stephen Hopkins to be enjoyed by him and his heyers fforever, when he shall have attayned the adg off twenty-two yeares.
And my will further is That iff my said wiff should marry again, then the one-half off the Estate that she shall then possess, the former portions being paid, shall be paid in Equall proportions to my said Son and daughter or their heyers after the decease of my wiff, these children to be under the control of their Mother.
Bethiah until 18 years of age and Stephen untill 22 years of age Shall remain with and under the Government of my Said wife until they have attayned their several years aforesaid. As also they shall noe way Contract or Engadg themselves in way of marriage without the knowledge and Consent of my wife aforesaid. I desire Mr. John Cullick & James Ensign to be Overseers.
John Hopkins
Witness:
John Cullick
William Andrews
James Ensign

Children

  1. Bethia Hopkins b. c. 1631; m. (1) at Hartford 27 May 1652 Samuel Stocking, son of George Stocking; m. (2) by 1685 James Steele, son of George Steele.[1]
  2. Stephen Hopkins b. say 1633; m. by 1657 Dorcas Brownson, dtr of John Brownson.

Could Stephen Hopkins be the father of John Hopkins ?

From the research of Evelyn Cole Peters, John Hopkins arrived in Boston. Settled at Cambridge by 1633, perhaps by 1630. Went to Hartford, Ct. with Hooker's company in 1636. Became a freeman in 1634.
Annie Arnous Haxtun, in "Signers of the Mayflower Compact", makes a strong argument that John Hopkins was the son of Stephen Hopkins, who came to America on the Mayflower. See this also
"Hartford, Ct Families" by L. A. Barbour, page 314" John Hopkins was in Cambridge in 1634; freeman Mass. March 4, 1635; removed to Hartford where he was an original proprietor; his home lot was on what is now the East Park; chosen townsman 1640; juror 1643.
"Genealogy of One Branch of the Hopkins Family (John of Hartford)", extracted from "Sketch of the Public & Private Life of Samuel Miles Hopkins of Salem, Conn", 1898, Rochester Historical Society, Rochester, NY, 1898. Before he left England, Stephen Hopkins had two children, Giles and Constanta, by a first wife, and at least one other named Damaris, by a second wife.
In Bradford's "History of Plymouth Plantation (pp. 448, 452), we find the list of passengers in the Mayflower. Among them are " Stephen Hopkins and Elizabeth his wife, and two children, Giles and Constanta, both by a former wife, and two more by this wife, called Damaris and Occanus, the last born at sea, and two servants, Edward Doty and Edward Litster."
It can be plausibly maintained that while Giles was the eldest son of Stephen by his first wife, there was a second son John, also by the first wife, and that this John, left behind in England on account of the second wife's jealousy and coming himself to Boston thirteen years after, is the ancestor of all our Hopkins tribe. It's certain that Elizabeth Hopkins exercised such a strong influence over her husband, Stephen Hopkins, that he made her son Caleb Hopkins his heir, regardless of the rights of Giles Hopkins, his eldest son by the former wife. It is also curious to find that Giles' first son was named Stephen, and that his second son was named John. The names Stephen and John indeed succeed each other continuously during the early history of the family.[9]
What seems to be the record of Stephen's second marriage at St. Mary's Whitchapel, London, reads simply: "Stephen Hopkins and Eliza Fisher, March, 1617".[10] The record of marriages at St. Mary Le Strand, London, adds other family names to the list: "November 23, 1612, John Hopkins and Jane Marshall";[11] "February 15, 1616, Hugh Richardson and Mary Hopkins;" Samuell Hopkins and Mary Tumber 10 August. 1614.[12] The "John" here mentioned may possibly be the brother of Stephen, from whom John of Hartford was named. The name Samuel is also perpetuated in the subsequent history of the Hopkins family. And, lest all these records from London churches should seem impertinent, we must remember that Bradford gives Stephen Hopkins as one of the Mayflower passengers "from the London section." Thus an argument has been constructed to prove that the Hopkins race is descended from Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower.
We can trace our descent with certainty to John Hopkins who came from England to Massachusetts with the Reverend Thomas Hooker in 1633. It would be very pleasant to know that this John Hopkins was the Mayflower Stephen's son by the first marriage, early deprived of his mother by her death and left behind in England by his father thirteen years before. The age and name of the son, and the name which the son in turn gave to his son, corroborate the surmise. Dr. Samuel Hopkins of Newport, and President Mark Hopkins of Williams College, although their biographers throw ? upon this genealogy, both inclined to the belief that Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower was their ancestor.
Yet the first link of connection still remains somewhat hypothetical, and the descent from so distinguished a member of the original Plymouth Company cannot be considered as absolutely proved.

Research Notes

Unsourced birth date: This profile previously showed a birth date of 1613, in St. Stephens, London, London, England. This information is unsourced and was removed.

Sources

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Anderson, Robert Charles. The Great Migration, Immigrants to New England, 1634-1635, Volume III, G-H, (Boston: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2003.) p. 411. Link at AmericanAncestors ($)
  2. Shurtleff, Nathaniel. Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England (William White, Boston, 1853-) p. 370
  3. The Records of the Town of Cambridge (formerly Newtowne) Massachusetts, 1630-1703 (Cambridge, Mass., 1901) p. 9, 11, 13, 15, 19
  4. 4.0 4.1 The Register Book of the Lands and Houses in the "New towne" and the town of Cambridge (Cambridge, Mass., 1896) inventory p. 26; [https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Q2EDAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb_hover&pg=GBS.PA40 sold property pp 40-41
  5. Original Distribution of the Lands in Hartford Among the Settlers, 1639, Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, Volume 14 (Hartford 1912; rpt. Bowie, Maryland, 1989) pp 225-228
  6. 6.0 6.1 Trumbull, J. Hammond. (transcriber). The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut Prior to the Union with New Haven Colony May 1665. (Hartford: Brown and Parsons, 1850.) AKA Colonial Records of Connecticut. Volume I. 1636-1665. Freed from watch p. 49; Jury p. 92
  7. Timothy Hopkin's (1932) book, John Hopkins of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1634, and Some of His Descendants, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, p. 6, citing Hartford Probate Records (2: 54-57) download from https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE223274&from=fhd
  8. Manwaring's Digest of Early Connecticut Probate Records (1: 130). 1 January 1648-49.
  9. If Stephen Hopkins had a brother named John, it would not have been unusual for Giles Hopkins to name his 2nd son "John". Chet Snow. See next paragraph. 11 Sep. 2017.
  10. Marriage: "London, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812"
    London Metropolitan Archives; London, England; London Church of England Parish Registers; Reference Number: P93/MRY1/001
    Ancestry Record 1624 #658774 (accessed 24 October 2023)
    Stephen Hopkins marriage to Eliza Fisher on 19 Feb 1617 in St Mary, Whitechapel, Tower Hamlets, Middlesex, England.
  11. Marriage: "Westminster, London, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1558-1812"
    City of Westminster Archives Centre; London, England; Westminster Church of England Parish Registers; Reference: SML/PR/1/1
    Ancestry Record 61865 #151220 (accessed 24 October 2023)
    John Hopkins marriage to Jane Marshall on 23 Nov 1612 in St Mary Le Strand, London, Westminster, England.
  12. Marriage: "Westminster, London, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1558-1812"
    City of Westminster Archives Centre; London, England; Westminster Church of England Parish Registers; Reference: SML/PR/1/1
    Ancestry Record 61865 #90151386 (accessed 24 October 2023)
    Anne Tumber marriage to Samuell Hopkins on 10 Aug 1614 in St Mary Le Strand, London, Westminster, England.

See also:

  • Macdonough, Rodney. The Macdonough-Hackstaff Ancestry (Press of S. Usher, Boston, 1901) Page 349-55
  • Roberts, Gary Boyd; Ancestors of American Presidents. Boston: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2009. This person is an ancestor of President Millard Fillmore John Hopkins's wife is given only as "Jane ----."
  • Shoemaker Book, Blair, Williams T., (Scranton, PA: International Textbook Press for J. I. Shoemaker, 1924), page 665.
  • Barbour, Lucius Barnes, 1982, Families of Early Hartford, Connecticut, Genealogical Publishing Co. Inc., Baltimore, Maryland and Connecticut Society of Genealogists, Inc., Glastonbury, Connecticut pp. 314
  • Timothy Hopkins. 1932. John Hopkins of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1634, and Some of His Descendants. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA. John Hopkins's wife is given only as "Jane."
  • Timothy Hopkins. 1948. "Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower* and Some of His Descendants." New England Historical and Genealogical Register 102(1): 46-60. On p. 46 is an editorial footnote to the title of the article: *I have no reason to believe that John Hopkins of Hartford was related to Stephen of the Mayflower. I have seen statements that he was the son of Stephen; but as Stephen does not mention him in his will and Bradford makes no reference to such a son of Stephen and no one has found any authority which is based upon any fact, I do not think that any faith can be placed in such statements. (Letter of T.H., 28 April 1908.)
  • John Farmer. 1829. Genealogical Register of the First Settlers of New England. Carter, Andrews & Co., Lancaster, MA (republ. 1964/69 by Genealogical Publ. Co., Baltimore; online at GenealogyLibrary.com). On p. 149: JOHN, Cambridge, was admitted freeman 1635.
  • Clarence Almon Torrey. 1997. New England Marriages Prior to 1700. Genealogical Publ. Co., Baltimore. On p. 387: HOPKINS, John (-1654) & Jane __?__, m/2 Nathaniel WARD, m/3 Gregory WOLTERTON; b 1634; Cambridge / Hartford, CT. The "b 1634" is supposed to indicate the birth date of a child as an indication that the marriage took place before this time. I say "supposed to" because I know of no birth record for Stephen, 1634 or otherwise (see comments below). The locations given by Torrey are known residences of the husband, ending with the husband's place of death. An entry in Torrey does not imply a marriage in New England; it only demonstrates the presence of a married couple there before 1700. Torrey is not a compilation of primary records; it is a compilation of secondary published sources.
  • Judd, Sylvester. Ancestors of Rev. Samuel hopkins, D.D., of Newport, and Their Children., The New England Historical & Genealogical Register (NEHGS, Boston, Mass., 1851) Vol. 5, Page 43-5
  • "The Stocking Ancestry and History of a Stocking Family" compiled by Marie Stocking, May 15, 1963




Is John your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message private message a profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with John by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA. Y-chromosome DNA test-takers in his direct paternal line on WikiTree:
  • John Hopkins Find Relationship : Family Tree DNA Y-DNA Test 67 markers, haplogroup r-m269, FTDNA kit #B61663 + Y-Chromosome Test 67 markers, haplogroup r-m269, FTDNA kit #B61663, MitoYDNA ID B61663 [compare]

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 14

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Son was born in 1633 in England. John arrived in Cambridge in 1634, but he married Jane in Cambridge in 1633? Might need to clean that up
posted by Daniel Sheffield Sr.
Thanks, Daniel. FYI -once you learn how to create profiles, and then become pre-1700 certified, that's the type of correction you will be able to (and we would encourage you) to make yourself. WikiTree has some great new learning materials. You might want to check out the WikiTree Academy.
posted by M Cole
After visiting this profile page earlier, I was concerned by the citation of a book allegedly by Timothy Hopkins in 1948, called "Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower, and Some of His Descendants" . I have no knowledge of such a book. I was wondering if that citation was also a mistake, since there is such an obvious error in the citation of the marriage records of St Mary Le Strand. Anyway, the book I have and am familiar with is "John Hopkins of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1634 and Some of His Descendants" by Timothy Hopkins in 1932. Of course, just because I'm not familiar with the cited book on this page, doesn't mean it isn't correct. I just will feel better if I mention the only book that I am familiar with by Timothy Hopkins. Anyway, it seems there must have been another book. In any case, I really do think the marriage of John Hopkins and Jane Marshall should be investigated as the marriage of John of Cambridge! I don't think John of Cambridge and of Hartford is the son of Stephen of the Mayflower. I do think if we follow the lead of the 1612 marriage, we might find his real parents. I am most anxious for the reply from St Mary Le Strand. I suspect I will have to hire local researchers, but I hope the church will locate the record for me themselves. That would be great. Vicki Hopkins Kahn
posted by Vicki (Hopkins) Kahn
Hi Vicki, Fortunately the parish registers are indexed on Ancestry, so I was able to correct and source the marriage date. There was a marriage for Samuel Hopkins and Ann Tumber that was mixed and matched with the John Hopkins marriage.

"Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower, and Some of His Descendants" is not a book, but an article the New England Historical and Genealogical Register.

posted by M Cole
Thank you, M Cole! It looks really good! Also, I'm gratified to know that was an article.

Thanks, again. Vicki Kahn

PS, By the way, what do you think of my idea that the John and jane married in 1612 might actually be the John and Jane we've all been looking for this long time?

posted by Vicki (Hopkins) Kahn
To Whom It May Concern: I just sent a private message to the Project and to John as profile managers, but I think perhaps it is OK to post a public comment here. It has just come to my attention that there is a transcription error in the section on this profile asking if John Hopkins of Cambridge and Hartford is the son of Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower. That error is: The record of marriages at St. Mary Le Strand, London, adds other family names to the list: "November 23, 1612, John Hopkins and Ann Tumber". However, Haxtun, in her book, "Signers of the Mayflower Compact" has recorded a marriage of " 23 November, 1612, between John Hopkins and Jane Marshall." Followed by a marriage record of "-------, 1624,----Samuel Hopkins and Ann Tumber." So, John did not marry Ann, he married Jane. I am also wondering if this John Hopkins married to Jane Marshall in 1612, may be John of Hartford. I do not see why John needs to be a son of Stephen of the Mayflower. Perhaps he is his brother or other kinsman. If we begin a working hypothesis that John Hopkins of Hartford was 20 years old at the time of his marriage in 1612, he would be 42 at the time of his becoming a "freeman" and the birth of his son Stephen, in 1634. He would be 62 at the time of his death in 1654. More important, perhaps is the age of Jane. If she were 18 at her marriage in 1612, she would be 40 at the birth of her son Stephen in 1634--and if she were 20 in 1612 she would be 42 in 1634. Both ages well within the childbearing years. She could easily have both Stephen and Bethia before she was 50. She did not have any more children in her other marriages after John"s death in 1654. John and Jane could have easily had children during the 22 years between their marriage in 1612 and John's becoming a "freeman" in 1634. These children could easily have remained in England. Perhaps they did not join the Puritan church. Also, because a man had to be 21 years old or older to become a "freeman", it does not mean that he had to turn 21 years old on that date. John could easily have become a freeman at the age of 42. A man had to prove himself within the community before he was accepted and made a freeman. It usually took 3 to 4 years to do so, and he had to prove himself as a member of the church, and swear loyalty to the government. All of which could take time. Personally, I am bout to start research of my own in this direction. Admittedly, I am not familiar with all of the sources listed on this profile, but within Haxtun's book, she only uses conjecture to place John at a young age and as the son of Stephen of the Mayflower--not real evidence. I think John Hopkins who married Jane Marshall on 23 November, 1612, may actually be John Hopkins of Cambridge and Hartford. I have sent an initial inquiry to St Mary Le Strand regarding searching the records for this marriage, and birth or baptism records of children of this marriage, and also, birth or baptism records for John Hopkins and for Jane Marshall, hoping to find their parents. I am waiting for a response. Anyway, I do think this is a viable theory and would appreciate feedback on it. Thank you, Vicki Hopkins Kahn
posted by Vicki (Hopkins) Kahn
Wondering if this profile should be PPP due to disputed connection to Mayflower Stephen Hopkins?
posted by Jillaine Smith
I'm not at all convinced by the Mayflower-Stephen-as-father theory. He brought two children by the first wife; why would he bring two and leave one behind?
posted by Jillaine Smith
Also changing Jane's surname to Unknown
posted by Anne B
Planning an overhaul of this profile. There is a lot of extraneous information and little substtance about John. There is an [https://www.americanancestors.org/DB116/i/7118/411/235154249

Anderson Article]. I will also consult the Colony and Hartford records.

Removals: The sections on children Bethia and Stephen will be moved/incorporated into their profiles.

The section about Stephen Hopkins as father will be removed except maybe one paragraph saying No he isn't.

The Connecticut Timeline is lovely, but doesn't belong here.

Thoughts anyone.

posted by Anne B
Still looking for Hopkins descendants with y DNA testing ,this John or Stephan ( Mayflower) in US as well England . Thanks john hopkins
posted by John Hopkins
No serious Mayflower researcher thinks John is son of Stephen & Mary. See my note below from 2 years ago about all the copied problems with this family.
posted by Tish Bucher
In the Stocking Ancestry, (https://archive.org/stream/stockingancestry00stoc#page/5/mode/2up/search/bethia) on page 4, Charles Henry Wright Stocking seems to confuse Stephen Hopkins and a Samuel Hopkins. Samuel Hopkins had two sons names Joseph and Nathaniel. Does anyone know more about a Samuel Hopkins who had these two sons?
posted by Elizabeth (Hart) Hyatt
The Mayflower Society and Connecticut & Massachusetts Hopkins scholars and researchers agree that John is not the son of Stephen Hopkins of the Mayflower and that John's wife's maiden name is not known.

See AmericanAncestors.com at http://tinyurl.com/cm9axxz for WARNINGS about these families and http://mayflowerfamilies.com/?page_id=322

The 1613 birth/baptism date in St. Stephen's (at Coleman Street), London is an OLD error for a real baptism in April 1611 at St. Katherine Coleman, London of a John, son of Stephen (but not Mayflower since he wasn't in the country). We have no idea which John Hopkins or which Stephen Hopkins they were. If people only have access to London records then we're missing all the other John and Stephen Hopkins in England whose records are not on Ancestry. See http://tinyurl.com/Johnson-Book

The reference to "Annie Arnous Haxtun, in Signers of the Mayflower Compact" in the text on the left refers to a book published around 1897 (?) that she compiled from write-in letters to a newspaper genealogy column. LOTS of things have change since then so we should be quoting her sources (there weren't any), not her book. She only expressed OPINIONS and what she had about early Mayflower Stephen Hopkins, his made-up parents, grandparents and children (John for example) is wrong.

John is not brother of a Bethia who (didn't) marry Wm Kelsey. Kelsey's wife is not known. Even the Kelsey Kindred uses no first and no maiden name.

If you need MAYFLOWER help see http://tinyurl.com/WIKIPEDIA-Stephen-Hopkins and http://boards.ancestry.com/surnames.hopkins/5435/mb.ashx for explanation of how he got tagged with the bapt date of 29 Oct 1581 in Gloucester, married to the mythical Constance Dudley and how Nicholas Hopkins & Mary Poole were invented as his parents and how Stephen "of Norfolk" was invented as Nicholas's father.

posted by Tish Bucher