Did Sir Alexander Webb II exist?

Question

Sir Alexander Webb II is currently connected as a Questionable Magna Carta Gateway Ancestor and the father of two Puritan Great Migration immigrants: Richard Webb of Norwalk, CT and Henry Webb of Boston. Until today, when he was disconnected, he was also listed as the father of Christopher Webb of Braintree. The theory of his parentage of those three immigrants (and a few others) can be traced to a couple of late 19th Century-early 20th Century unsourced genealogies: Charles Selleck's 1896 self-published history of Norwalk, CT (pp 387-388, 398-399, 402-403 interpage), which is available online at this link, and a manuscript entitled "Webb Genealogy from 1350 to 1913" by James B. Webb, which is referred to as a source by some online Webb genealogists but which does not seem to be readily available.

The problem is that I can find absolutely zero evidence of the existence of Sir Alexander Webb. I found evidence of his putative father, but no reliable evidence of him, his marriage or, most importantly, his parentage of Richard Webb of Norwalk or Henry Webb of Boston. His parentage of Christopher Webb of Braintree has already been disproven. It seems possible that the link through him was created in order to show a relationship with William Shakespeare.

Can anyone find any reliable evidence that Sir Alexander Webb existed? And if so, that he was the father of either Richard Webb or Henry Webb?

Comments

It appears, in any event, that the "Sir" is incorrect. The (unreliable) sources for him don't say that he was Sir, they say that one of his ancestors in the 15th century was Sir.

Answer 1

Getting closer to disproving his existence. Kate Emery Pogue's 2008 book "Shakespeare's Family" states that the will of Alexander Webbe (husband of Margaret Arden and supposed father of "Sir Alexander Webb II") makes bequests to his six children: Robert, Edward, Anne, Elizabeth, Mary and Sara. John Shakespeare, the Bard's father, was an overseer. No son Alexander Jr. appears to have been mentioned. If I can track down a copy or transcription of the will, that would be the final nail in Sir Alexander Webb II's coffin.

Comments

Alexander Webbe (of Snitterfield, husband of Margaret) is described as a husbandman in the 1560s. Unlikely that his son got a knighthood

 http://collections.shakespeare.org.uk/search/archive/view_as/list/search/everywhere:alexander-webbe

---

Helen - Thanks for the link. The other Shakespeare original record source I found that I like a lot is: https://shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/exhibition

---

Actually, looks like a lot of the docs in shakespearedocumented come from the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust - ie collections.shakespeare.org.uk

---

You can take known people and find that even wills can be incorrect because of the material presented to them.  Noone can find the correct spelling of my greatgrandfathers name because he didn't use it.  And even his middle name has different spellings.  I go by what his grandson my dad said.  And they had biblical names so it would make sense he was Corinthias rather than Corinthian but because we can't find a legal paper using that name we may never know.  Robert could be Robert Alexander so it might be good to find an article with that mentioned or something similar. That would be proof.  Or if you look at ancestors with name combinations. With the Webbs they reoccur over and over and over and over.  My ancestors are Henrys too.  Lots of them.  And James Henry appears often.

---

Chase, I accidentally clicked on the star (using a phone) but I think this is the best answer.

For reference Since your answer back in 2019. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Webb-112#_note-Outlines2:407-8

and https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Webb-113

Edit corrected 2nd link

Answer 2

Find this on Geni, Sir Alexander Webb II born abt 1559,Stratford on Avon

Warwickshire England.Shows parents names also.

Comments

Thanks. I've seen the Geni profile. It uses the same bad sources that the WT profile for him uses, eg unsourced family genealogy pages. Nothing reliable.

We need something like a parish record, court record, deed, contract, tax record, or will or estate record. Heck, I'd settle for a reasonably contemporary pedigree. I note that the only Webb mentioned in the 1619 Visitations of Warwick is a William Webb from Oxfordshire. See https://archive.org/details/visitationcount01britgoog/page/n334

Answer 3

He existed

Comments

Not a big deal. We can agree to disagree. Seems like you disagree each time I tell you why I think a man with his name existed. You counter with telling me you got proof he did not. I counter with somewhere I read about him, then you counter with another reason why you think I am wrong. Not important enough to keep going. No big deal.

---

I am of the aforementioned Webb line, and am trying to clean up my Ancestry tree. There is, indeed, a great deal of unreliable and conflicting information on there, to be sure. I did come across a partial reference for a Probate (UK Extracted Probate Records) for a Sir Thomas Alexander Webb, Jr. buried at Charlton, Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England, so it would appear that such a man did exist and in that general area. It does not, however mean that he was a part of the referenced line.

---

I see probate records for several Thomas Webbs of Tetbury, Gloucestershire, but it does not appear that any of them were named Thomas Alexander Webb and there is no indication that any of them was a Sir.

---

Chase, I finally had time to dig into the record I found. It is simply a digital extract, part of a digital set called UK Extracted Probate records. I was hoping for details or better an actual document, but it includes only the name, fully, “Sir Thomas Alexander Webb, Jr.”. Other than the above mentioned, there is no document or details, nor any reference to follow, so it is of little use other than indicating that someone of that name and title had a probate. I cannot imagine that such a specific extract could be an error or confusion, but I am new to such research and have a very great deal to learn. As time permits I may research this further simply because I find the entire matter fascinating. Thank you kindly for your information.

---

Can you provide a link? Or know what website you found it on? I have not been able to find it.

---

Chase, it is available as an internal search tool, one of many, within Ancestry. That is where I have been assembling my tree. I had ‘inherited’ a profile for the questionable individual and there is a little hints button. One can adjust the sensitivity of the information used as search key. In the search results, a number of sources may be returned such as US and International Marriage Records 1560 - 1900, or in this case UK Extracted Probate Records 1269 - 1975. These are digitized data bases associated with or owned by Ancestry. Some of them include PDF copies of the documents, but in this case it did not. This is the link: https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/1610/ but I had trouble getting that result here. Either way there are no details or documents attached to it.

---

Thanks, William. When I do a search in UK Extracted Probate Records 1269 - 1975 for Thomas Alexander Webb, I find lots of entries for Thomas Webb, one of whom was buried at Charlton, Tetbury in 1604. But I find no entries for a Thomas Alexander Webb, let alone a Sir Thomas Alexander Webb, Jr.

---

Chase, I had the same lack of results when accessing from that link. Obviously this one snippet proves nothing, especially when it only comes up through that one way within Ancestry. I honestly have no idea how their system works. I am grateful for the genetic matching, though. I would likely never been able to follow my Hunt ancestors without it.  No record at all seems to exist for my maternal great grandfather’s birth to his father, yet dozens of genetic matches show his line back to fifth great grandfather. A pity I get snake eyes for my Jackson ancestors. My great grandfather Jackson is a solid brick wall dead end. If I ever find anything meaningful on the Webb business, I will let you know, but I am not holding my breath.

---

There are very many trees on Ancestry with a Sir Thomas Alexander Webb.Most just use other trees as a source but  some have an impressive array of records.Unfortunately just as some people copy whole trees without investigating, others add records willy nilly seemingly  without any evaluation. 

 I found this one which includes several records .One of these is  the 'extracted probate data base' .The link is to Thomas Webb  died in Tetbury  1604 whose will was proved in Gloucester . https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/75957794/person/362355662042/facts 

As you can see if the link works for you , the assemblage  of other  'sources' are to Thomas Webbs from all over England. Most are indexed without a clear date but  they come from different periods.  They   include  Thomas Webb father of the bride in a 1855  Birmingham wedding, an Elizabeth d of Thomas Webb baptised in Chippenham. Wiltshire in 1668 and a Thomas Alexander Webb (labourer), father of Mary baptised in Lewisham in 1855.

---

Agreed, Helen. This problem is not unique to the Webb genealogy, either as an examination on trees for my Forbes ancestors shows a similar …. Inconsistent … set of available entries which upon close examination, simply make no sense. It is rather unfortunate, but quite consistent with human nature. For me, researching ancestors is simply a matter of curiosity. I have no dog in the hunt, but certainly am curious as to who my real ancestors were, be they merchants or sharecroppers (my grandfather Webb and his father were both grocers; my father and his father were both riverboat captains.) It is definitely a challenge, even with the tools now available. 

Answer 4

According to the whole internet, "Sir Henry Alexander Webb" was gentleman usher to Queen Catherine Parr.

But according to this PDF on the Oxford Authorship site, the usher was a Henry Webb of Middlesex and left a sole daughter and heiress, Susan

http://www.oxford-shakespeare.com/BritishLibrary/BL_Add_Charter_16194.pdf (p. 5)

Implying of course that the usher wasn't the father of Alexander sr.

Comments

Yes. I think there has been a lot of creative genealogy both in linking US immigrants to relatives of Shakespeare and also in trying to link relatives of Shakespeare to earlier prominent families. From what I can tell, there is no good evidence connecting Shakespeare to any "Sir" anythings.

---

RJ - To the substance of your post, so it appears that Sir Henry Alexander Webb was Henry Webb (no Alexander and maybe no Sir) and he was not the father of Alexander Webb of Bearley/Snitterfield?

---

Well presumably Alexander Webb of Snitterfield had a father who was called something, which might have been Henry for all I know.  But if looking for sources for him, it looks like we can eliminate any that relate to the gentleman usher, because that was a different Henry Webb.

---

As a humorous aside, one of the genealogy books that is cited in support of the existence and lineage of Alexander Webb II is the "Winthrop-Babcock Genealogy" (see https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/27001/dvm_GenMono007279-00539-0/537 ), which was singled out by Donald Lines Jacobus in his "Genealogy as Pastime and Profession" as the type of genealogy book that should not be trusted and as containing blatantly false pedigrees (see https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=wu.89062938204;view=1up;seq=87 ).

---

I agree with the name other than the given name.  My own family doesn't go by their first names.  James Frederick goes by Fred, James Michael goes by Mike and and noone would know my dad by his first name because he rarely used it.  I realized that when searching for Henry Webb.  Maybe that is just the name they used,  since there are several Henrys. Maybe that is why I can't find connections.

---

I created a full profile for Henry Webbe, gentleman usher 

It now seems pretty clear that the whole widely-disseminated Webb genealogy from Sir Alexander Webb II on up is fraudulent. Sir Alexander Webb II did not exist, Sir Alexander Webb I did exist but was no Sir and there is no evidence he was related to the US immigrant Webbs. Sir Henry Alexander Webb, gentleman usher, is based off of a very real Henry Webbe, gentleman usher, but he was not a Sir, did not have the middle name Alexander, did not marry a woman named Grace Arden, and did not have a son named Alexander. There is no evidence that a Henry Webbe as described in the Webb genealogies, existed.

Answer 5

According to info provided to me by Wikitree, Alexander Webb Sr is the son of Grace Arden Webb, and then Alexander Webb II is his son of course. His son is then William Micajah Webb etc. .  Grace Arden is the son of Thomas Arden. Regarding the Sir, I think anyone can be appointed that title.  I think Paul McCartney is Sir Paul McCartney.

Comments

Unfortunately, there is a lot of information on Wikitree that is incorrect information that has been copied from other sources. The key is the quality of the sources. There are lots of family fables and made up genealogies in unsourced family genealogy books, which then get repeated and embellished in online family webpages/trees. Based on reliable evidence, Sir Alex and William Micajah appear to fall in that category.

---

We're a bit more egalitarian today  and anyone researching Sir Paul in 300 years time will find plenty of records to show what he did.Even today, the path to knighthood is somewhat easier for those from the right background. If the son of a husbandman achieved a knighthood, he would be known for having done something and there would be records. (Sir Thomas Cromwell is an example of relative rags to riches).

---

That is sad.  I do know that the same thing has happened with family search.org etc. And then people put stuff on with no connections to anyone and no dna matches. The tree is only as good as the info put on it.