Son of Thomas Dibble|
Father of Wakefield Dibble
There are several Ebenezer Dibbles. This is the oldest, who I have called Ebenezer Dibble (the older). He had a son, Ebenezer Dibble, who is not my direct ancestor, so I am mostly ignoring him. Another son, Wakefield Dibble is my direct ancestor, and one of his sons was Rev. Ebenezer Dibblee, another direct ancestor. There are other Ebenezers in the Dibble/Dibblee families as well, so be careful!
This Ebenezer lives in Windsor. His son, Wakefield, is described in the will of Thomas Dibble (senior) as his grandson, so Ebenezer Dibble must be Thomas' son. Ebenezer is not mentioned in the will, as he died before his father, in the Great Swamp Fight in King Philip's War.
Original texts and relevant websites
Places in Connecticut connected with Dibblees
Wars connected with the Dibblee family
Freemen in Massachusetts and Connecticut
Entries in Matthew Grant's Old Church Record
Case of Israel Dibble & Deborah Bartlett
Wills connected with Thomas Dibble
Military equipment of Windsor
Letter about the death of 'King Philip'
|26 Sep 1641||Ebenezer Deble born in Windsor||Mormon Database|
|Nov 1663||Ebenezer Dibble & Mary Wakefield married in New Haven||New Haven records|
|11 Dec 1664||Ebenzer Deble not in full communion of church, but asking for baptism of his children||see Church|
|24 Dec 1664||Mary, daughter of Ebenezer Deble, born. She was baptised on 24 Dec 1664.||Old Church Record|
|15 Sep 1667||Wakefeld, son of Ebenezer Deble, born. He was baptised on 17 May 1668.||Old Church Record|
|13 Oct 1670||Ebenezer made Freeman of Windsor at a Court of Election at Hartford.||Freemen records|
|1670||Unnamed daughter of Ebenezer dies.||Old Church Record|
|17 Aug 1671||Ebenezer, son of Ebenezer Deble was baptised.||Old Church Record|
|Dec 31 1672||Ebenezer Dibble is appointed as Bayliff of Windsor.||Stiles' Ancient Windsor Vol I page 87|
|c.1673||John, son of Ebenezer Deble was born.||Connecticut probate 1635-1700 page 193|
|9 Oct 1675||Ebenezer Dible is in the military. The Council provides some corn for his family.||Connecticut Records 1665-1678 page 374|
|6 Dec 1675||Ebenezer Dibble died in the Great Swamp Fight.||Connecticut probate 1635-1700 page 193|
|12 Aug 1676||William Jones writes to the Governor of Connecticut describing the death of 'King Philip'. He asks for help for Ebenezer Dibble's widow, who has been left destitute.||King Philip letter|
In Vital records of New Haven, 1649-1850, it says "Ebenezer Dibble & Mary Wakefield were married by Mr: Jones november 1663". Ebenezer's will (see below) says his widow is Mary Dibble. While they were married in New Haven, the children were baptised in Windsor, and Ebenzer was made bailiff there, so that is where the family were living.
Ebenezer Dibble died in the Great Swamp fight and his wife was left destitute (see Military career below). However, she remarried. From Windsor Marriages (First Book) 1638-1704, "James Hellior and Mary that was the wife of Ebenezer Dible were married June 28th 1677 by Capt Nubery".
|born||baptised||spouse (from Windsor Marriages)|
|Mary||24 Dec 1664 (Old Church Record)||25 Dec 1664 (Old Church Record)|
|Wakefield||15 Sep 1667 (Old Church Record)||17 May 1668 (Old Church Record)||Sarah Loomis (27 Dec 1692), then Jane Fyler (29 Sep 1694)|
|unnamed daughter||dies in 1770 (Old Church Record)|
|Ebenezer (junior)||17 Aug 1671 (Old Church Record)||Mary Loomis (16 Jul 1696)|
|John||c. 1673 (Probate)|
Matthew Grant's Old Church Record says , August 1677, that Ebenezer Deble had 5 children "so far as I am able to find out". There was an unnamed daughter, who died in 1770, obviously an infant death. I do not know if she is included in the count or not.
In 11 Dec 1664, Matthew Grant mentions in his Old Church Record, that Ebenzer Deble had tended himself "publickly, to attain baptism for thir children and remain so still and have not put one for full communion nor have not Joined themselves with the other company". So he was not a full member of the congregation, but sufficiently so to get his children baptised.
This sounds a bit odd. Old Church Record also says:
"June 21 1668 It was by vote of the Church assented to that Adult persons be it husban or wife that desired to have their children Baptized by mr chancy, should, it they presented themselves to the elders in privat, and declared to their satisfaction thir knowledg in the principles & owned the fathers covinant, then there should nothing be required of them in publick until they presented themselves for full communion.
before this time it had been the practic to call such persons in publiqu, to stand forth and answer to questions of catechism propounded to them and to own the church covinant. And the time which mr warham first begann this practic was january 31, 1657 and went onne in the practic of it untill march 19, 1664 which day he declared to the church that he had met with such arguments against the practice conserning the baptizing of members [chi]ldren, that he could not get throw at present, and could not goe one in practis as hee had don without scrupiel of conscience, therefore must forebare to give [ ] not that he intended to cast of the practice holy, but only to delaye it for a time till he could better be able to answer his present scruples, for if he should act and not of faith rom.14 would be sin to him.
So the delaye of it from marh. 19 64 was three years and so much as from the 19. of March to the 21 of Juen that mr chancy set it one agyne."
So what does this all mean? This is the "Half-Way Covenant, a doctrinal decision of the Congregational churches in New England. The first generation of Congregationalists had decided that only adults with personal experience of conversion were eligible to full membership but that children shared in the covenant of their parents and therefore should be admitted to all the privileges of the church except the Lord's Supper. The question arose (c.1650) whether this privilege should be extended to the children of these children, even though the parents of the second generation may have confessed no experience that brought them into full communion. It was proposed (1657) and adopted (1662) by a church synod that the privileges should be extended. The measure, to which the nickname Half-Way Covenant became attached, provoked much controversy and was never adopted by all the churches" (quoted from Columbia Encyclopedia). It seems that Ebenezer Deble had done one of these Half-Way Covenants. His father Thomas Dibble was a full member of the church, so his children, such as Ebenezer, could be baptised. But he could not take communion unless he became a full member, which it seemed he never did. He could have his children baptised, and go to church services.
In 13 Oct 1670 Ebenezer Dibble was made Freeman of Connecticut (click here for more information on Freemen). This meant that he could vote, and was an established member of the community.
From Page 87 of Ancient Windsor, Connecticut Vol I (history) by Henry Reed Stiles:
Dec 31 1672 "Ebenezer Dibble was by town vote chosen for town Baylif for the year ensuing, to go forth when required by the townsmen to fetch in town rates of those that refuse or neglect to pay their rates when demanded, and the Bayliff is allowed to take three pence upon a shilling for his pains."
His grandfather, Robert Deeble had been bailiff in Dorchester.
In 1675, in raising the tax for the support of the rivulet ferry, it was thought more equitable to lay the tax on persons and such property as was to be the most benefited. The taxpayers were divided into five classes. The first class was headed "Family, horse and four oxen." Of this class there were 29. Of "Family, horse and two oxen," there were 42; of "Family and horse," 37; of "Only families," 15; "Single men," 24, of which 17 owned horses.
Among the class of "Family and horse" are listed T.Deble Jr, Ebns Debble, Jno. Debble.
On 1 Mar 1669, the brother of Ebenezer Dibble, Israel Dibble was accused of adultery with Deborah Barlet by her husband Benjamin Bartlet. Click here for more about this case. Various members of the Dibble family provided testimony attacking this accusation, including Ebenezer Dibble. Ebenezer's testimony does bring up one point about his age. The testimony says that he is 21 years old "or there about". I would make him closer to 28 if he was born in Sep 1641, as the Mormon database suggests. We could have a wrong birth date for 'our' Ebenezer. There could have been an earlier Ebenezer whose birth was noted, and then died as an infant death, and the name got reused, like the Samual Dibbles (see Thomas Dibble's page). Or perhaps the entry is wrong. But the court does seem vague as to the date. Perhaps they just looked at him and thought "He looks around 21 years old". The important ages were to sort out people with the same name, such as the Thomas Dibbles. If Ebenezer was 21, then so was Thomas Junior, which would make them twins!
While the verdict of the case of Israel Dibble and Deborah Barlet is unknown, it did not seem to affect the standing of the Dibble family as a whole. However, it may have affected the standing of Israel Dibble himself. Israel was the oldest son of Thomas Dibble senior, and Ebenezer was the second oldest son. Yet after the case Ebenezer seems to have achieved a greater status in the town, becoming Freeman and then bayliff.
In 3 July 1667, Ebenezer Dibble received a draggon's pouch from his brother (I think) Thomas Dibble. Thomas made 16 of these pouches for dragoons, including himself, who were going to fight Indians. Thomas got paid £2/1/- (two pounds, one shilling) for these pounches, whole Ebenezer Dibble got paid fifteen shillings for half pikes. See Military Equipment of Windsor for details.
Either Ebenezer Dibble stayed in the military or he rejoined sometime before October 1675. "At a meeting of the Council Octobr, 9th, 1675... The Council doe appoynt the Assist and Comr of Windso take care to prouide some corn for the supply of Ebenezer Dible's famaly, who hath been implyed in the seruice of the country." (See Connecticut Records 1665-1678 page 374.)
It sounds as if Ebenezer was taking part in King Philip's War, sometimes called the First Indian War or Metacom's War. This was an armed conflict between Native American inhabitants of present-day New England and English colonists and their Native American allies, in 1675–78. The war is named after the main leader of the Native American side, Metacomet, known to the English as 'King Philip'. There is a letter dated 1676 to the Governor describing 'King Philips' death. Click here for a transcript. The same letter asks for help for the widow of Ebenezer Dibble whose husband was killed at the swamp fight. He "died in debt more than his estate" so his widow was destitute. See below for details.
Matthew Grant's Old Church Record lists five people dying "in war" in 1675, including Ebenezer Deble. From Page 225 of Ancient Windsor, Connecticut Vol I (history) by Henry Reed Stiles: "In the town books, the recorder has entered the following: Here I set down the Deaths of several persons who went against the Indians and were wounded that they died. It was on the 19th of December, 1695. Capt. Samuel Marshall, Ebenezer Dibble, Nath. Pond, Richard Saxton, Edward Chapman."
Description of the swamp fight from Wikipedia: On November 2, Plymouth Colony governor Josiah Winslow led a combined force of colonial militia against the Narragansett tribe, who had retreated to a massive fort in a frozen swamp. The cold weather in December froze the swamp so it was relatively easy to cross. Led by an Indian guide, on a very cold December 16, 1675, the colonial force found the Narragansett fort near present-day South Kingstown, Rhode Island. A combined force of Plymouth, Massachusetts, and Connecticut militia numbering about 1,000 men, including about 150 Pequots and Mohican Indian allies, attacked the Indian fort. The fierce battle that followed is known as the Great Swamp Fight. It is believed that the militia killed about 300 Narragansett (exact figures are unavailable). The militia burned the fort (occupying over 5 acres of land) and destroyed most of the tribe's winter stores. Most of the Narragansett warriors and their families escaped into the frozen swamp. Facing a winter with little food and shelter, the entire surviving Narragansett tribe was forced out of quasi-neutrality and joined the fight. The colonists lost many of their officers in this assault: about 70 of their men were killed and nearly 150 more wounded. Lacking supplies for an extended campaign the rest of the colonial assembled forces returned to their homes.
From Early Connecticut probate records Vol 1 1635-1700 page 193.
Probate Records Vol III Page 173.
Dibble, Ebenezer, Windsor, who in Warr with the Indians last December is dead.
© Jo Edkins 2012 - Return to Early Dibblee History index