First, you assume that Rupp did not or did check all sources available to him in his lifetime....HOW do you know this? Have you done an exhaustive scholarly piece to make such a blanket statement is true? 2.Unless you are an expert in the customs of French nanimg practices of the time period in question you have absolutely no right ro make 'absolute' statements of Womens' naming practices ....some may or may not have done this and because you have a few documents and heard a few 'experts' make these exertions may make them true in some instances, but not asthe final arbiter on the matters.
3 HOW DO YOU KNOW the Indian story isn't true?It well may be not, but perhaps some type or meeting DID take place and your snide, snarky dismissal this of it screams AMATEUR.
I too am a descendant of both the LeFevres, Ferrees several times over as well as the DuBois, Herrs, KendigsGroffs, Barrs ......
You only have only proof which others have offered about wherenames came from before. By your unwillingness to accept or open up other possibilities is the poorest example of genealogical scholarship.Not considering other's discoveries about names,naming practices or where they came from, so YOU can be the expert, judge and jury in this matteris the example of a small mind and am example of lack of knowledge.
Your absolute refusal to point out that Lancaster became its own county just proves my point that you have to be someone superior over others, just so you, but not that they could be in the know Lancaster split from Chester......FYI there is a program going on between the two so the public can have access to BOTH records Don't believe me? Calll the LancasterArchives.You may have a lot of knowledge, but you are not the only one, and you have the worst, most belligerent attitude for a genealogist EVER