MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
John Higgins

MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 09 jul 2005 06:17:01

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 09 jul 2005 13:11:06

In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!)

http://www.owsleyfamily.com though the site is down currently. You may be
able to get it through a Google search and then using the cached copy.

volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and Margeryn Popham as the
parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e., equating Sir
Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden.

These Hampdens are a pain, far too many of them, even though they died
up. The Bucks 1634 Visitation gives John as heir and Edmund of
Woodstock as sons to Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham; no sign of
Isabel.

There are many pages on the Hampdens in Lipscomb's "Bucks", Vol II, pp.
227 to 293 plus odd snippets elsewhere. These four volumes are
available on one CD.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas
Hampdens here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir
Thomas of Baddesley?

I'm not confident enough of the evidence at my disposal to make such
clarifications!

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 09 jul 2005 23:15:45

Dear John ~

Thank you for your post. You've asked a good question.

I recommend you examine the PCC wills of Thomas Hampden (died 1485) and
of his widow, Margery Popham (died 1506) [Margery married (2nd) Richard
Godfrey]. The specific references for these two wills are:

Thomas Hampden, PCC, 27 Logge
Margery Godfrey, PCC, 1 Adeane

One of these wills should indicate if Thomas and Margery had other
issue besides their son, John Hampden.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

Douglas Richardson royala

Perhaps ... but I doubt it

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 04:52:19

My comments are interspersed below. DR

"John Higgins" wrote:
Perhaps you should check out these wills yourself, to ensure the accuracy of
what you've published in MCA. They don't appear to address my question, but
they do seem to indicate that Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham had more
children than the single son John that you ascribe to them.

So you've seen the two Hampden wills already. Do you really expect
newsgroup members to go on a goose hunt for you, when you already know
the answer before you posted? Geez.

Perhaps an MCA correction is in order??

Perhaps?? ... but I doubt it.

Better luck next time, John.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 10 jul 2005 05:16:02

Perhaps you should check out these wills yourself, to ensure the accuracy of
what you've published in MCA. They don't appear to address my question, but
they do seem to indicate that Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham had more
children than the single son John that you ascribe to them.

Perhaps an MCA correction is in order??

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John ~

Thank you for your post. You've asked a good question.

I recommend you examine the PCC wills of Thomas Hampden (died 1485) and
of his widow, Margery Popham (died 1506) [Margery married (2nd) Richard
Godfrey]. The specific references for these two wills are:

Thomas Hampden, PCC, 27 Logge
Margery Godfrey, PCC, 1 Adeane

One of these wills should indicate if Thomas and Margery had other
issue besides their son, John Hampden.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire,

for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite,
among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'.
Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden,
Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son
John.
I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and

Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e.,
equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If so, this
might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.
Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of

Baddesley?
>

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 05:36:15

Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

Douglas Richardson royala

The parentage of Isabella Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 05:55:10

So, John, you saw the two Hampden wills after I gave you the references
for them today. Well and good. And they showed this couple had a
daughter named Isabella? Right?

Well, don't keep us in suspense. We all want to know what you found.
The accuracy of Leo van de Pas' website is hinging on your answer!
Also, Ronny Bodine's book. Also, tell us you found evidence that
Thomas Hampden was knighted. We have to know the answer.

By the way, the next time you follow my recommendations, please show at
least a little gratitude. Otherwise people will think you are just
another newsgroup sponger with an imaginary ax to grind.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

"John Higgins" wrote:
You should be careful of your facts before you make accusations about "goose
hunts"....looks more like a case of "constant misrepresentations"....who's
the goose?

As it happens, I took your suggestion regarding the wills at face value
(thank you for posting the information on them) and downloaded them from the
UK National Archives site this afternoon AFTER you posted the references.
Such a quick result IS possible, you know, in this age of technology...:-)

After reading the wills, my position is the same: MCA is WRONG in saying
that this couple had only a single child. And, NO, I certainly won't share
the details with you - especially after this response. You can do your own
research - if you have any interest at all in accuracy.

I think an apology is in order here....and an MCA correction.....

Peter Stewart

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 10 jul 2005 05:59:31

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1120970175.298330.29540@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is.

Yes, of course - Richardson is very big on "primary" evidence, as far as he
can understand it ("duxtaxat", or dumtaxat...indeed Tweedledumtaxat).

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson royala

The need for primary evidence

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 06:12:59

Peter Stewart wrote:
Yes, of course - Richardson is very big on "primary" evidence, as far as he
can understand it ("duxtaxat", or dumtaxat...indeed Tweedledumtaxat).

Peter Stewart

Dear Peter ~

As a matter of fact, I'm very big on primary evidence. I might suggest
you read the book, Evidence!, by Elizabeth Shown Mills, FASG. The book
is excellent.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 06:20:35

Well, John, don't keep us in suspense! Tell us true. You found that
the wills of Thomas Hampden and his widow, Margery, named a daughter
Isabella. Right? Also, you found evidence that Thomas Hampden was
knighted. Right?

Well? Tell us true. I'm holding my breath.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"John Higgins" wrote:
If you're looking for sources, you might start with the source that both MCA
and RPA cite for both Thomas Hampdens - Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea
Poyntz', mentioned in my first post. Leo has informed me that Bodine
provided sources, but I don't have access to most of them.

As it happens I believe that MCA and RPA are probably right in saying that
Isabel Hampden was the dau. of one Thomas Hampden and John Hampden was the
son of another Thomas Hampden. But I haven't seen evidence that confirms
this - or the ancestry or marriage of the first Thomas.

And even if Isabel was not the daughter of Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham
(as Leo following Bodine indicates), this couple apparently did have more
children than just John...so MCA is still wrong.

Peter Stewart

Re: The need for primary evidence

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 10 jul 2005 06:20:58

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1120972379.501296.216850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

Yes, of course - Richardson is very big on "primary" evidence, as far as
he
can understand it ("duxtaxat", or dumtaxat...indeed Tweedledumtaxat).

Peter Stewart

Dear Peter ~

As a matter of fact, I'm very big on primary evidence.


Then why on earth won't you take the trouble to learn Latin and French (NB
not "franqais") so that you can begin to study the primary evidence in your
chosen field?

Pretending that the registers of Urban V are your favourite light reading
doesn't cut any mustard here.

While you are at it, you might try to substantiate the various charges you
have laid against me over some recent threads. We all know you have the
motive, in spades, and you claim to have the opportunity. Exactly what is
lacking then?

Gumption? Or are you just blowing smoke at us all, yet again....

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: The need for primary evidence

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 10 jul 2005 06:29:40

Peter Stewart wrote:
Pretending that the registers of Urban V are your favourite light reading
doesn't cut any mustard here.

Peter Stewart

My, you're being silly goose today. Mustard has nothing to do with it.
Actually, Peter, I have the registers of Urbain V right by my bedside.
I read a few lines in them every night before I go to sleep.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

John Higgins

Re: Perhaps ... but I doubt it

Legg inn av John Higgins » 10 jul 2005 06:30:02

You should be careful of your facts before you make accusations about "goose
hunts"....looks more like a case of "constant misrepresentations"....who's
the goose?

As it happens, I took your suggestion regarding the wills at face value
(thank you for posting the information on them) and downloaded them from the
UK National Archives site this afternoon AFTER you posted the references.
Such a quick result IS possible, you know, in this age of technology...:-)

After reading the wills, my position is the same: MCA is WRONG in saying
that this couple had only a single child. And, NO, I certainly won't share
the details with you - especially after this response. You can do your own
research - if you have any interest at all in accuracy.

I think an apology is in order here....and an MCA correction.....

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 8:52 PM
Subject: Perhaps ... but I doubt it


My comments are interspersed below. DR

"John Higgins" wrote:
Perhaps you should check out these wills yourself, to ensure the
accuracy of
what you've published in MCA. They don't appear to address my question,
but
they do seem to indicate that Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham had more
children than the single son John that you ascribe to them.

So you've seen the two Hampden wills already. Do you really expect
newsgroup members to go on a goose hunt for you, when you already know
the answer before you posted? Geez.

Perhaps an MCA correction is in order??

Perhaps?? ... but I doubt it.

Better luck next time, John.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Peter Stewart

Re: The need for primary evidence

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 10 jul 2005 06:40:55

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1120973380.764816.312910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

Pretending that the registers of Urban V are your favourite light reading
doesn't cut any mustard here.

Peter Stewart

My, you're being silly goose today. Mustard has nothing to do with it.
Actually, Peter, I have the registers of Urbain V right by my bedside.
I read a few lines in them every night before I go to sleep.


Then simply tell us what is the gist of "duxtaxat" in your understanding of
the passage you favoured Tony with?

Your smarmy attempts at humour don't help to dig you out of these holes any
more than your ignoring the points at issue.

Peter Stewart

John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 10 jul 2005 07:05:01

If you're looking for sources, you might start with the source that both MCA
and RPA cite for both Thomas Hampdens - Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea
Poyntz', mentioned in my first post. Leo has informed me that Bodine
provided sources, but I don't have access to most of them.

As it happens I believe that MCA and RPA are probably right in saying that
Isabel Hampden was the dau. of one Thomas Hampden and John Hampden was the
son of another Thomas Hampden. But I haven't seen evidence that confirms
this - or the ancestry or marriage of the first Thomas.

And even if Isabel was not the daughter of Thomas Hampden and Margery Popham
(as Leo following Bodine indicates), this couple apparently did have more
children than just John...so MCA is still wrong.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire,

for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite,
among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'.
Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden,
Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son
John.
I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden and

Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate; i.e.,
equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If so, this
might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.
Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of

Baddesley?
>

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 10 jul 2005 10:14:24

In message of 10 Jul, "Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com"
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:

Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database

Do we have to have this again?

and see that you have listed Isabella Hampden, wife of Walter
Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas Hampden (died 1485), of
Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas

I am beginning to think you are jealous and this is blinding your
perceptions. Leo is genuinely helpful, he gives people information for
free, he does not hold out the begging bowl; everyone respects that.

can supply us the evidence to prove this connection? Primary
evidence, that is.

This is obtuse. Leo has said on many occasions that he has a limited
set of sources and that they are, if I understand rightly, mostly
secondary and most being good (i.e. reasonably reliable) collections of
genealogical data. You have heard his say the same thing. And you are
thus now choosing to ignore what you have heard. I have never heard Leo
say that he worked from primary sources; he does not have to, so why
are you asking him to do so?

More demands that are made to sound oh-so-reasonable but which are
totally inappropriate for the circumstances. A bit of bullying again?

I've checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no
daughter named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed

"bollixed" - what sort of word is this? I wonder if it is intended
to be polite? I wonder also if it is the sort of language that you ask
others not to use?

two different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

I wish I knew what esquires were. Knights are easy, they got knighted
by a Big Cheese. But esquires?

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Leo van de Pas

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 10 jul 2005 16:29:01

Primary, I would like a correct statement in your request. Request? Demand
more likely. You maintain you found in "my database" , I would like to point
out that only I have access to "my data base", not even Ian Fettes has
access to "my data base".

You do need glasses, or do you have typing trouble? Where did you find
Isabella's father is a Sir? Not in my data base nor on my website.

You tell people to do their homewerk themselves before expecting others to
do it for them, well go ahead and do your own work. On the file in my
WEBSITE I quote my source, a source I expect to be available in Salt Lake
City. Have your venemous eyes overlooked my source? Or were you so delighted
of seeing my error of calling her father Sir, which I actually do not do,
not in my WEBSITE nor in my DATA BASE.

If anybody bollixed as you so gently put it, it is someone in the USA,
someone with a better reputation than you have. You are hectoring and
bullying again, I am still waiting for an apology for your last attempt. I
know, I can wait till the cows come home, that is collegiality for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married
to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for
whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite, among
other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately
MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks,
who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden
and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate;
i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If
so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?


D. Spencer Hines

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 10 jul 2005 19:08:13

"Venemous eyes..." [sic]

Hilarious!

Leo has slipped his tether again.

Pace, Pace...

DSH

""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:005501c5853f$85cbffa0$0300a8c0@Toshiba...

"Have your venemous [sic] eyes overlooked my source?"

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 10 jul 2005 19:59:06

In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

There is an abstract of his will in Testamenta Vetusta:

"Thomas Hampden, of Hampden, Esquire, on the Feast of St Luke the
Evangelist, 1482. My body to be buried before the image of St Mary
Magdalen, in the Chancel of the Church at Hampden. To the parson of
Hampden XIIIs IVd.; to a priest to sing for my soul XXXs.; to Margery
my wife, whom of youth I have known well conscienced, and to me a true
and loving wife; John my father; to my cousin John Wroughton; to Mr
William Colet, Parson, of Hampden; to John my son, and Elizabeth his
wife, my manor of Hampden; with remainder to Edmund, my second son,
Edward my third son, Francis, my fourth son, Alexander my fifth son and
to Henry my sixth son; remainder to my daughters Alice, Katherine, Jane
and Eleanor, until my daughters be married; my manors of Bledlowe,
Chilton, and Elsyngton, Upton, Wales and Waldrege, in the county of
Bucks. And I appoint my sons John and Edmund my executors.
"Proved November 22d, 1486."

Sounds like a little more than one child.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 10 jul 2005 23:46:01

Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Interestingly, the will and the abstract make no mention of a daughter
Isabel. This doesn't conclusively answer my original question about the
parrentage of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate (since the will discussed his
unmarried daughters, and she conceivably could have been omitted if she were
married before the will - although this seems unlikely). But it does seems
to support the idea that Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, the father of
Isabel, is a different individual from the Thomas Hampden who mar. Margery
Popham. So the question remains; who was this Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

There is an abstract of his will in Testamenta Vetusta:

"Thomas Hampden, of Hampden, Esquire, on the Feast of St Luke the
Evangelist, 1482. My body to be buried before the image of St Mary
Magdalen, in the Chancel of the Church at Hampden. To the parson of
Hampden XIIIs IVd.; to a priest to sing for my soul XXXs.; to Margery
my wife, whom of youth I have known well conscienced, and to me a true
and loving wife; John my father; to my cousin John Wroughton; to Mr
William Colet, Parson, of Hampden; to John my son, and Elizabeth his
wife, my manor of Hampden; with remainder to Edmund, my second son,
Edward my third son, Francis, my fourth son, Alexander my fifth son and
to Henry my sixth son; remainder to my daughters Alice, Katherine, Jane
and Eleanor, until my daughters be married; my manors of Bledlowe,
Chilton, and Elsyngton, Upton, Wales and Waldrege, in the county of
Bucks. And I appoint my sons John and Edmund my executors.
"Proved November 22d, 1486."

Sounds like a little more than one child.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 00:05:02

Dear John,

How many Thomas Hampden would there have been at that time? I think Adrian
Channing's list is interesting but I wonder, being nominted to become a
knight at the coronation of Edward V, a coronation that did not take
place----did these knights still become knights? Are there examples of
others on this "quite long list" that they were regarded as knights
afterwards? If not, then we could have two plain Thomas Hampden who may turn
out to be one person after all.
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John
mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Interestingly, the will and the abstract make no mention of a daughter
Isabel. This doesn't conclusively answer my original question about the
parrentage of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate (since the will discussed
his
unmarried daughters, and she conceivably could have been omitted if she
were
married before the will - although this seems unlikely). But it does
seems
to support the idea that Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, the father of
Isabel, is a different individual from the Thomas Hampden who mar. Margery
Popham. So the question remains; who was this Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

There is an abstract of his will in Testamenta Vetusta:

"Thomas Hampden, of Hampden, Esquire, on the Feast of St Luke the
Evangelist, 1482. My body to be buried before the image of St Mary
Magdalen, in the Chancel of the Church at Hampden. To the parson of
Hampden XIIIs IVd.; to a priest to sing for my soul XXXs.; to Margery
my wife, whom of youth I have known well conscienced, and to me a true
and loving wife; John my father; to my cousin John Wroughton; to Mr
William Colet, Parson, of Hampden; to John my son, and Elizabeth his
wife, my manor of Hampden; with remainder to Edmund, my second son,
Edward my third son, Francis, my fourth son, Alexander my fifth son and
to Henry my sixth son; remainder to my daughters Alice, Katherine, Jane
and Eleanor, until my daughters be married; my manors of Bledlowe,
Chilton, and Elsyngton, Upton, Wales and Waldrege, in the county of
Bucks. And I appoint my sons John and Edmund my executors.
"Proved November 22d, 1486."

Sounds like a little more than one child.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org



Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 11 jul 2005 00:16:10

In message of 10 Jul, leo@home.netspeed.com.au ("Leo") wrote:

I agree. However, we should still keep in mind that the will may only
have mentioned the unmarried daughters----there is still a reasonable
possibility that Ronnie Bodine is correct. Maybe someone can double
check the sources quoted by him?

There are none.

And this relationship is looking even more unlikely when it is
considered that this Isabella Hampden's son, Thomas Newdigate, married a
Katherine Hampden, great-granddaughter of Thomas H. and Margery Popham.

Moving on to related matter, Margery Popham's mother is given in the
Bucks 1634 visitation, as part of a very wordy account of her family,
as Bettrys Gowen, dau. of Sir John Gowen. This sir John also is said
ot have had a son Vmfree whose son John had a daughter Mary who m. Sir
David Owen. I wonder if sir John Gowen was not Sir John Bohun, 2nd
baron Bohun as he did have a son Humphrey who had a son John who had a
daughter Mary who married Sir David Owen, son of Owen Tudor?

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 jul 2005 00:18:01

As Tim Powys-Lybbe mentioned in an early message in this thread, there are
enough branches of the Hampdens that it would be unwise to assume that there
was only a single Thomas Hampden at this time.

The will doesn't address the question of whether Thomas Hampden of Hampden
was knighted because the will was dated 1482 and he reportedly was knighted
in 1483. So it seems we may have two SIR Thomas Hampdens rather than ttwo
"plain" Thomas Hampdens.

Based on the absence of Isabel being mentioned in the will of Thomas Hampden
of Hampden, I think that the conservative approach (pending further
evidence) would be to assume that her father Sir Thomas of Baddesley is not
the same as Thomas H. of Hampden.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Leo" <leo@home.netspeed.com.au>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John,

How many Thomas Hampden would there have been at that time? I think Adrian
Channing's list is interesting but I wonder, being nominted to become a
knight at the coronation of Edward V, a coronation that did not take
place----did these knights still become knights? Are there examples of
others on this "quite long list" that they were regarded as knights
afterwards? If not, then we could have two plain Thomas Hampden who may
turn
out to be one person after all.
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John
mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Interestingly, the will and the abstract make no mention of a daughter
Isabel. This doesn't conclusively answer my original question about the
parrentage of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate (since the will discussed
his
unmarried daughters, and she conceivably could have been omitted if she
were
married before the will - although this seems unlikely). But it does
seems
to support the idea that Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, the father of
Isabel, is a different individual from the Thomas Hampden who mar.
Margery
Popham. So the question remains; who was this Sir Thomas of Baddesley?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

There is an abstract of his will in Testamenta Vetusta:

"Thomas Hampden, of Hampden, Esquire, on the Feast of St Luke the
Evangelist, 1482. My body to be buried before the image of St Mary
Magdalen, in the Chancel of the Church at Hampden. To the parson of
Hampden XIIIs IVd.; to a priest to sing for my soul XXXs.; to Margery
my wife, whom of youth I have known well conscienced, and to me a
true
and loving wife; John my father; to my cousin John Wroughton; to Mr
William Colet, Parson, of Hampden; to John my son, and Elizabeth his
wife, my manor of Hampden; with remainder to Edmund, my second son,
Edward my third son, Francis, my fourth son, Alexander my fifth son
and
to Henry my sixth son; remainder to my daughters Alice, Katherine,
Jane
and Eleanor, until my daughters be married; my manors of Bledlowe,
Chilton, and Elsyngton, Upton, Wales and Waldrege, in the county of
Bucks. And I appoint my sons John and Edmund my executors.
"Proved November 22d, 1486."

Sounds like a little more than one child.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org




Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 00:28:01

I agree. However, we should still keep in mind that the will may only have
mentioned the unmarried daughters----there is still a reasonable possibility
that Ronnie Bodine is correct. Maybe someone can double check the sources
quoted by him?
Leo

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


As Tim Powys-Lybbe mentioned in an early message in this thread, there are
enough branches of the Hampdens that it would be unwise to assume that
there
was only a single Thomas Hampden at this time.

The will doesn't address the question of whether Thomas Hampden of Hampden
was knighted because the will was dated 1482 and he reportedly was
knighted
in 1483. So it seems we may have two SIR Thomas Hampdens rather than ttwo
"plain" Thomas Hampdens.

Based on the absence of Isabel being mentioned in the will of Thomas
Hampden
of Hampden, I think that the conservative approach (pending further
evidence) would be to assume that her father Sir Thomas of Baddesley is
not
the same as Thomas H. of Hampden.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Leo" <leo@home.netspeed.com.au
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John,

How many Thomas Hampden would there have been at that time? I think
Adrian
Channing's list is interesting but I wonder, being nominted to become a
knight at the coronation of Edward V, a coronation that did not take
place----did these knights still become knights? Are there examples of
others on this "quite long list" that they were regarded as knights
afterwards? If not, then we could have two plain Thomas Hampden who may
turn
out to be one person after all.
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John
mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Interestingly, the will and the abstract make no mention of a daughter
Isabel. This doesn't conclusively answer my original question about
the
parrentage of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate (since the will
discussed
his
unmarried daughters, and she conceivably could have been omitted if she
were
married before the will - although this seems unlikely). But it does
seems
to support the idea that Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, the father of
Isabel, is a different individual from the Thomas Hampden who mar.
Margery
Popham. So the question remains; who was this Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


In message of 9 Jul, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley,
Hertfordshire, for whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both
RPA and MCA cite, among other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of
Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR
Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in
1485, leaving one child, a son John.

There is an abstract of his will in Testamenta Vetusta:

"Thomas Hampden, of Hampden, Esquire, on the Feast of St Luke the
Evangelist, 1482. My body to be buried before the image of St Mary
Magdalen, in the Chancel of the Church at Hampden. To the parson of
Hampden XIIIs IVd.; to a priest to sing for my soul XXXs.; to
Margery
my wife, whom of youth I have known well conscienced, and to me a
true
and loving wife; John my father; to my cousin John Wroughton; to Mr
William Colet, Parson, of Hampden; to John my son, and Elizabeth his
wife, my manor of Hampden; with remainder to Edmund, my second son,
Edward my third son, Francis, my fourth son, Alexander my fifth son
and
to Henry my sixth son; remainder to my daughters Alice, Katherine,
Jane
and Eleanor, until my daughters be married; my manors of Bledlowe,
Chilton, and Elsyngton, Upton, Wales and Waldrege, in the county of
Bucks. And I appoint my sons John and Edmund my executors.
"Proved November 22d, 1486."

Sounds like a little more than one child.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org





John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 jul 2005 01:00:01

In digging into this a bit further, I'm beginning to wonder about the
traditional assignment of Isabel's father, Sir Thomas Hampden, as being of
Baddesley, Hertfordshire. I can't find any reference to a Baddesley in
Herts (aside from genealogies referencing this Sir Thomas). There are
estates of Badddesley Clinton and Baddesley Ensor in what historically was
the northern edge of Warwickshire, and North Baddesley and South Baddesley
are in Hampshire near Southampton. But no Baddesley that I can find in
Hertsfordshire....

Any thoughts on this point?

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 01:09:20

Dear Leo ~

Thomas Hampden (died 1485), of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire, was
never knighted. This comes from primary evidence, not secondary
sources. Among other things, his inquisition post mortem refers to him
simply as "esquire," not "knight." There are other records which can
be cited as well.

I believe this is a correction for your database.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo" wrote:
Dear John,

How many Thomas Hampden would there have been at that time? I think Adrian
Channing's list is interesting but I wonder, being nominted to become a
knight at the coronation of Edward V, a coronation that did not take
place----did these knights still become knights? Are there examples of
others on this "quite long list" that they were regarded as knights
afterwards? If not, then we could have two plain Thomas Hampden who may turn
out to be one person after all.
Leo

Gjest

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Gjest » 11 jul 2005 01:23:01

Dear Tim and others,
There remains the possibly that Isabel was
already married when Thomas Hampden Esq of Hampden made his will. He did name
daughters, true, but apparently unmarried daughters as no husbands appear to
have been mentioned. If Isabel were in fact married and her portion settled
She probably would not be mentioned in the will.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 01:24:44

Dear Leo ~

I think my request was rather simple. If you have no primary evidence,
just admit it and move on. There's certainly no need to fly off the
handle.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Primary, I would like a correct statement in your request. Request? Demand
more likely. You maintain you found in "my database" , I would like to point
out that only I have access to "my data base", not even Ian Fettes has
access to "my data base".

You do need glasses, or do you have typing trouble? Where did you find
Isabella's father is a Sir? Not in my data base nor on my website.

You tell people to do their homewerk themselves before expecting others to
do it for them, well go ahead and do your own work. On the file in my
WEBSITE I quote my source, a source I expect to be available in Salt Lake
City. Have your venemous eyes overlooked my source? Or were you so delighted
of seeing my error of calling her father Sir, which I actually do not do,
not in my WEBSITE nor in my DATA BASE.

If anybody bollixed as you so gently put it, it is someone in the USA,
someone with a better reputation than you have. You are hectoring and
bullying again, I am still waiting for an apology for your last attempt. I
know, I can wait till the cows come home, that is collegiality for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married
to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for
whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite, among
other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'. Separately
MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks,
who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas Hampden
and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter Newdigate;
i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden. If
so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?


Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 01:36:24

"John Higgins" wrote:
Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Dear John ~

I think you mean an addition to MCA, not a correction. Be that as it
may, I certainly appreciate you bringing this to my attention.

You are wrong, though, about Thomas Hampden being a knight, or that he
lived at Baddesley, Hertfordshire, or that he had a daughter, Isabella.
As far as I know, all of these statements are incorrect. When you
have evidence to prove these points, by all means, please post them.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 02:31:19

Dear John ~

I believe you were the one who alleged Thomas Hampden was might have
been knighted. You said Leo's website included Isabella, daughter of
Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, as a child of Thomas
Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. Right? You stated Leo got
this from Ronny Bodine. Right?

I in turn recommended you that you should look at the will of Thomas
Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. That's a reasonable thing
to do.

You followed my recommendation, looked at the will, and then refused to
tell anyone what it said. Geez, John, talk about drama!

Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused yet?

I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
tall grasses, complaining along the way.

Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you and
Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.

Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 jul 2005 02:45:01

Oh, come on now - get realistic. If your books depended solely on primary
evidence, they'd be much thinner than they are now - even considering the
padded references they now contain. Why hold Leo to a higher standard than
you yourself follow?

And Leo is right - the database accessible through his website does NOT show
Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden as a knight. You should either document
your assertion or submit (yet another) apology to Leo.

(And some readers still wonder why so many of us are skeptical of
Richardson's work....a continuing string of misrepresentations)


----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I think my request was rather simple. If you have no primary evidence,
just admit it and move on. There's certainly no need to fly off the
handle.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Primary, I would like a correct statement in your request. Request?
Demand
more likely. You maintain you found in "my database" , I would like to
point
out that only I have access to "my data base", not even Ian Fettes has
access to "my data base".

You do need glasses, or do you have typing trouble? Where did you find
Isabella's father is a Sir? Not in my data base nor on my website.

You tell people to do their homewerk themselves before expecting others
to
do it for them, well go ahead and do your own work. On the file in my
WEBSITE I quote my source, a source I expect to be available in Salt
Lake
City. Have your venemous eyes overlooked my source? Or were you so
delighted
of seeing my error of calling her father Sir, which I actually do not
do,
not in my WEBSITE nor in my DATA BASE.

If anybody bollixed as you so gently put it, it is someone in the USA,
someone with a better reputation than you have. You are hectoring and
bullying again, I am still waiting for an apology for your last attempt.
I
know, I can wait till the cows come home, that is collegiality for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married
to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire,
for
whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite,
among
other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'.
Separately
MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden,
Bucks,
who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son
John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas
Hampden
and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter
Newdigate;
i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden.
If
so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by
MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas
Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?



John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 jul 2005 03:02:02

"Addition" or "correction" is a matter of semantics. MCA is wrong in saying
that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden and Margery Popham had a single son.
When something is wrong you correct it. But this is pointless to pursue....

And you mis-state my position. I agree that the evidence currently does not
support that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden was of Baddesley, or that he
had a daughter Isabel/Isabella - I'll leave the issue of his possible
knighthood for Adrian Channing to address. My point all along has been that
MCA and RPA (among others) say that there were two distinct Thomas Hampdens,
while Ronnie Bodine says they were one and the same. At present, I think
the case for a single Thomas Hampden in this situation is not strong enough.

[BTW: What PRIMARY sources do you recommend checking to confirm his
knighthood? Should we apply these sources for ALL knights?)

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


"John Higgins" wrote:
Yes indeed, quite a number of children beyond the single son John
mentioned
in MCA. The will itself is quite a bit longer than the abstract would
suggest, but the abstract has captured the core of the relationships
mentioned in the will. Sounds like a correction for MCA....

Dear John ~

I think you mean an addition to MCA, not a correction. Be that as it
may, I certainly appreciate you bringing this to my attention.

You are wrong, though, about Thomas Hampden being a knight, or that he
lived at Baddesley, Hertfordshire, or that he had a daughter, Isabella.
As far as I know, all of these statements are incorrect. When you
have evidence to prove these points, by all means, please post them.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

D. Spencer Hines

Sir Thomas Hampden & Isabella Hampden Never Existed?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 11 jul 2005 04:51:40

Leo has made another blooper?

Well he is certainly no virgin in that respect.

Leo sorely needs a spiced hot toddy and a long nap to clear his brain.

DSH

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1121045478.999472.7220@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

| Dear John ~
|
| I believe you were the one who alleged Thomas Hampden was might have
| been knighted. You said Leo's website included Isabella, daughter of
| Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, as a child of Thomas
| Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. Right? You stated Leo got
| this from Ronny Bodine. Right?
|
| I in turn recommended you that you should look at the will of Thomas
| Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. That's a reasonable thing
| to do.
|
| You followed my recommendation, looked at the will, and then refused
to
| tell anyone what it said. Geez, John, talk about drama!
|
| Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
| Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused
yet?
|
| I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
| knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
| named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
| statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
| tall grasses, complaining along the way.
|
| Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
| and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you
and
| Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
| made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
| of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.
|
| Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?
|
| Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
|
| Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: Sir Thomas Hampden & Isabella Hampden Never Existed?

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 07:42:22

D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Leo has made another blooper?

Well he is certainly no virgin in that respect.

Leo sorely needs a spiced hot toddy and a long nap to clear his brain.

DSH

Dear Spencer ~

Yes, I'm afraid Leo has in fact made yet another blooper. Only this
time he has John Higgins trying to cover for him. Neither man will
fess up to their error. It's the case of the blind leading the blind.
They both fall in the ditch. It's so sad.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 08:14:20

My comments are interspersed below. DR

"Leo" wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John ~
snip

Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused yet?

You are such a dishonest liar. What did Adrian Channing say?

W.A. Shaw's...The Knights of England...Viol I Page 140 (incorrectly indexed
as Vol II) "Th. Hamde, of Hamden" June 1483- writs dated 5 June 1483, one of
quite a long list to be knighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation did
not take plasce, but PRESUMABLY the knighhoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.

Are you still confused?

No, Leo, you are the one who is confused and lying. Neither the
coronation or the knighthoods took place. Your huge ego has trapped
you into making yet another astonishing blooper. This is so sad.

I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
tall grasses, complaining along the way.

-----We do not owe you anything. You can graciously ask and we can
graciously decline. Taking into account your harranging and bullying, how
can you possibly expect co-operatgion? Especially when you are so DUMB you
haven't digested my website's mainpage where any one can see what I rely on.
I offer apples but you want oranges, stiff get them yourself.

I merely asked for your evidence, Leo. If you have no evidence, then
your database is worthless. Do you never verify your secondary sources
against primary records? Or, do you just copy willy-nilly everything
you find in print? Don't answer that question. We already know the
answer.

Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you and
Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.


--------What a waste of time, we could give you the sources (do your work, I
am sure you have access to Ronny Bodine's work) and all you could do is to
APOLOGIES AGAIN as I did not make a blooper but presented Ronny Bodine's
finding correctly.

I feel sorry for Ronny Bodine that you have dragged his good name into
this ugly mess. Poor Ronny.

Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?

------You wouldn't if you bought yourself a pair of glasses and read AND
DIGESTED what people say. Now be a good boy, do your own home work, and not
a word out of you until you digested this message.

No, Leo, you still need to post Ronny Bodine's sources. Once you have
posted Ronny's sources, then the newsgroup members can examine them to
see for themselves if they merit Isabella Hampden being included as a
child of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire.
If the evidence is sufficient, then she will remain. If not, then you
will need to correct your database. So far, the lack of evidence tells
the whole story. Isabella isn't mentioned as a child in the will of
either Thomas Hampden, Esquire, or his widow, Margery.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 08:35:01

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John ~
snip

Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused yet?

You are such a dishonest liar. What did Adrian Channing say?

W.A. Shaw's...The Knights of England...Viol I Page 140 (incorrectly indexed
as Vol II) "Th. Hamde, of Hamden" June 1483- writs dated 5 June 1483, one of
quite a long list to be knighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation did
not take plasce, but PRESUMABLY the knighhoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.

Are you still confused?
I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
tall grasses, complaining along the way.

-----We do not owe you anything. You can graciously ask and we can
graciously decline. Taking into account your harranging and bullying, how
can you possibly expect co-operatgion? Especially when you are so DUMB you
haven't digested my website's mainpage where any one can see what I rely on.
I offer apples but you want oranges, stiff get them yourself.

Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you and
Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.


--------What a waste of time, we could give you the sources (do your work, I
am sure you have access to Ronny Bodine's work) and all you could do is to
APOLOGIES AGAIN as I did not make a blooper but presented Ronny Bodine's
finding correctly.

Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?
------You wouldn't if you bought yourself a pair of glasses and read AND

DIGESTED what people say. Now be a good boy, do your own home work, and not
a word out of you until you digested this message.


Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 08:35:02

Fly off the handle?

Again buy some glasses, you haven't read what Tim Powys-Lybbe had to say.

You haven't read Adrian Channings message.

You haven't read my message........

At least none seem to have sunk in. Goodness gracious what is this reseacher
coming to?
Tragic!


----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I think my request was rather simple. If you have no primary evidence,
just admit it and move on. There's certainly no need to fly off the
handle.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Primary, I would like a correct statement in your request. Request?
Demand
more likely. You maintain you found in "my database" , I would like to
point
out that only I have access to "my data base", not even Ian Fettes has
access to "my data base".

You do need glasses, or do you have typing trouble? Where did you find
Isabella's father is a Sir? Not in my data base nor on my website.

You tell people to do their homewerk themselves before expecting others
to
do it for them, well go ahead and do your own work. On the file in my
WEBSITE I quote my source, a source I expect to be available in Salt Lake
City. Have your venemous eyes overlooked my source? Or were you so
delighted
of seeing my error of calling her father Sir, which I actually do not do,
not in my WEBSITE nor in my DATA BASE.

If anybody bollixed as you so gently put it, it is someone in the USA,
someone with a better reputation than you have. You are hectoring and
bullying again, I am still waiting for an apology for your last attempt.
I
know, I can wait till the cows come home, that is collegiality for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

I just checked your database and see that you have listed Isabella
Hampden, wife of Walter Newdigate, as the daughter of Sir Thomas
Hampden (died 1485), of Hampden, Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Margery
Popham.

I wonder if the always helpful Mr. van de Pas can supply us the
evidence to prove this connection? Primary evidence, that is. I've
checked various sources on the Hampden family and find no daughter
named Isabella for this couple. I suspect you've bollixed two
different Thomas Hampden's and rolled them into one person.

One other thing: I see that you have identified Thomas Hampden of
Hampden (died 1485) as a knight. My research indicates Thomas of
Hampden was an esquire, never a knight.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net



"John Higgins" wrote:
[re-posted due to gateway failure - never got to SGM]

Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as
married
to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for
whom no wife is given by either RPA or MCA. Both RPA and MCA cite,
among
other sources, Ronny Bodine's 'Ancestry of Dorothea Poyntz'.
Separately
MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden, Bucks,
who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son John.

I've been advised by the always helpful Leo van de Pas that Ronny
Bodine's (impossible to locate!) volume gives the latter Thomas
Hampden
and Margeryn Popham as the parents of Isabel who mar. Walter
Newdigate;
i.e., equating Sir Thomas of Baddesley with Thomas of Great Hampden.
If
so, this might be a Magna Carta descent which has been overlooked by
MCA.

Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas
Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?




Leo

Re: Sir Thomas Hampden & Isabella Hampden Never Existed?

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 09:21:01

Dear Douglas,
You are such a shameless f... or i.... you fill in these words. What do
you regard a blooper is? Tell me as my Chambers's 20th century Dictionary
does not give an explantion for this word.

I presume you mean an error? Error comes from the word ERR. "To wander, to
wander from the right way etc.....".

Where did I wander? When I correctly copy Ronny Bodine.....Who is wandering?
When people copy Richardson and get it wrong, who is wandering? Who made the
mistake, In this kind of cases we know about the chicken or the egg which
one comes first.

In this case you are not the chicken but the Turkey who makes
mistakes........

You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself...........but then you are
showing your true colours, those of yet another ugly American. Thank
goodness there are so many decent ones......

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: Sir Thomas Hampden & Isabella Hampden Never Existed?


D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Leo has made another blooper?

Well he is certainly no virgin in that respect.

Leo sorely needs a spiced hot toddy and a long nap to clear his brain.

DSH

Dear Spencer ~

Yes, I'm afraid Leo has in fact made yet another blooper. Only this
time he has John Higgins trying to cover for him. Neither man will
fess up to their error. It's the case of the blind leading the blind.
They both fall in the ditch. It's so sad.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Leo

OT is there a doctor in the house? was Re: MCA addition?: H

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 09:34:01

What did I say? Did I say that either the coronation of Edward V or the
knighting happened? No I even asked if it was possible to see whether the
other on the list were regarded Sir afterwards.

You wriggle and you squirm, but you are still a dishonest liar.

You do not need to ask me for MY evidence. I do not have evidence. The
source of my information is on my WEBSITE. To ask for the obvious is part of
your hectoring and bullying.

I did not drag Ronny Bodine into it-----you did. You did not have to send
the message where you asked for the obvious, and still got it wrong. No I do
not have a Sir as father for Isabel.......

You keep on digging and digging and it becomes quite hilarious to see what a
dishonest fool you are.SIGH I have said it again, but then is becoming more
obvious with every new message from you on the subject.

Please explain why do I NEED TO POST RONNY BODINE'S SOURCES?
You mean to say you have no access to his work? In Salt Lake City? The Mecca
for genealogists? What the only available copy is in Australia with me?
Dreadful!!!

As I said before I do not owe you any assistance, you can do your own
research.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


My comments are interspersed below. DR

"Leo" wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John ~
snip

Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused yet?

You are such a dishonest liar. What did Adrian Channing say?

W.A. Shaw's...The Knights of England...Viol I Page 140 (incorrectly
indexed
as Vol II) "Th. Hamde, of Hamden" June 1483- writs dated 5 June 1483, one
of
quite a long list to be knighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation
did
not take plasce, but PRESUMABLY the knighhoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.

Are you still confused?

No, Leo, you are the one who is confused and lying. Neither the
coronation or the knighthoods took place. Your huge ego has trapped
you into making yet another astonishing blooper. This is so sad.

I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
tall grasses, complaining along the way.

-----We do not owe you anything. You can graciously ask and we can
graciously decline. Taking into account your harranging and bullying, how
can you possibly expect co-operatgion? Especially when you are so DUMB
you
haven't digested my website's mainpage where any one can see what I rely
on.
I offer apples but you want oranges, stiff get them yourself.

I merely asked for your evidence, Leo. If you have no evidence, then
your database is worthless. Do you never verify your secondary sources
against primary records? Or, do you just copy willy-nilly everything
you find in print? Don't answer that question. We already know the
answer.

Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you and
Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.


--------What a waste of time, we could give you the sources (do your
work, I
am sure you have access to Ronny Bodine's work) and all you could do is
to
APOLOGIES AGAIN as I did not make a blooper but presented Ronny Bodine's
finding correctly.

I feel sorry for Ronny Bodine that you have dragged his good name into
this ugly mess. Poor Ronny.

Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?

------You wouldn't if you bought yourself a pair of glasses and read AND
DIGESTED what people say. Now be a good boy, do your own home work, and
not
a word out of you until you digested this message.

No, Leo, you still need to post Ronny Bodine's sources. Once you have
posted Ronny's sources, then the newsgroup members can examine them to
see for themselves if they merit Isabella Hampden being included as a
child of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire.
If the evidence is sufficient, then she will remain. If not, then you
will need to correct your database. So far, the lack of evidence tells
the whole story. Isabella isn't mentioned as a child in the will of
either Thomas Hampden, Esquire, or his widow, Margery.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 09:37:01

Again you are a liar. Adrian did not state any facts. Only presumption, and
quite an educated presumption. I do not know the Shaw source he mentions,
but by the sound of what Adrian says, it sounds like a reliable source. Now
APOLOGISE TO ADRIAN

My God, if you tried to undo the damage you have been doing lately, there
won't be much time for research left.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: "Leo" <leo@home.netspeed.com.au>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Adrian was wrong.

DR

----- Original Message -----
From: "Leo" <leo@home.netspeed.com.au
To: <royalancestry@msn.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


When are you buying glasses? How many times do I have to say he is NOT a
Sir in my WEBSITE nor DATA BASE.

You haven't read what Adrian Channing had to say either. You call
yourself a researcher when you can't even read simple English messages?



----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

Thomas Hampden (died 1485), of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire, was
never knighted. This comes from primary evidence, not secondary
sources. Among other things, his inquisition post mortem refers to him
simply as "esquire," not "knight." There are other records which can
be cited as well.

I believe this is a correction for your database.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo" wrote:
Dear John,

How many Thomas Hampden would there have been at that time? I think
Adrian
Channing's list is interesting but I wonder, being nominted to become a
knight at the coronation of Edward V, a coronation that did not take
place----did these knights still become knights? Are there examples of
others on this "quite long list" that they were regarded as knights
afterwards? If not, then we could have two plain Thomas Hampden who may
turn
out to be one person after all.
Leo






John Higgins

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 jul 2005 19:14:02

More misrepresentations by Richardson....will it ever stop?

1) In my original post I said that the Thomas Hampden who was knighted was
Sir Thomas of Baddesley, father of Isabella who mar. Walter Newdigate. This
is noted in, among other places, both RPA and MCA.

"Both RPA and the newly published MCA describe Walter Newdigate as married
to Isabel, dau. of Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, for whom
no wife is given by either RPA or MCA."

2) In the same post I specifically said that the Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden who mar. Margery Popham was NOT a Sir Thomas - although this was
subsequently questioned by Adrian Channing.

"Separately MCA discusses Thomas Hampden [not SIR Thomas] of Great Hampden,
Bucks, who mar. Margery Popham and d. in 1485, leaving one child, a son
John."

3) I pointed out that Ronnie Bodine (Leo's source - and also cited by at
least RPA) had stated that the two Thomas Hampdens were the same man, and I
asked for input as to whether this was accurate. (But neither Ronnie nor
Leo calls him SIR Thomas - as repeatedly claimed by Richardson)

"Can anyone help to clarify whether there are one or two Thomas Hampdens
here - and, if two, what's the ancestry and marriage of Sir Thomas of
Baddesley?"

I've said before that, based on the evidence we have now, the conservative
approach would be to assume there were two Thomas Hampdens - there is not
enough support for the conclusion in Bodine that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden is the same as Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley. But on the other
hand we know very little about the latter Thomas - which is why I raised the
question.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear John ~

I believe you were the one who alleged Thomas Hampden was might have
been knighted. You said Leo's website included Isabella, daughter of
Sir Thomas Hampden of Baddesley, Hertfordshire, as a child of Thomas
Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. Right? You stated Leo got
this from Ronny Bodine. Right?

I in turn recommended you that you should look at the will of Thomas
Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire. That's a reasonable thing
to do.

You followed my recommendation, looked at the will, and then refused to
tell anyone what it said. Geez, John, talk about drama!

Then Adrian Channing told Leo van de Pas that Thomas Hampden of Great
Hampden was knighted. I said no, he wasn't. Is everyone confused yet?

I've consistently stated that Thomas Hampden of Great Hampden wasn't
knighted. I also have found no evidence that he had a daughter
named Isabella. I've asked Leo and you to provide proof of these
statements. Something, anything. Instead you're both running for the
tall grasses, complaining along the way.

Why don't we start with the list of Ronny Bodine's sources which Leo
and you both have in your possession. Is there some reason why you and
Leo won't post Ronny's sources? Let me guess - they'll show Leo has
made yet another blooper in including Isabella Hampden as the daughter
of Thomas Hampden, Esquire, of Great Hampden.

Why do I have this strange sinking feeling of deja vu again?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 21:24:37

Dear Leo ~

Adrian posted:

"He was knighted June 1483."

This sounds like a factual statement to me.

Adrian has since posted a correction to his statement above. Adrian
has done a good job.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo" wrote:
Again you are a liar. Adrian did not state any facts. Only presumption, and
quite an educated presumption. I do not know the Shaw source he mentions,
but by the sound of what Adrian says, it sounds like a reliable source. Now
APOLOGISE TO ADRIAN

My God, if you tried to undo the damage you have been doing lately, there
won't be much time for research left.

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 21:51:33

That's nice, Leo. You ready to correct your database?

DR

"Leo" wrote:
In front of me I have his reply to my request for a source

W.A. Shaw's _The Knights of England_ Vol I page 140 (incorrectly indexed as
Vol II) "The. Hamden, of Hamden" June 1483 - writs dated 5 June 1483, one of
a quite long list to be kn ighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation did
not take place, but PRESUMABLY the knighthoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.

Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 22:38:02

In front of me I have his reply to my request for a source

W.A. Shaw's _The Knights of England_ Vol I page 140 (incorrectly indexed as
Vol II) "The. Hamden, of Hamden" June 1483 - writs dated 5 June 1483, one of
a quite long list to be kn ighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation did
not take place, but PRESUMABLY the knighthoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:24 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


Dear Leo ~

Adrian posted:

"He was knighted June 1483."

This sounds like a factual statement to me.

Adrian has since posted a correction to his statement above. Adrian
has done a good job.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


"Leo" wrote:
Again you are a liar. Adrian did not state any facts. Only presumption,
and
quite an educated presumption. I do not know the Shaw source he mentions,
but by the sound of what Adrian says, it sounds like a reliable source.
Now
APOLOGISE TO ADRIAN

My God, if you tried to undo the damage you have been doing lately, there
won't be much time for research left.


Douglas Richardson royala

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 11 jul 2005 23:02:15

Dear Leo ~

I have consistently and I believe correctly stated that Thomas Hampden
was an esquire, not a knight; that he did not lived at Baddlesley,
Hertfordshire; and that he had no daughter named Isabella.

Is that good enough for you?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

"Leo" wrote:
How many times do I (and others) have to say I do not have a Sir in my
system? You made him one by proclaiming I had Isabella as a daughter of Sir
Thomas.
You are a worry, perhaps you should go and see a doctor, I still believe
glasses could do a lot for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:51 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


That's nice, Leo. You ready to correct your database?

DR

"Leo" wrote:
In front of me I have his reply to my request for a source

W.A. Shaw's _The Knights of England_ Vol I page 140 (incorrectly indexed
as
Vol II) "The. Hamden, of Hamden" June 1483 - writs dated 5 June 1483, one
of
a quite long list to be kn ighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation
did
not take place, but PRESUMABLY the knighthoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.


Leo

Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]

Legg inn av Leo » 11 jul 2005 23:37:01

How many times do I (and others) have to say I do not have a Sir in my
system? You made him one by proclaiming I had Isabella as a daughter of Sir
Thomas.
You are a worry, perhaps you should go and see a doctor, I still believe
glasses could do a lot for you.

----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:51 AM
Subject: Re: MCA addition?: Hampden of Baddesley [or Great Hampden?]


That's nice, Leo. You ready to correct your database?

DR

"Leo" wrote:
In front of me I have his reply to my request for a source

W.A. Shaw's _The Knights of England_ Vol I page 140 (incorrectly indexed
as
Vol II) "The. Hamden, of Hamden" June 1483 - writs dated 5 June 1483, one
of
a quite long list to be kn ighted on Coronation of Ed V - the coronation
did
not take place, but PRESUMABLY the knighthoods did, or they would not be
listed by Shaw.


Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»