Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
John Brandon

Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av John Brandon » 04 okt 2005 15:48:06

The Fall 2005 issue of _The Genealogist_ is out. It contains an
interesting article by John A. Brayton, "Lenthall Family of Weymouth,
Massachusetts, and Buckinghamshire, England." Brayton cites the
following evidence:

--Bishops' Transcripts of the Parish Registers of Great Missenden,
Bucks.

Baptisms:
12 July 1629, Susanna Lenthall, daughter of Robert
12 July 1629, Sara Lenthall, daughter of Robert and Susanna
9 Feb. 1633/4, Marie Anna Lenthall, daughter of Robert and Susanna
13 Aug. 1637, Ann Lenthall, daughter of Robert and Susanna

--Parish Registers of Great Hampden, Bucks. (where Lenthall was
inducted 30 Nov. 1643)

1647, N[ota] B[ene]
My daughter Sarah Lenthall was buried ye eleventh day of August An:
supra ... fell sick on Wednesday morning following being ye 11th of
Aug: about an howre before Sun rise dyed of ye sickness; so in ye
Evening we buried her in ye meade called ye kitchen-meade by ye
hedgeside as you go down ... She was aged 14 yeares, eleven moneths &
seaventeene dayes--had she lived to Bartholomes day she had ben fill 15
yeares of age.

In the closing section, Brayton gives a genealogical summary of the
information:

Children of Rev. Robert1 and Susanna (---) Lenthall (ii, iii, iv bp.
Great Missenden, Bucks):

i ADRIAN LENTHALL, b. say 1626 (almost 21 at death), bur. Great
Hampden, Bucks, 2 Sept. 1647.

ii. SARAH LENTHALL, bp. 12 July 1629, d. Great Hampden, Bucks, 11 Aug.
1647.

iii. MARIE ANNA or MARIANN LENTHALL, bp. 9 Feb. 1633/4

iv. ANN LENTHALL, bp. 13 Aug. 1637 ....

At first glance, this looked alright, but then I looked again. First,
where is the twin Susanna, baptized with Sarah on 12 July 1629?
Second, if we take literally Rev. Lenthall's note about the age of his
daughter Sarah at death, we are forced to conclude that she would have
been born in late August 1632, not in 1629. I'm uncertain how to
resolve these concerns.

On page 250 is an addition to Brandon Fradd's article on the "Ancestry
of Thomas Thorne, Grandfather of Thomas1 Dudley" in the last issue.
Fradd concludes that "ThomasB and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne had yet another
daughter, Jane, baptismal date unknown, who married John Hender of
Botreaux Castle, co. Cornwall, esq." See my posting, "Another sister
for Susanna (Thorne) Dudley," of Jan. 2005: http://tinyurl.com/cxcg6 .

If you go to Leo's great website, http://www.genealogics.org , and
enter the name "Hender," you'll come up with only one entry, that for
Frances Hender, wife of Richard Robartes, 1st Baron Robartes of Truro.
As shown in my posting and Fradd's note, this Frances was a daughter of
John and Jane (Thorne) Hender of Botreaux Castle, per their M.I.:

"Katherine ye eldest [daughter] married unto John Molesworth, Esqr.,
his Maties surveiour-General of this county, Francis ye second espoused
unto Richard Robartes, Esqr., now high shrief ther.; Mary ye third
coupled unto Elice Hele, Esqr., learned in ye lawes, & Trea: of ye
Temple; & Elizabeth ye fourth affianced in marriage unto Mr. Willm.
Cotton, sone and heire to ye Right Reverend Father in God William,
lord-bishoppe of Exon."

If you look at Frances Hender's descendants on Leo's website, you'll
see that she is an ancestor of Diana, Princess of Wales, via Hender,
Robartes, Lambart, Bayly, Paget, Gordon-Lennox, Bingham, Hamilton, and
Spencer. Leo can now include Frances Hender's parents (John and Jane
[Thorne] Hender) and could add to her ancestry if he likes: Jane
Thorne's parents--Thomas and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne--were also the
grandparents of Gov. Thomas Dudley, whose ancestry is traceable on the
website.

Gjest

Re: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av Gjest » 04 okt 2005 16:17:25

IGI (FWIW) has a baptism date for Sarah Lenthall, daughter of Robert
and Susanna, at Great Missenden, 26 August 1632.

St Bartholomew's Day is 24 August, so presumably the child buried in
1647 who would have been 15 on that day in that year, was born 24
August 1632 - consistent with the purported baptism from IGI.

Great Missenden is the next town to mine, and I know the vicar well;
let me know if I can do anything in this respect.

MAR

John Brandon

Re: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av John Brandon » 04 okt 2005 17:05:27

mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
IGI (FWIW) has a baptism date for Sarah Lenthall, daughter of Robert
and Susanna, at Great Missenden, 26 August 1632.

That does seem to be an extracted entry. Maybe Mr. Brayton forgot that
the regular parish registers were available, as well as the Bishop's
Transcripts ...?

John Brandon

Re: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av John Brandon » 04 okt 2005 17:09:41

The regular registers seem to contain one marriage he missed;

14 June 1632, Thomas Cruton to Martha Lenthall

Gjest

Re: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av Gjest » 04 okt 2005 20:26:47

According to Phillimore's Atlas, the deposited original registers
(which should be at Aylesbury) cover the dates 1678 to 1966 only,
although there is said to be a set of register transcripts at the SoG
Library for 1575 to 1725 - this latter may be based on BTs rather than
original registers, so perhaps Brayton reviewed all that remains.
(That doesn't tell us where the IGI item came from, of course -
although it may have been someone's fertile imagination).

Cheers

Michael

John Brandon

Re: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_

Legg inn av John Brandon » 04 okt 2005 20:43:06

Do tell. The mystery deepens ...

John Higgins

Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 07 okt 2005 05:16:01

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:48 AM
Subject: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_


[snip of Lenthall material]

On page 250 is an addition to Brandon Fradd's article on the "Ancestry
of Thomas Thorne, Grandfather of Thomas1 Dudley" in the last issue.
Fradd concludes that "ThomasB and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne had yet another
daughter, Jane, baptismal date unknown, who married John Hender of
Botreaux Castle, co. Cornwall, esq." See my posting, "Another sister
for Susanna (Thorne) Dudley," of Jan. 2005: http://tinyurl.com/cxcg6 .

If you go to Leo's great website, http://www.genealogics.org , and
enter the name "Hender," you'll come up with only one entry, that for
Frances Hender, wife of Richard Robartes, 1st Baron Robartes of Truro.
As shown in my posting and Fradd's note, this Frances was a daughter of
John and Jane (Thorne) Hender of Botreaux Castle, per their M.I.:

"Katherine ye eldest [daughter] married unto John Molesworth, Esqr.,
his Maties surveiour-General of this county, Francis ye second espoused
unto Richard Robartes, Esqr., now high shrief ther.; Mary ye third
coupled unto Elice Hele, Esqr., learned in ye lawes, & Trea: of ye
Temple; & Elizabeth ye fourth affianced in marriage unto Mr. Willm.
Cotton, sone and heire to ye Right Reverend Father in God William,
lord-bishoppe of Exon."

If you look at Frances Hender's descendants on Leo's website, you'll
see that she is an ancestor of Diana, Princess of Wales, via Hender,
Robartes, Lambart, Bayly, Paget, Gordon-Lennox, Bingham, Hamilton, and
Spencer. Leo can now include Frances Hender's parents (John and Jane
[Thorne] Hender) and could add to her ancestry if he likes: Jane
Thorne's parents--Thomas and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne--were also the
grandparents of Gov. Thomas Dudley, whose ancestry is traceable on the
website.


This parentage for Jane Thorne, wife of John Hender, is quite interesting -
not least because a different parentage for her is given in Vivian's edition
of the Visitations of Devon, p. 727. There she is said, in a pedigree of
the family of Thorne of Thorne, to be a daughter of Andrew, a second son
who moved from Devon to Northamptonshire and there married Frances, dau. of
Nicholas Lelande of Northants. A number of earlier generations are given.
There appears to be no connection between the family of Thorne of Thorne in
Devon and the Northamptonshire family which Brandon Fradd refers to as
"Dorne alias Thorne".

The monumental inscription of John Hender, quoted by John Brandon in January
of this year, appeared to specifically indicate Jane Thorne's father. I
wonder, however, if it's possible that the MI was wrong and the visitation
pedigree is right. The only other connection proposed between the
Dorne/Thorne family and Hender is the reference in the will of Thomas Dorne
alias Thorne to a son possibly named Pender (with no indication as to
whether this is a surname or a given name) which is suggested should be read
as Hender. This seems pretty tenuous....

The ancestry for Jan Thorne proposed by John Brandon is certainly more
interesting than that in the Devon visitation pedigree, but....

John Brandon

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av John Brandon » 07 okt 2005 13:58:48

It's all very well to sniff and tsk about, with supercilious ideas of
the quality of others' research ... until it turns out that they were
actually more sensible than you.

1. Mr. Fradd had researcher Ken Smallbone confirm that the will of
Thomas Thorne of Yardley Hastings mentions "my son Hender," rather than
"Pender" (as supplied by Mary Kingsbury Talcott in NEHGR vol. 66).

2. An M.I. is more likely to be correct than a visitation, especially
one that has undergone the edition of Col. Vivian.

The M.I. of John and Jane (Thorne) Hender does show the arms of Thorne
of Thorne (Devon). I suggest that the Thorne family of Yardley
Hastings did not use a coat of arms at that time (or that the
Henders--far away in Cornwall--did not remember what the proper coat of
arms was, and just substituted those of a local family).




"John Higgins" wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:48 AM
Subject: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_


[snip of Lenthall material]


On page 250 is an addition to Brandon Fradd's article on the "Ancestry
of Thomas Thorne, Grandfather of Thomas1 Dudley" in the last issue.
Fradd concludes that "ThomasB and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne had yet another
daughter, Jane, baptismal date unknown, who married John Hender of
Botreaux Castle, co. Cornwall, esq." See my posting, "Another sister
for Susanna (Thorne) Dudley," of Jan. 2005: http://tinyurl.com/cxcg6 .

If you go to Leo's great website, http://www.genealogics.org , and
enter the name "Hender," you'll come up with only one entry, that for
Frances Hender, wife of Richard Robartes, 1st Baron Robartes of Truro.
As shown in my posting and Fradd's note, this Frances was a daughter of
John and Jane (Thorne) Hender of Botreaux Castle, per their M.I.:

"Katherine ye eldest [daughter] married unto John Molesworth, Esqr.,
his Maties surveiour-General of this county, Francis ye second espoused
unto Richard Robartes, Esqr., now high shrief ther.; Mary ye third
coupled unto Elice Hele, Esqr., learned in ye lawes, & Trea: of ye
Temple; & Elizabeth ye fourth affianced in marriage unto Mr. Willm.
Cotton, sone and heire to ye Right Reverend Father in God William,
lord-bishoppe of Exon."

If you look at Frances Hender's descendants on Leo's website, you'll
see that she is an ancestor of Diana, Princess of Wales, via Hender,
Robartes, Lambart, Bayly, Paget, Gordon-Lennox, Bingham, Hamilton, and
Spencer. Leo can now include Frances Hender's parents (John and Jane
[Thorne] Hender) and could add to her ancestry if he likes: Jane
Thorne's parents--Thomas and Mary (Purefoy) Thorne--were also the
grandparents of Gov. Thomas Dudley, whose ancestry is traceable on the
website.


This parentage for Jane Thorne, wife of John Hender, is quite interesting -
not least because a different parentage for her is given in Vivian's edition
of the Visitations of Devon, p. 727. There she is said, in a pedigree of
the family of Thorne of Thorne, to be a daughter of Andrew, a second son
who moved from Devon to Northamptonshire and there married Frances, dau. of
Nicholas Lelande of Northants. A number of earlier generations are given.
There appears to be no connection between the family of Thorne of Thorne in
Devon and the Northamptonshire family which Brandon Fradd refers to as
"Dorne alias Thorne".

The monumental inscription of John Hender, quoted by John Brandon in January
of this year, appeared to specifically indicate Jane Thorne's father. I
wonder, however, if it's possible that the MI was wrong and the visitation
pedigree is right. The only other connection proposed between the
Dorne/Thorne family and Hender is the reference in the will of Thomas Dorne
alias Thorne to a son possibly named Pender (with no indication as to
whether this is a surname or a given name) which is suggested should be read
as Hender. This seems pretty tenuous....

The ancestry for Jan Thorne proposed by John Brandon is certainly more
interesting than that in the Devon visitation pedigree, but....

Gjest

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av Gjest » 07 okt 2005 17:12:38

John Brandon wrote:
It's all very well to sniff and tsk about, with supercilious ideas of
the quality of others' research ... until it turns out that they were
actually more sensible than you.

Not a terribly helpful tone; Mr Higgins made a valid point. Rebuttal
is best made with facts, not pugnacity.

Your point that the MI in question contains the "wrong" arms does call
its accuracy into question. The references quoted are from a secondary
source ('Parochial History of the County of Cornwall') - does the
original survive? Is the secondary text accurate? How contemporaneous
is the MI?

It seems to me that neither case is watertight. The balance of
probabilities is a different matter, of course.

John Brandon

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av John Brandon » 07 okt 2005 17:26:33

Not a terribly helpful tone; Mr Higgins made a valid point. Rebuttal
is best made with facts, not pugnacity.

If Mr. Higgins had bothered to consult the new issue of _The
Genealogist_ he would have had most of his questions answered.

Of course, I am not credited at all in Mr. Fradd's note while Marshall
Kirk *is*, but that is another matter ...

John Higgins

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av John Higgins » 07 okt 2005 18:42:01

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]


Not a terribly helpful tone; Mr Higgins made a valid point. Rebuttal
is best made with facts, not pugnacity.

If Mr. Higgins had bothered to consult the new issue of _The
Genealogist_ he would have had most of his questions answered.

I'm not as fortunate as Mr. Brandon is in having immediate access to new
issues of TG and other genealogical magazines. My library doesn't yet have
the new issue and probably won't for a while yet.

In the interim perhaps Mr. Brandon could make a positive contribution by
commenting on the issues raised by an earlier response: Does the original
MI survive? Is it contemporaneous? Is the secondary text accurate?

Of course, I am not credited at all in Mr. Fradd's note while Marshall
Kirk *is*, but that is another matter ...


Ahh, the real reason for the fit of pique surfaces: "I didn't get credit
for my wonderful discovery". So sorry....now grow up and live with it....

John Brandon

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av John Brandon » 07 okt 2005 18:53:06

Ahh, the real reason for the fit of pique surfaces: "I didn't get credit
for my wonderful discovery". So sorry....now grow up and live with it....

I am an adult, of course, and have been for quite some time, though
perhaps not so elderly as yourself.

Why would you assume that Brandon Fradd would fail to check the will
for the status of "Hender" vs. "Pender"? Of course he did his own
corroborating research.

When the will of Thomas Thorne of Yardley Hastings mentions his 'son
Hender', and the MI of said Hender mentions Thomas Thorne of Yardley
Hastings, I think the conclusion is obvious.

R. Battle

Re: Thorne and Hender [was: Fall issue of _The Genealogist_]

Legg inn av R. Battle » 07 okt 2005 23:01:43

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, John Higgins wrote:

<snip>
Ahh, the real reason for the fit of pique surfaces: "I didn't get
credit for my wonderful discovery". So sorry....now grow up and live
with it....

I have no comment to make on the rest of this exchange (the merits of the
Thorne-identity arguments, participants' tones, etc.). However, the issue
of proper attribution is important, no matter how it is broached. If John
Brandon was indeed the discoverer of the (importance of the) item in
question and not Marshall Kirk (i.e., if Mr. Kirk found out about it by
way of Mr. Brandon and not from his own research), that should be
acknowledged. Of course, if that is the case, it may well be that Mr.
Fradd is blameless in this, if he was not aware of the chain of discovery.
He certainly did not claim to have found it himself.

-Robert Battle

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»