Blount-Ayala
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Mary Zashin
Mary Kempe's Mother
In RPA, p. 273, Mary Kempe, wife of Dudley Digges (d. 1638/8), is
identified as the youngest daughter and coheiress of Thomas Kempe,
Knt., of Ollantigh, Kent, by Dorothy Thompson. However, on p. 556 of
RPA and p. 631 of MCA, Mary is identified as the daughter of Thomas
Kempe and his first wife, Anne. The latter two pages cite the will
of Dorothy Kempe. Can anyone clear up the confusion and identify the
mother of Mary Kempe? Thank you, M. Zashin
identified as the youngest daughter and coheiress of Thomas Kempe,
Knt., of Ollantigh, Kent, by Dorothy Thompson. However, on p. 556 of
RPA and p. 631 of MCA, Mary is identified as the daughter of Thomas
Kempe and his first wife, Anne. The latter two pages cite the will
of Dorothy Kempe. Can anyone clear up the confusion and identify the
mother of Mary Kempe? Thank you, M. Zashin
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
In message of 24 Jan, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
In Nancy Mitford's chapter on "The English Aristocracy" within the book
"Noblesse Oblige", pub Hamish Hamilton in 1956, she wrote on p. 47:
"All peers, except barons, are officially styled 'Cousin' by the
Queen; as regards most dukes and earls this is not so much fiction as
a distant truth."
A further consideration is who actually drafted all these charters that
use the word 'cousin'. For instance in modern times I have one document
that has Edward VII's initials on it; I know that he did not draft this
document at all, yet he signed it; he relied on an army of people to
draft it, to check it and finally to tell him that it was fit for him
to initial. I can only surmise that similar practices occurred in
medieval times: in no way was it the sovereign's job to draft out these
charters; the chancery (is this the right word?) where the charters
were drawn up had an army of people who did just this and regulated
such activities; as now, the sovereign would only be involved perhaps
at the beginning to give a command and certainly at the end to
authorise the use of the Great (or lesser?) Seal. I can easily believe
that in such a hotbed of legalism and precedent, the practice would soon
have become sacrosanct of using the word 'cousin' to describe all
big-wigs. I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill in
describing the use of this word.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Douglas Richardson schrieb:
In the letter, she specifically refers to the recipient, Edward
Somerset, Earl and Marquis of Worcester, as her beloved cousin ("bien
amé cousin"). This is yet another example of kinship by marriage
being mentioned in private correspondence. In this instance, Edward
Somerset and Henriette Marie's husband, King Charles I, were doubly
related in the 6th and 7th degrees of kinship by common descent from
Richard Wydeville (died 1469), Earl of Rivers.
This becoming OT; is it not more likely that Her Majesty was employing
the standard Court formula in addressing peers which persists (in
formal circumstances) today in the UK (e.g. the Sovereign addresses
dukes as "Right trusty and right entirely beloved cousin", and earls as
"Right trusty and well beloved cousin") which denotes nothing in the
way of kinship? Perhaps this was another French imported courtesy.
In Nancy Mitford's chapter on "The English Aristocracy" within the book
"Noblesse Oblige", pub Hamish Hamilton in 1956, she wrote on p. 47:
"All peers, except barons, are officially styled 'Cousin' by the
Queen; as regards most dukes and earls this is not so much fiction as
a distant truth."
A further consideration is who actually drafted all these charters that
use the word 'cousin'. For instance in modern times I have one document
that has Edward VII's initials on it; I know that he did not draft this
document at all, yet he signed it; he relied on an army of people to
draft it, to check it and finally to tell him that it was fit for him
to initial. I can only surmise that similar practices occurred in
medieval times: in no way was it the sovereign's job to draft out these
charters; the chancery (is this the right word?) where the charters
were drawn up had an army of people who did just this and regulated
such activities; as now, the sovereign would only be involved perhaps
at the beginning to give a command and certainly at the end to
authorise the use of the Great (or lesser?) Seal. I can easily believe
that in such a hotbed of legalism and precedent, the practice would soon
have become sacrosanct of using the word 'cousin' to describe all
big-wigs. I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill in
describing the use of this word.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Merilyn Pedrick
Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
Dear Martin
Thankyou for that - and yes it was remiss of me to mix up the death dates.
I did have the information about the Lewknor ancestors, but one of the
places where I'm confused at the moment is with the immediate family of Sir
Thomas Lewknor and his two wives, Philippe Dallingridge and Elizabeth
Etchingham. It didn't help that I had a death date for Elizabeth as 1412
rather than 1464.
But having sorted that, I now find a difficulty with Nicholas Lewknor who
married Elizabeth Radmylde.
I have his parents as Sir Thomas Lewknor and Elizabeth Etchingham, as you do
but Leo's Genealogics site has his parents as Sir Thomas (sic) Lewknor and
Elizabeth Carew. I had thought that the husband of Elizabeth Carew was
Thomas's father Sir Roger Lewknor.
Leo has Elizabeth Carew as the first wife of Sir Thomas Lewknor and his
second wife as Philippe Dallingridge. But that can't be right.
Next conundrum is Nicholas Lewknor's sister Joan Lewknor and her Frowick
husband.
I have Thomas Frowicke who was born in 1423 making him about two years
younger than Joan Lewknor, but Leo has Joan's husband as Thomas's father
Henry Frowicke. I have their (Thomas & Joan's) daughter Isabel Frowicke as
the wife of Sir Thomas Hawte and their children as Jane Hawte wife of Robert
Wrothe, and Margery Hawte, wife of William Isaac.
Leo has Thomas Frowicke as the husband of Eleanor Throckmorton and no sign
of an Isabel Frowicke!
I think this section of my database needs a total overhaul!
Best wishes
Merilyn Pedrick
-------Original Message-------
From: mhollick@mac.com
Date: 01/24/06 13:47:09
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
You have to read the postings more carefully. Sir Richard Berners, the
first husband of Philippa Dalyngringe died on 6 August 1412 not
Philippa. Sir Thomas Lewknor was the son of Sir Roger Lewknor and
Elizabeth Carew; grandson of Sir Thomas Lewknor and Joan D'Oyley;
great-grandson of Sir Roger Lewknor and Katherine (possibly) Bardolf;
great-great-grandson of Sir Thomas Lewknor and Sibyl (---); and
great-great-great-grandson of Sir Roger Lewknor and Joan de Keynes.
Thankyou for that - and yes it was remiss of me to mix up the death dates.
I did have the information about the Lewknor ancestors, but one of the
places where I'm confused at the moment is with the immediate family of Sir
Thomas Lewknor and his two wives, Philippe Dallingridge and Elizabeth
Etchingham. It didn't help that I had a death date for Elizabeth as 1412
rather than 1464.
But having sorted that, I now find a difficulty with Nicholas Lewknor who
married Elizabeth Radmylde.
I have his parents as Sir Thomas Lewknor and Elizabeth Etchingham, as you do
but Leo's Genealogics site has his parents as Sir Thomas (sic) Lewknor and
Elizabeth Carew. I had thought that the husband of Elizabeth Carew was
Thomas's father Sir Roger Lewknor.
Leo has Elizabeth Carew as the first wife of Sir Thomas Lewknor and his
second wife as Philippe Dallingridge. But that can't be right.
Next conundrum is Nicholas Lewknor's sister Joan Lewknor and her Frowick
husband.
I have Thomas Frowicke who was born in 1423 making him about two years
younger than Joan Lewknor, but Leo has Joan's husband as Thomas's father
Henry Frowicke. I have their (Thomas & Joan's) daughter Isabel Frowicke as
the wife of Sir Thomas Hawte and their children as Jane Hawte wife of Robert
Wrothe, and Margery Hawte, wife of William Isaac.
Leo has Thomas Frowicke as the husband of Eleanor Throckmorton and no sign
of an Isabel Frowicke!
I think this section of my database needs a total overhaul!
Best wishes
Merilyn Pedrick
-------Original Message-------
From: mhollick@mac.com
Date: 01/24/06 13:47:09
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
You have to read the postings more carefully. Sir Richard Berners, the
first husband of Philippa Dalyngringe died on 6 August 1412 not
Philippa. Sir Thomas Lewknor was the son of Sir Roger Lewknor and
Elizabeth Carew; grandson of Sir Thomas Lewknor and Joan D'Oyley;
great-grandson of Sir Roger Lewknor and Katherine (possibly) Bardolf;
great-great-grandson of Sir Thomas Lewknor and Sibyl (---); and
great-great-great-grandson of Sir Roger Lewknor and Joan de Keynes.
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: Queen Henrietta Maria, or Queen Mary: origin of "Marylan
Tony Hoskins wrote:
An indication of my having work I am procrastinating.
Digging around, it seems the Bay was named in the early 17th century for
Lord De la Warr, governor fo Virginia, who died 1623. The River then
derived its name from the Bay, and the state (never the colony) from the
River/Bay.
The colony was originally New Sweden, then was conquered by the Dutch
and effectively became a part of New Amsterdam, then came the English,
then the Dutch, then the English. It was attached to New York, then
sold to William Penn, but maintained its 'royal charter' status, making
it difficult to formally unite with Pennsylvania (which was not a "royal
colony"). Under Pennsylvania control, it was "The Three Lower Counties
on the Delaware". It formally became (just) Delaware only when it
drafted its state constitution at the time of the Revolution.

taf
Excellent points well phrased and presented. But, worthy of so much
discussion? Dunno.
An indication of my having work I am procrastinating.
Continuing the silliness nonetheless: the origin of the state name
Delaware - whether by way of the River, from the Lords, or directly
form the Lords, is interesting. Some other time, with lots more time to
devote to these pleasantries than I obviously have at present.
Digging around, it seems the Bay was named in the early 17th century for
Lord De la Warr, governor fo Virginia, who died 1623. The River then
derived its name from the Bay, and the state (never the colony) from the
River/Bay.
The colony was originally New Sweden, then was conquered by the Dutch
and effectively became a part of New Amsterdam, then came the English,
then the Dutch, then the English. It was attached to New York, then
sold to William Penn, but maintained its 'royal charter' status, making
it difficult to formally unite with Pennsylvania (which was not a "royal
colony"). Under Pennsylvania control, it was "The Three Lower Counties
on the Delaware". It formally became (just) Delaware only when it
drafted its state constitution at the time of the Revolution.
Yours in dogged cordiality,
taf
-
Mary Zashin
Wife of John de Eure, d. 1368
Both RPA (p. 295) and MCA (p. 307-8) identify the wife of John de
Eure simply as Margaret, and give as their son Ralph Eure, d. 1421/2,
who married (1) Isabel de Atholl, and (2) Katherine Aton. I believe
she was identified by R. Bevan as a daughter of Sir Thomas de Grey (d.
1343/4); is this now an accepted identification? Further, this John
de Eure is identified as the father of another John de Eure, d.
1393/4 married to Isabella Clifford in 1361, in Weis, MCS.
Isabella is identified as a daughter of Robert de Clifford, d. 1344,
and Isabel de Berkeley. However, RPA and MCA do not include this
generation, placing Ralph Eure as the son of John and Margaret, and
neither RPA (p. 214) nor MCA ( p. 216) give Robert and Isabel a
daughter Isabella. Has it been determined that this marriage,
generation, and daughter lack support? Thanks, M. Zashin
Eure simply as Margaret, and give as their son Ralph Eure, d. 1421/2,
who married (1) Isabel de Atholl, and (2) Katherine Aton. I believe
she was identified by R. Bevan as a daughter of Sir Thomas de Grey (d.
1343/4); is this now an accepted identification? Further, this John
de Eure is identified as the father of another John de Eure, d.
1393/4 married to Isabella Clifford in 1361, in Weis, MCS.
Isabella is identified as a daughter of Robert de Clifford, d. 1344,
and Isabel de Berkeley. However, RPA and MCA do not include this
generation, placing Ralph Eure as the son of John and Margaret, and
neither RPA (p. 214) nor MCA ( p. 216) give Robert and Isabel a
daughter Isabella. Has it been determined that this marriage,
generation, and daughter lack support? Thanks, M. Zashin
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
"I wonder if some of the 'regulars' would be willing to comment on
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
certainly is - back a mere 7 generations to a certain Mary (Evans ?)
Miles (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent, and Llandeyrn, Glamorgan. I envy
my father - his goes back nicely 12 generations to Mary (---) Osborne,
wife (married in 1652) of Jeremiah Osborne, of New Haven, Connecticut.
But my friend Elisabeth Prinzessin zu Ysenburg wins the prize among
people I know. Hers goes back to NN von Aspermont, wife of Rudolf II
Graf von Werdenberg-Sargans (died aft 18 March 1323).
For sheer American interest, my distant cousin Irina Nelidow is
noteworthy. Her mother Dorothy Gordon (King) Nelidow (1895-1966), was
daughter of Annie Mackenzie (Coats) King, daughter of Sarah
(Auchincloss) Coats, daughter of Elizabeth (Buck) Auchincloss, daughter
of Susannah (Manwaring) Buck, daughter of Martha (Saltonstall)
Manwaring, daughter of Rebecca (Winthrop) Saltonstall, daughter of Anne
(Dudley) Winthrop, daughter of Rebecca (Tyng) Dudley.
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
certainly is - back a mere 7 generations to a certain Mary (Evans ?)
Miles (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent, and Llandeyrn, Glamorgan. I envy
my father - his goes back nicely 12 generations to Mary (---) Osborne,
wife (married in 1652) of Jeremiah Osborne, of New Haven, Connecticut.
But my friend Elisabeth Prinzessin zu Ysenburg wins the prize among
people I know. Hers goes back to NN von Aspermont, wife of Rudolf II
Graf von Werdenberg-Sargans (died aft 18 March 1323).
For sheer American interest, my distant cousin Irina Nelidow is
noteworthy. Her mother Dorothy Gordon (King) Nelidow (1895-1966), was
daughter of Annie Mackenzie (Coats) King, daughter of Sarah
(Auchincloss) Coats, daughter of Elizabeth (Buck) Auchincloss, daughter
of Susannah (Manwaring) Buck, daughter of Martha (Saltonstall)
Manwaring, daughter of Rebecca (Winthrop) Saltonstall, daughter of Anne
(Dudley) Winthrop, daughter of Rebecca (Tyng) Dudley.
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
-
Gjest
Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
Dear Merilyn.
I`m fairly certain that You and Martin have Nicholas
Lewknor`s parents correct, Sir Thomas Lewknor and 2nd wife Elizabeth Etchingham
rather than Elizabeth Carew who was actually Sir Thomas` mother. Nicholas`
elder half brother Sir Roger Lewknor ( son of Thomas and Philippe
Dalyngridge, widow of Richard Berners married Eleanor Camoys, their daughter Elizabeth
Lewknor married John Wrothe, then comes John Wrothe who married Joan (unknown)
and Robert Wrothe who married Jane Hawte, daughter of Sir Thomas Hawte and
Isabel Frowycke, daughter of Thomas Frowycke by his wife Joan, whom W G Davis
in his book " The Ancestry of Mary Isaac" speculated was Joan, daughter of
Richard and Joan (Cotton) Sturgeon. M I further gives a detailed account of
Robert Wrothe`s will, in which He instructs his ward Edward (III) Lewknor to
marry his daughter Dorothy Wrothe or if no such agreement could be reached by
them, then to pay Dorothy a substantial sum of money. Edward (III) Lewknor was
the son of Edward (II) Lewknor and his wife Margaret Copley, Edward (II)
Lewknor was the son of Edward (I) Lewknor and Margaret (unknown), Edward (I) Lewknor
was the son of Nicholas Lewknor aforesaid by his wife Elizabeth Radmylde,
making Edward (III) Lewknor and his bride Dorothy Wrothe 3rd cousins once
removed.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
I`m fairly certain that You and Martin have Nicholas
Lewknor`s parents correct, Sir Thomas Lewknor and 2nd wife Elizabeth Etchingham
rather than Elizabeth Carew who was actually Sir Thomas` mother. Nicholas`
elder half brother Sir Roger Lewknor ( son of Thomas and Philippe
Dalyngridge, widow of Richard Berners married Eleanor Camoys, their daughter Elizabeth
Lewknor married John Wrothe, then comes John Wrothe who married Joan (unknown)
and Robert Wrothe who married Jane Hawte, daughter of Sir Thomas Hawte and
Isabel Frowycke, daughter of Thomas Frowycke by his wife Joan, whom W G Davis
in his book " The Ancestry of Mary Isaac" speculated was Joan, daughter of
Richard and Joan (Cotton) Sturgeon. M I further gives a detailed account of
Robert Wrothe`s will, in which He instructs his ward Edward (III) Lewknor to
marry his daughter Dorothy Wrothe or if no such agreement could be reached by
them, then to pay Dorothy a substantial sum of money. Edward (III) Lewknor was
the son of Edward (II) Lewknor and his wife Margaret Copley, Edward (II)
Lewknor was the son of Edward (I) Lewknor and Margaret (unknown), Edward (I) Lewknor
was the son of Nicholas Lewknor aforesaid by his wife Elizabeth Radmylde,
making Edward (III) Lewknor and his bride Dorothy Wrothe 3rd cousins once
removed.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Merilyn Pedrick
Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
Whew! Thankyou for that James - I might just get it all sorted at last.
Best wishes
Merilyn
-------Original Message-------
From: Jwc1870@aol.com
Date: 01/25/06 12:09:39
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
Dear Merilyn.
I`m fairly certain that You and Martin have Nicholas
Lewknor`s parents correct, Sir Thomas Lewknor and 2nd wife Elizabeth
Etchingham
rather than Elizabeth Carew who was actually Sir Thomas` mother. Nicholas`
elder half brother Sir Roger Lewknor ( son of Thomas and Philippe
Dalyngridge, widow of Richard Berners married Eleanor Camoys, their
daughter Elizabeth
Lewknor married John Wrothe, then comes John Wrothe who married Joan
(unknown)
and Robert Wrothe who married Jane Hawte, daughter of Sir Thomas Hawte and
Isabel Frowycke, daughter of Thomas Frowycke by his wife Joan, whom W G
Davis
in his book " The Ancestry of Mary Isaac" speculated was Joan, daughter of
Richard and Joan (Cotton) Sturgeon. M I further gives a detailed account of
Robert Wrothe`s will, in which He instructs his ward Edward (III) Lewknor to
marry his daughter Dorothy Wrothe or if no such agreement could be reached
by
them, then to pay Dorothy a substantial sum of money. Edward (III) Lewknor
was
the son of Edward (II) Lewknor and his wife Margaret Copley, Edward (II)
Lewknor was the son of Edward (I) Lewknor and Margaret (unknown), Edward (I)
Lewknor
was the son of Nicholas Lewknor aforesaid by his wife Elizabeth Radmylde,
making Edward (III) Lewknor and his bride Dorothy Wrothe 3rd cousins once
removed.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Best wishes
Merilyn
-------Original Message-------
From: Jwc1870@aol.com
Date: 01/25/06 12:09:39
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Cudworth /Lewknor/Echingham
Dear Merilyn.
I`m fairly certain that You and Martin have Nicholas
Lewknor`s parents correct, Sir Thomas Lewknor and 2nd wife Elizabeth
Etchingham
rather than Elizabeth Carew who was actually Sir Thomas` mother. Nicholas`
elder half brother Sir Roger Lewknor ( son of Thomas and Philippe
Dalyngridge, widow of Richard Berners married Eleanor Camoys, their
daughter Elizabeth
Lewknor married John Wrothe, then comes John Wrothe who married Joan
(unknown)
and Robert Wrothe who married Jane Hawte, daughter of Sir Thomas Hawte and
Isabel Frowycke, daughter of Thomas Frowycke by his wife Joan, whom W G
Davis
in his book " The Ancestry of Mary Isaac" speculated was Joan, daughter of
Richard and Joan (Cotton) Sturgeon. M I further gives a detailed account of
Robert Wrothe`s will, in which He instructs his ward Edward (III) Lewknor to
marry his daughter Dorothy Wrothe or if no such agreement could be reached
by
them, then to pay Dorothy a substantial sum of money. Edward (III) Lewknor
was
the son of Edward (II) Lewknor and his wife Margaret Copley, Edward (II)
Lewknor was the son of Edward (I) Lewknor and Margaret (unknown), Edward (I)
Lewknor
was the son of Nicholas Lewknor aforesaid by his wife Elizabeth Radmylde,
making Edward (III) Lewknor and his bride Dorothy Wrothe 3rd cousins once
removed.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
JeffChipman
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
Mary--
You are correct that there is a discrepancy in PA3 regarding the
maternity of Mary Digges. There is a verbatim transcript of Dorothy
Kempe's will (PCC 49 Ridley 1629) in Jay Berry Price's book "The Price
Blakemore Hamblen Skipwith And Allied Lines" pp., 32-35 in which
Dorothy Kempe names "my daughter the Lady Marie Diggs" and "Elizabeth
Diggs my grandchild."
Since Douglas Richardson wrote PA3 perhaps he can present the evidence
that Mary Digges was by Thomas Kempe's first wife. I would point out
that not much seems to be known about the Thompson family, other than
they were of London, according to the literature.
Jeff
You are correct that there is a discrepancy in PA3 regarding the
maternity of Mary Digges. There is a verbatim transcript of Dorothy
Kempe's will (PCC 49 Ridley 1629) in Jay Berry Price's book "The Price
Blakemore Hamblen Skipwith And Allied Lines" pp., 32-35 in which
Dorothy Kempe names "my daughter the Lady Marie Diggs" and "Elizabeth
Diggs my grandchild."
Since Douglas Richardson wrote PA3 perhaps he can present the evidence
that Mary Digges was by Thomas Kempe's first wife. I would point out
that not much seems to be known about the Thompson family, other than
they were of London, according to the literature.
Jeff
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
Dear Newsgroup ~
Tim's comments withstanding, it was NOT customary for the English
monarch to refer to all peers as "cousin" as late as 1600. Rather, my
research proves that all men of rank addressed as cousin were in fact
blood related to the king, invariably within the 5th degree of kinship
on at least one side. Men of rank not closely related to the king were
never addressed as cousin.
In a related vein, Complete Peerage, for example, notes that in 1455
William Beauchamp, Lord Saint Amand, was "one of two Barons addressed
by the King as Cousin." [Reference: C.P.11 (1949): 302, footnote d].
The implication is that the other barons were NOT addressed as cousin
by the then reigning monarch, King Henry VI, in that year in that
particular class of records.
Michael may be correct that addressing all peers as cousins may be a
French custom which was adopted by the British crown. If so, this
convention was adopted after 1600. As far as the French crown goes, I
have numerous references to kinship to French kings in the
1200's-1300's. The French kings appear to be acting just like the
English kings in addressing ONLY near blood related people as cousins
in public documents. So, if addressing all French peers as cousin is
really a French custom, it was adopted in a later time period, and then
was picked up by the English.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
Tim's comments withstanding, it was NOT customary for the English
monarch to refer to all peers as "cousin" as late as 1600. Rather, my
research proves that all men of rank addressed as cousin were in fact
blood related to the king, invariably within the 5th degree of kinship
on at least one side. Men of rank not closely related to the king were
never addressed as cousin.
In a related vein, Complete Peerage, for example, notes that in 1455
William Beauchamp, Lord Saint Amand, was "one of two Barons addressed
by the King as Cousin." [Reference: C.P.11 (1949): 302, footnote d].
The implication is that the other barons were NOT addressed as cousin
by the then reigning monarch, King Henry VI, in that year in that
particular class of records.
Michael may be correct that addressing all peers as cousins may be a
French custom which was adopted by the British crown. If so, this
convention was adopted after 1600. As far as the French crown goes, I
have numerous references to kinship to French kings in the
1200's-1300's. The French kings appear to be acting just like the
English kings in addressing ONLY near blood related people as cousins
in public documents. So, if addressing all French peers as cousin is
really a French custom, it was adopted in a later time period, and then
was picked up by the English.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
In message of 24 Jan, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
Douglas Richardson schrieb:
In the letter, she specifically refers to the recipient, Edward
Somerset, Earl and Marquis of Worcester, as her beloved cousin ("bien
amé cousin"). This is yet another example of kinship by marriage
being mentioned in private correspondence. In this instance, Edward
Somerset and Henriette Marie's husband, King Charles I, were doubly
related in the 6th and 7th degrees of kinship by common descent from
Richard Wydeville (died 1469), Earl of Rivers.
This becoming OT; is it not more likely that Her Majesty was employing
the standard Court formula in addressing peers which persists (in
formal circumstances) today in the UK (e.g. the Sovereign addresses
dukes as "Right trusty and right entirely beloved cousin", and earls as
"Right trusty and well beloved cousin") which denotes nothing in the
way of kinship? Perhaps this was another French imported courtesy.
In Nancy Mitford's chapter on "The English Aristocracy" within the book
"Noblesse Oblige", pub Hamish Hamilton in 1956, she wrote on p. 47:
"All peers, except barons, are officially styled 'Cousin' by the
Queen; as regards most dukes and earls this is not so much fiction as
a distant truth."
A further consideration is who actually drafted all these charters that
use the word 'cousin'. For instance in modern times I have one document
that has Edward VII's initials on it; I know that he did not draft this
document at all, yet he signed it; he relied on an army of people to
draft it, to check it and finally to tell him that it was fit for him
to initial. I can only surmise that similar practices occurred in
medieval times: in no way was it the sovereign's job to draft out these
charters; the chancery (is this the right word?) where the charters
were drawn up had an army of people who did just this and regulated
such activities; as now, the sovereign would only be involved perhaps
at the beginning to give a command and certainly at the end to
authorise the use of the Great (or lesser?) Seal. I can easily believe
that in such a hotbed of legalism and precedent, the practice would soon
have become sacrosanct of using the word 'cousin' to describe all
big-wigs. I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill in
describing the use of this word.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
====I do not know how Richardson counts, below he states that Charles I and
Edward Somerset (1603-1667) were doubly related in the 6th and 7th degree.
In the modern counting, which I prefer as it is straightforward, they are
5th cousins once removed.
Henrietta Maria and the same Edward are 6th cousins. So both fall outside
the rule of thumb 5th degree of kinship.
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
Dear Newsgroup ~
Tim's comments withstanding, it was NOT customary for the English
monarch to refer to all peers as "cousin" as late as 1600. Rather, my
research proves that all men of rank addressed as cousin were in fact
blood related to the king, invariably within the 5th degree of kinship
on at least one side. Men of rank not closely related to the king were
never addressed as cousin.
====I do not know how Richardson counts, below he states that Charles I and
Edward Somerset (1603-1667) were doubly related in the 6th and 7th degree.
In the modern counting, which I prefer as it is straightforward, they are
5th cousins once removed.
Henrietta Maria and the same Edward are 6th cousins. So both fall outside
the rule of thumb 5th degree of kinship.
In a related vein, Complete Peerage, for example, notes that in 1455
William Beauchamp, Lord Saint Amand, was "one of two Barons addressed
by the King as Cousin." [Reference: C.P.11 (1949): 302, footnote d].
The implication is that the other barons were NOT addressed as cousin
by the then reigning monarch, King Henry VI, in that year in that
particular class of records.
Michael may be correct that addressing all peers as cousins may be a
French custom which was adopted by the British crown. If so, this
convention was adopted after 1600. As far as the French crown goes, I
have numerous references to kinship to French kings in the
1200's-1300's. The French kings appear to be acting just like the
English kings in addressing ONLY near blood related people as cousins
in public documents. So, if addressing all French peers as cousin is
really a French custom, it was adopted in a later time period, and then
was picked up by the English.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
In message of 24 Jan, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
Douglas Richardson schrieb:
In the letter, she specifically refers to the recipient, Edward
Somerset, Earl and Marquis of Worcester, as her beloved cousin ("bien
amé cousin"). This is yet another example of kinship by marriage
being mentioned in private correspondence. In this instance, Edward
Somerset and Henriette Marie's husband, King Charles I, were doubly
related in the 6th and 7th degrees of kinship by common descent from
Richard Wydeville (died 1469), Earl of Rivers.
This becoming OT; is it not more likely that Her Majesty was employing
the standard Court formula in addressing peers which persists (in
formal circumstances) today in the UK (e.g. the Sovereign addresses
dukes as "Right trusty and right entirely beloved cousin", and earls as
"Right trusty and well beloved cousin") which denotes nothing in the
way of kinship? Perhaps this was another French imported courtesy.
In Nancy Mitford's chapter on "The English Aristocracy" within the book
"Noblesse Oblige", pub Hamish Hamilton in 1956, she wrote on p. 47:
"All peers, except barons, are officially styled 'Cousin' by the
Queen; as regards most dukes and earls this is not so much fiction as
a distant truth."
A further consideration is who actually drafted all these charters that
use the word 'cousin'. For instance in modern times I have one document
that has Edward VII's initials on it; I know that he did not draft this
document at all, yet he signed it; he relied on an army of people to
draft it, to check it and finally to tell him that it was fit for him
to initial. I can only surmise that similar practices occurred in
medieval times: in no way was it the sovereign's job to draft out these
charters; the chancery (is this the right word?) where the charters
were drawn up had an army of people who did just this and regulated
such activities; as now, the sovereign would only be involved perhaps
at the beginning to give a command and certainly at the end to
authorise the use of the Great (or lesser?) Seal. I can easily believe
that in such a hotbed of legalism and precedent, the practice would soon
have become sacrosanct of using the word 'cousin' to describe all
big-wigs. I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill in
describing the use of this word.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gjest
Re: William Whittington of Early VA Gateway
The marriage for Richard Warren was only found recently.
The ideas about his ancestry are guesswork.
The parents of the Howland brothers seem to have been common
of stock (no wills), and I dont think the ancestry goes further back.
Having English ancestry is often more promising, as compared to
other countries in northern Europe.
Many others dont have parish registers going back into the 1500s.
And they certainly seem to lack the medieval resources,
such as Inquisitions Post Mortem, Close Rolls, Feet of Fines,
lawsuits, etc.
Leslie
The ideas about his ancestry are guesswork.
The parents of the Howland brothers seem to have been common
of stock (no wills), and I dont think the ancestry goes further back.
Having English ancestry is often more promising, as compared to
other countries in northern Europe.
Many others dont have parish registers going back into the 1500s.
And they certainly seem to lack the medieval resources,
such as Inquisitions Post Mortem, Close Rolls, Feet of Fines,
lawsuits, etc.
Leslie
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
<
< ====I do not know how Richardson counts, ...
That's easy, Pas. 1, 2, 3, ...
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
<
< ====I do not know how Richardson counts, ...
That's easy, Pas. 1, 2, 3, ...
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
You are always so gracious, but you do not seem to understand that there are
two (if not three) ways of counting relationships. I prefer the modern one,
but then I said that in the message part you wiped.But then your
understanding is so often flawed, and as Aristotle Onassis said "Big
mistakes usually start real small". You do it frequently.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
two (if not three) ways of counting relationships. I prefer the modern one,
but then I said that in the message part you wiped.But then your
understanding is so often flawed, and as Aristotle Onassis said "Big
mistakes usually start real small". You do it frequently.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
====I do not know how Richardson counts, ...
That's easy, Pas. 1, 2, 3, ...
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Tompkins, M.L.
RE: Identification of Maritagium of Maud Basset, wife of Wil
<<Trevor Foulds in his excellent work, Thurgarton Cartulary (1994), pp.
clii-clviii indicates that Maud Basset, wife of William de Heriz (fl.
1230-1262), of Wiverton, Nottinghamshire, had six marks of land in
Wyndesclive in free marriage by grant of her father, Ralph Basset [of
Drayton Basset, Staffordshire]. Mr. Foulds was unable to identify the
locality named Wyndesclive.
However, Wyndesclive is surely the same place as "Wendlecliva" held by
Maud Basset's grandfather, Ralph Basset, under Henry de Sully, Abbot of
Glastonbury, in 1189 [Reference: N.E. Stacy, ed., Surveys of the Estates
of Glasonbury Abbey, c. 1135-1201 (Records of Social & Economic History
33) (2001): 208]. In footnote 3 on page 208, Mr. Stacy, the editor of
the above mentioned work on Glastonbury Surveys, identifies
"Wendlecliva" as Kingstone Winslow (in Ashbury), Berkshire:>>
Confirmation that Kingston Winslow was known as something like
Wyndesclive in this period can be found in Margaret Gelling's
Place-Names of Berkshire (English Place-Name Society, 1974), vol II at p
345, which gives many early examples of the place-name. Originally
Kingston and Winslow were two different estates, and the earliest
references, from the 12th and 13th centuries, are to Winslow alone, in
forms like Wendesclive. In the 13th and later centuries combined forms
like Kyngeston Wendesclive appear, and finally in the early 18th century
the name is recorded as Kingston Winscliffe alias Winslowe.
Matt Tompkins
clii-clviii indicates that Maud Basset, wife of William de Heriz (fl.
1230-1262), of Wiverton, Nottinghamshire, had six marks of land in
Wyndesclive in free marriage by grant of her father, Ralph Basset [of
Drayton Basset, Staffordshire]. Mr. Foulds was unable to identify the
locality named Wyndesclive.
However, Wyndesclive is surely the same place as "Wendlecliva" held by
Maud Basset's grandfather, Ralph Basset, under Henry de Sully, Abbot of
Glastonbury, in 1189 [Reference: N.E. Stacy, ed., Surveys of the Estates
of Glasonbury Abbey, c. 1135-1201 (Records of Social & Economic History
33) (2001): 208]. In footnote 3 on page 208, Mr. Stacy, the editor of
the above mentioned work on Glastonbury Surveys, identifies
"Wendlecliva" as Kingstone Winslow (in Ashbury), Berkshire:>>
Confirmation that Kingston Winslow was known as something like
Wyndesclive in this period can be found in Margaret Gelling's
Place-Names of Berkshire (English Place-Name Society, 1974), vol II at p
345, which gives many early examples of the place-name. Originally
Kingston and Winslow were two different estates, and the earliest
references, from the 12th and 13th centuries, are to Winslow alone, in
forms like Wendesclive. In the 13th and later centuries combined forms
like Kyngeston Wendesclive appear, and finally in the early 18th century
the name is recorded as Kingston Winscliffe alias Winslowe.
Matt Tompkins
-
JohnR
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
apparently from her tomb:
"Mary Kempe, Lady Digges Daughyer and Coheire of Sr. Thomas Kempe of
Olentigh Knight by Sir Thomas Moyle's Daughter and Coheire, Son of Sir
Thomas Kempe Knight, by an heir of Brown and Arundel, Son of SIr
William Kempe Knight, who by Emelyn daughter and coheir of Sir
Valentine Chichley and Phillipa daughter and heire of Sir Robert
Chiche, Mayor of London, and brother to Henry the Archbishop, was son
of Sir Thomas Kempe Knight, nephew to Thomas Kempe, Bishop of London,
the nephew of John Kempe Archbishop of York, then of Canterbury,
Cardinal, Lord Chancellor, Lyes here buried to-gether with Francis her
4th and Richard her eighth son"
Hitchin-Kemp, Frederick. A general history of the Kemp and Kempe
families of Great Britain. London, 1902
"Mary Kempe, Lady Digges Daughyer and Coheire of Sr. Thomas Kempe of
Olentigh Knight by Sir Thomas Moyle's Daughter and Coheire, Son of Sir
Thomas Kempe Knight, by an heir of Brown and Arundel, Son of SIr
William Kempe Knight, who by Emelyn daughter and coheir of Sir
Valentine Chichley and Phillipa daughter and heire of Sir Robert
Chiche, Mayor of London, and brother to Henry the Archbishop, was son
of Sir Thomas Kempe Knight, nephew to Thomas Kempe, Bishop of London,
the nephew of John Kempe Archbishop of York, then of Canterbury,
Cardinal, Lord Chancellor, Lyes here buried to-gether with Francis her
4th and Richard her eighth son"
Hitchin-Kemp, Frederick. A general history of the Kemp and Kempe
families of Great Britain. London, 1902
-
CED
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
Douglas Richardson wrote:
To the Newsgroup:
Richardson says that his research "proves..." What research has
Richardson done which proves his point? Where was the result of this
research published? What kind of peer review was conducted?
As has often been the case, Richardson is attempting to make himself
into an authority. If he wants to be considered an authority on any
subject, he must, according to accepted strandards, do a systematic
study, publish his results, and have a valid peer review of his work.
Otherwise, what he says is merely his opinion and nothing else. What
he has in his files proves nothing.
Does he believe that his files are the repository of the authorized
version of the truth? Or maybe the truth lies in his fingers as he
writes?
Richardson, a 'trained' historian, should know better that try to make
his opinion into something more than that.
CED
Dear Newsgroup ~
Tim's comments withstanding, it was NOT customary for the English
monarch to refer to all peers as "cousin" as late as 1600. Rather, my
research proves that all men of rank addressed as cousin were in fact
blood related to the king, invariably within the 5th degree of kinship
on at least one side. Men of rank not closely related to the king were
never addressed as cousin.
To the Newsgroup:
Richardson says that his research "proves..." What research has
Richardson done which proves his point? Where was the result of this
research published? What kind of peer review was conducted?
As has often been the case, Richardson is attempting to make himself
into an authority. If he wants to be considered an authority on any
subject, he must, according to accepted strandards, do a systematic
study, publish his results, and have a valid peer review of his work.
Otherwise, what he says is merely his opinion and nothing else. What
he has in his files proves nothing.
Does he believe that his files are the repository of the authorized
version of the truth? Or maybe the truth lies in his fingers as he
writes?
Richardson, a 'trained' historian, should know better that try to make
his opinion into something more than that.
CED
In a related vein, Complete Peerage, for example, notes that in 1455
William Beauchamp, Lord Saint Amand, was "one of two Barons addressed
by the King as Cousin." [Reference: C.P.11 (1949): 302, footnote d].
The implication is that the other barons were NOT addressed as cousin
by the then reigning monarch, King Henry VI, in that year in that
particular class of records.
Michael may be correct that addressing all peers as cousins may be a
French custom which was adopted by the British crown. If so, this
convention was adopted after 1600. As far as the French crown goes, I
have numerous references to kinship to French kings in the
1200's-1300's. The French kings appear to be acting just like the
English kings in addressing ONLY near blood related people as cousins
in public documents. So, if addressing all French peers as cousin is
really a French custom, it was adopted in a later time period, and then
was picked up by the English.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
In message of 24 Jan, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
Douglas Richardson schrieb:
In the letter, she specifically refers to the recipient, Edward
Somerset, Earl and Marquis of Worcester, as her beloved cousin ("bien
amé cousin"). This is yet another example of kinship by marriage
being mentioned in private correspondence. In this instance, Edward
Somerset and Henriette Marie's husband, King Charles I, were doubly
related in the 6th and 7th degrees of kinship by common descent from
Richard Wydeville (died 1469), Earl of Rivers.
This becoming OT; is it not more likely that Her Majesty was employing
the standard Court formula in addressing peers which persists (in
formal circumstances) today in the UK (e.g. the Sovereign addresses
dukes as "Right trusty and right entirely beloved cousin", and earls as
"Right trusty and well beloved cousin") which denotes nothing in the
way of kinship? Perhaps this was another French imported courtesy.
In Nancy Mitford's chapter on "The English Aristocracy" within the book
"Noblesse Oblige", pub Hamish Hamilton in 1956, she wrote on p. 47:
"All peers, except barons, are officially styled 'Cousin' by the
Queen; as regards most dukes and earls this is not so much fiction as
a distant truth."
A further consideration is who actually drafted all these charters that
use the word 'cousin'. For instance in modern times I have one document
that has Edward VII's initials on it; I know that he did not draft this
document at all, yet he signed it; he relied on an army of people to
draft it, to check it and finally to tell him that it was fit for him
to initial. I can only surmise that similar practices occurred in
medieval times: in no way was it the sovereign's job to draft out these
charters; the chancery (is this the right word?) where the charters
were drawn up had an army of people who did just this and regulated
such activities; as now, the sovereign would only be involved perhaps
at the beginning to give a command and certainly at the end to
authorise the use of the Great (or lesser?) Seal. I can easily believe
that in such a hotbed of legalism and precedent, the practice would soon
have become sacrosanct of using the word 'cousin' to describe all
big-wigs. I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill in
describing the use of this word.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
CED
Re: Knightly class
"Tompkins, M.L." wrote:
Dear Mr. Tomkins:
I have read your postings of the past few days with interest. I have
read books and articles by the authors you listed ( Christopher
Harper-Bill is of limited usefulness on this subject) and by many
others such as H. E. Hallam, G. W. S. Barlow, S. D. Church, Frank
Barlow, Dorothy Stenton, F. M. Stenton, Judith Green, and F. M.
Powicke. I say this only to let you know that I have taken your
postings seriously and make this posting with some care and earnesty.
On 17 January 2006, in a posting under the thread "One Manor per Knight
...," you wrote:
"Ironically Douglas Richardson's comment on that - that de Burgh came
from the knightly class, not the gentry - was correct, though not in
the
way that he intended. However I did find the thrust of Mr Richardson's
argument, that de Burgh's associations (to various earls and bishops, I
think it was) point to him as coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class, persuasive."
In an otherwise good posting those two sentences are out of place and,
I assume, written without research on the background of Hubert de Burgh
and his elder brother, William de Burgh.
There are no known knights in the family of these brothers until the
two themselves come into view. When they do so, both appear to have
been household knights with no provable land holdings. The rise to
power of the two brothers was the result of close personal connections
with the household of King John, before he came to the throne.
If you have evidence of their "coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class," please provide it to us. If you rely upon
Richardson's postings, do so at your own risk.
I would gladly participate in a discussion of the knightly "class" if
you care to do so. I believe that you see a more cohesive group of
knights than I do. I see knights of the relevant period as household
soldiers and other household servants who only became landed over a
period of time.
CED
Dear Leo,
I haven't been making it up as I go along - I have been trying to pass
on the understanding of the knightly class which is generally accepted
among medieval historians. These are not my personal opinions, but the
conclusions of people who have devoted years to researching these
aspects of medieval society - people like David Carpenter, Professor of
Medieval History at King's College, London; Peter Coss, Professor of
Medieval History at Cardiff University; Maurice Keen, emeritus fellow at
Balliol College, Oxford; Christopher Harper-Bill, Professor of Medieval
History at the University of East Anglia. It may be that I have failed
to present their views sufficiently well, but I do urge that it would be
better to read their work and consider the detailed evidence they
present before disputing their conclusions.
Dear Mr. Tomkins:
I have read your postings of the past few days with interest. I have
read books and articles by the authors you listed ( Christopher
Harper-Bill is of limited usefulness on this subject) and by many
others such as H. E. Hallam, G. W. S. Barlow, S. D. Church, Frank
Barlow, Dorothy Stenton, F. M. Stenton, Judith Green, and F. M.
Powicke. I say this only to let you know that I have taken your
postings seriously and make this posting with some care and earnesty.
On 17 January 2006, in a posting under the thread "One Manor per Knight
...," you wrote:
"Ironically Douglas Richardson's comment on that - that de Burgh came
from the knightly class, not the gentry - was correct, though not in
the
way that he intended. However I did find the thrust of Mr Richardson's
argument, that de Burgh's associations (to various earls and bishops, I
think it was) point to him as coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class, persuasive."
In an otherwise good posting those two sentences are out of place and,
I assume, written without research on the background of Hubert de Burgh
and his elder brother, William de Burgh.
There are no known knights in the family of these brothers until the
two themselves come into view. When they do so, both appear to have
been household knights with no provable land holdings. The rise to
power of the two brothers was the result of close personal connections
with the household of King John, before he came to the throne.
If you have evidence of their "coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class," please provide it to us. If you rely upon
Richardson's postings, do so at your own risk.
I would gladly participate in a discussion of the knightly "class" if
you care to do so. I believe that you see a more cohesive group of
knights than I do. I see knights of the relevant period as household
soldiers and other household servants who only became landed over a
period of time.
CED
I append below (again) the excerpt from David Carpenter's 1980 article
because it presents a good example of the historian's approach to the
knightly class. The most important point is that the class is not
regarded as consisting only of knights proper (so the narrow legal
qualifications for knighthood which existed at various dates do not
define the class). Another is that its boundaries, like those of all
broad social and economic classes, were not defined precisely - so its
existence is not negated by the fact that at its outer edges it blurs
into the titled nobility or the higher ecclesiastical hierarchy.
The excerpt also provides a good example of how when social and economic
historians talk about lords and the lordly class they do not necessarily
mean the titled nobility; in contexts like these a lord was anyone who
owned a manor - even just one small manor. This may be what has confused
your anonymous corespondent when he says that knights came from 'the
"lordly" class of families' - the lordly class in the 12th century was
the knightly class and those above them, and in the 15-16th centuries
was the gentry and above.
Lastly, although it is discussing just the 13th century, the excerpt
also illustrates the important point that the nature of knights and the
knightly class changed over time. Most importantly, that the term
'knightly class' becomes increasingly anachronistic after the 13th
century, as the knights proper become fewer in number and increasingly
confined to the class's upper echelons, making them less and less the
dominant element within the class.
But I should add that historians are not hung up on use of the term
'knightly' - other terms are used as well. 'Lordly' is a useful one, as
is 'seignorial', though both of them have a slightly wider ambit,
capable of encompassing the titled nobility as well, and even
ecclesiastical dignitaries and institutions in so far as they were lords
of manors. In the later middle ages 'the gentry' becomes a rough
eqivalent of the earlier knightly class.
Regards,
Matt Tompkins (or whatever my name is)
'A note first on the definition of the 'knightly' or 'gentry' class.
Historians would probably agree, easily enough, on a description of an
active member: a lord of one or a few manors; frequently a knight,
although the number who assumed the honour was diminishing; a man busy
in local government as a coroner, forest official, sheriff or
under-sheriff. At any time in the thirteenth century there were men of
this kind throughout the counties of England. A large part of local
government depended on them. To define the class itself, however, is
more difficult. Contemporaries had no word for it. In the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries barons, knights, esquires and some laymen who held
no military rank were all considered 'noble' or 'gentle'. The class
cannot be confined to those who were technically knights - that is, had
been girded with the sword of knighthood - since this was a group of
rapidly diminishing size which lacked any real unity. Early in the
thirteenth century nearly all lords of manors (and some men of lesser
consequence) were knights. A hundred years later, to make a broad
generalization, the honour was becoming confined to those with two or
three manors and above. Aware of this difficulty Coss decides to focus
attention on 'all who' (presumably beneath the baronage) 'held by
military tenure and were manorial landlords'. One need not cavil at
this definition, although there are problems connected with it. The
knightly class thus defined covers a wide social and material spectrum.
It embraces a few lords at the top of the scale who enjoyed incomes of
baronial proportions. It also includes a group of lords who held single
manors which contained well under 300 acres of land.'
From DA Carpenter, 'Was there a crisis of the knightly class in the
thirteenth century? The Oxfordshire evidence' in The English Historical
Review
377 (Oct 1980), pp 721-752 (the full article can be read at
http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/repri ... LXXVII/721),'
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
CED wrote:
My research notes on king's kinsfolk can be viewed in my books,
Plantagenet Ancestry (2004) and Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). Both
books have received favorable reviews. Let me know if you're
interested in ordering a copy of either book.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Richardson says that his research "proves..." What research has
Richardson done which proves his point? Where was the result of this
research published? What kind of peer review was conducted?
CED
My research notes on king's kinsfolk can be viewed in my books,
Plantagenet Ancestry (2004) and Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). Both
books have received favorable reviews. Let me know if you're
interested in ordering a copy of either book.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
CED
Re: Queen Henriette Marie
Douglas Richardson wrote:
To the Newsgroup:
Neither of the two books mentioned by Richardson are the product of a
systematic study of the use of relationship terms; nor are they
scholarly works. If either of the two were to make a pretense of being
scholarly, there would be at least an attempt at citing authority in a
manner accepted in scholarly circles.
Richardson should describe the methology of his "systematic" study if,
as he must claim, his books contain the product of such a study.
We all have good grounds for doubting whether Richardson even knows
what a systematic study is.
As to whether I should have either of those books:
I have almost two thousand books in my library. Most of great
scholarly merit. To place anything by Richardson on a shelve next to
any of them would be to disgrace the whole library.
CED
CED wrote:
Richardson says that his research "proves..." What research has
Richardson done which proves his point? Where was the result of this
research published? What kind of peer review was conducted?
CED
My research notes on king's kinsfolk can be viewed in my books,
Plantagenet Ancestry (2004) and Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). Both
books have received favorable reviews. Let me know if you're
interested in ordering a copy of either book.
To the Newsgroup:
Neither of the two books mentioned by Richardson are the product of a
systematic study of the use of relationship terms; nor are they
scholarly works. If either of the two were to make a pretense of being
scholarly, there would be at least an attempt at citing authority in a
manner accepted in scholarly circles.
Richardson should describe the methology of his "systematic" study if,
as he must claim, his books contain the product of such a study.
We all have good grounds for doubting whether Richardson even knows
what a systematic study is.
As to whether I should have either of those books:
I have almost two thousand books in my library. Most of great
scholarly merit. To place anything by Richardson on a shelve next to
any of them would be to disgrace the whole library.
CED
-
Gjest
Re: Wife of John de Eure, d. 1368
In Dorothy Thomson's will, she names her son Robert and daughter-in-law
Jane Thomson. She names daughter Lady Kempe. Grandchildren are as
follows: Sir John Thomson, Richard Sutton, Richard Harvey, Sir John
Cutts, John Fishe, Dorothy Andrews and husband Mr. Rudolf Andrews,
Susan Thomson, Lady Cutts, Lady Chicheley, Lady Skipwith and husband
Sir Henry Skipwith, Lady Diggs and husband Sir Dudley Diggs.
Grandsons-in-law named are Sir James Altham, Mr. Richard Sutton and
Edmond Blefeild.
Now, in John Thomson's will (i.e. Dorothy's husband), he mentions
"Richard Sutton gentleman, to whose wife my wife is grandmother." I
take that to mean that she was apparently married before. His only
bequests, aside from those to his wife, are to John, Henry and Francis,
sons of his son Robert.
Mardi
Jane Thomson. She names daughter Lady Kempe. Grandchildren are as
follows: Sir John Thomson, Richard Sutton, Richard Harvey, Sir John
Cutts, John Fishe, Dorothy Andrews and husband Mr. Rudolf Andrews,
Susan Thomson, Lady Cutts, Lady Chicheley, Lady Skipwith and husband
Sir Henry Skipwith, Lady Diggs and husband Sir Dudley Diggs.
Grandsons-in-law named are Sir James Altham, Mr. Richard Sutton and
Edmond Blefeild.
Now, in John Thomson's will (i.e. Dorothy's husband), he mentions
"Richard Sutton gentleman, to whose wife my wife is grandmother." I
take that to mean that she was apparently married before. His only
bequests, aside from those to his wife, are to John, Henry and Francis,
sons of his son Robert.
Mardi
-
Gjest
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
In Dorothy Thomson's will, she names her son Robert and daughter-in-law
Jane Thomson. She names daughter Lady Kempe. Grandchildren are as
follows: Sir John Thomson, Richard Sutton, Richard Harvey, Sir John
Cutts, John Fishe, Dorothy Andrews and husband Mr. Rudolf Andrews,
Susan Thomson, Lady Cutts, Lady Chicheley, Lady Skipwith and husband
Sir Henry Skipwith, Lady Diggs and husband Sir Dudley Diggs.
Grandsons-in-law named are Sir James Altham, Mr. Richard Sutton and
Edmond Blefeild.
Now, in John Thomson's will (i.e. Dorothy's husband), he mentions
"Richard Sutton gentleman, to whose wife my wife is grandmother." I
take that to mean that she was apparently married before. His only
bequests, aside from those to his wife, are to John, Henry and Francis,
sons of his son Robert.
Mardi
Jane Thomson. She names daughter Lady Kempe. Grandchildren are as
follows: Sir John Thomson, Richard Sutton, Richard Harvey, Sir John
Cutts, John Fishe, Dorothy Andrews and husband Mr. Rudolf Andrews,
Susan Thomson, Lady Cutts, Lady Chicheley, Lady Skipwith and husband
Sir Henry Skipwith, Lady Diggs and husband Sir Dudley Diggs.
Grandsons-in-law named are Sir James Altham, Mr. Richard Sutton and
Edmond Blefeild.
Now, in John Thomson's will (i.e. Dorothy's husband), he mentions
"Richard Sutton gentleman, to whose wife my wife is grandmother." I
take that to mean that she was apparently married before. His only
bequests, aside from those to his wife, are to John, Henry and Francis,
sons of his son Robert.
Mardi
-
Symonds
Re: William Whittington of Early VA Gateway
I seem to have missed the marriage information for Richard Warren. I
would very much appreciate learning more about the event. Many thanks.
Marilyn
lmahler@att.net wrote:
would very much appreciate learning more about the event. Many thanks.
Marilyn
lmahler@att.net wrote:
The marriage for Richard Warren was only found recently.
The ideas about his ancestry are guesswork.
-
Tompkins, M.L.
RE: Knightly class
Dear CED,
What a pleasure to read a civil post on this subject line.
<<On 17 January 2006, in a posting under the thread "One Manor per
Knight ..," you wrote:
"Ironically Douglas Richardson's comment on that - that de Burgh came
from the knightly class, not the gentry - was correct, though not in the
way that he intended. However I did find the thrust of Mr Richardson's
argument, that de Burgh's associations (to various earls and bishops, I
think it was) point to him as coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class, persuasive."
In an otherwise good posting those two sentences are out of place and, I
assume, written without research on the background of Hubert de Burgh
and his elder brother, William de Burgh.
There are no known knights in the family of these brothers until the two
themselves come into view. When they do so, both appear to have been
household knights with no provable land holdings. The rise to power of
the two brothers was the result of close personal connections with the
household of King John, before he came to the throne.
If you have evidence of their "coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class," please provide it to us. If you rely upon Richardson's
postings, do so at your own risk.>>
1. When Douglas Richardson said that de Burgh came from the knightly
class, he was using the term to mean a small exclusive social strata
sandwiched between the mass of the gentry and the titled nobility. His
intention was to show that de Burgh's origins lay not in the mere gentry
but in a knightly class just one step below the titled nobility.
I first pointed out that this was an anachronistic use of the terms,
since at that time there was no gentry, and the knightly class was a
very broad one roughly equivalent to the gentry of later periods. My
next comment was: given that in the late 12C the knightly class WAS the
gentry, the statement that de Burgh came from the knightly class must be
correct, BUT it now has the opposite meaning to that which Douglas
Richardson intended! It actually negates his argument. I would have
thought you would have enjoyed the irony.
2. I didn't say I had evidence that de Burgh came from the upper
echelons of the knightly class (to be honest I have very little interest
in his origins). What I did say was just a passing comment that I found
the argument to that effect put forward by Douglas Richardson
persuasive. It was an argument based on de Burgh's multiple family
connections to bishops, earls etc (I was ignoring the connections to
knights because at that period knighthood did not have the social
exclusivity it later had) - I'm not sure whether you're saying that
those connections did not actually exist, but if they didn't, then
clearly the argument would lose all persuasive force.
Though on looking again at the list of family connections, I do notice
that they could all equally well have resulted from de Burgh's rise to
power as from his family background. I suppose it would take careful
analysis of their timing to decide which.
Regards,
Matt
What a pleasure to read a civil post on this subject line.
<<On 17 January 2006, in a posting under the thread "One Manor per
Knight ..," you wrote:
"Ironically Douglas Richardson's comment on that - that de Burgh came
from the knightly class, not the gentry - was correct, though not in the
way that he intended. However I did find the thrust of Mr Richardson's
argument, that de Burgh's associations (to various earls and bishops, I
think it was) point to him as coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class, persuasive."
In an otherwise good posting those two sentences are out of place and, I
assume, written without research on the background of Hubert de Burgh
and his elder brother, William de Burgh.
There are no known knights in the family of these brothers until the two
themselves come into view. When they do so, both appear to have been
household knights with no provable land holdings. The rise to power of
the two brothers was the result of close personal connections with the
household of King John, before he came to the throne.
If you have evidence of their "coming from the upper echelons of that
knightly class," please provide it to us. If you rely upon Richardson's
postings, do so at your own risk.>>
1. When Douglas Richardson said that de Burgh came from the knightly
class, he was using the term to mean a small exclusive social strata
sandwiched between the mass of the gentry and the titled nobility. His
intention was to show that de Burgh's origins lay not in the mere gentry
but in a knightly class just one step below the titled nobility.
I first pointed out that this was an anachronistic use of the terms,
since at that time there was no gentry, and the knightly class was a
very broad one roughly equivalent to the gentry of later periods. My
next comment was: given that in the late 12C the knightly class WAS the
gentry, the statement that de Burgh came from the knightly class must be
correct, BUT it now has the opposite meaning to that which Douglas
Richardson intended! It actually negates his argument. I would have
thought you would have enjoyed the irony.
2. I didn't say I had evidence that de Burgh came from the upper
echelons of the knightly class (to be honest I have very little interest
in his origins). What I did say was just a passing comment that I found
the argument to that effect put forward by Douglas Richardson
persuasive. It was an argument based on de Burgh's multiple family
connections to bishops, earls etc (I was ignoring the connections to
knights because at that period knighthood did not have the social
exclusivity it later had) - I'm not sure whether you're saying that
those connections did not actually exist, but if they didn't, then
clearly the argument would lose all persuasive force.
Though on looking again at the list of family connections, I do notice
that they could all equally well have resulted from de Burgh's rise to
power as from his family background. I suppose it would take careful
analysis of their timing to decide which.
Regards,
Matt
-
JeffChipman
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
I think what we have here is some confusion over mother and daughter.
On pg 36 of the above referenced volume by Jay Berry Price, there is an
abstract of the will of Dorothy (--) Thompson dated 31 Oct 1618, which
names, among others, her daughter "Lady Kempe." "Lady Kempe" was the
mother of Mary Digges, and this will specifically names (among others)
grandaughter Lady Digges as the grandaughter of this Dorothy (--)
Thompson. This is an interesting document, as it establishes John
Thompson's wife as "Dorothy," but her maiden name is unknown.
As I have stated, the Price book (which is available in many larger
libraries) has a full transcription of the will of Dorothy (Thompson)
Kempe. I think Richardson in PA3 was following Faris in PA1 and PA2,
who makes the same identification of Mary Digges' mother as Anne (--)
in his section "Ollantigh", and cites "Stemmata Chicheleana" (1765) and
"Kempe" (1902) as his references; Richardson probably did not realize
he had ascribed two different mothers for Mary Digges.
Unless I'm missing something, I see no evidence that either "Dorothy"
was married twice.
On pg 36 of the above referenced volume by Jay Berry Price, there is an
abstract of the will of Dorothy (--) Thompson dated 31 Oct 1618, which
names, among others, her daughter "Lady Kempe." "Lady Kempe" was the
mother of Mary Digges, and this will specifically names (among others)
grandaughter Lady Digges as the grandaughter of this Dorothy (--)
Thompson. This is an interesting document, as it establishes John
Thompson's wife as "Dorothy," but her maiden name is unknown.
As I have stated, the Price book (which is available in many larger
libraries) has a full transcription of the will of Dorothy (Thompson)
Kempe. I think Richardson in PA3 was following Faris in PA1 and PA2,
who makes the same identification of Mary Digges' mother as Anne (--)
in his section "Ollantigh", and cites "Stemmata Chicheleana" (1765) and
"Kempe" (1902) as his references; Richardson probably did not realize
he had ascribed two different mothers for Mary Digges.
Unless I'm missing something, I see no evidence that either "Dorothy"
was married twice.
-
JeffChipman
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
One other thing: the elder Dorothy's will requests burial at Husborne
Crawley, Bedfordshire, with her husband John Thompson (this is
probably where the inscription noted by JohnR is to be found). Since
this Dorothy had a grandaughter who married Rd. Sutton, it would help
to know her grandaughter's maiden name (or for that matter her given
name); there is nothing else in the elder Dorothy's will to identify
offspring of a first marriage; it would be interesting to know
something about Rd. Sutton, which might supply an answer. I wonder why
Dorothy Thompson did not name this grandaughter.
Crawley, Bedfordshire, with her husband John Thompson (this is
probably where the inscription noted by JohnR is to be found). Since
this Dorothy had a grandaughter who married Rd. Sutton, it would help
to know her grandaughter's maiden name (or for that matter her given
name); there is nothing else in the elder Dorothy's will to identify
offspring of a first marriage; it would be interesting to know
something about Rd. Sutton, which might supply an answer. I wonder why
Dorothy Thompson did not name this grandaughter.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Knightly class
"Tompkins, M.L." wrote:
< I didn't say I had evidence that de Burgh came from the upper
< echelons of the knightly class (to be honest I have very little
interest
< in his origins). What I did say was just a passing comment that I
found
< the argument to that effect put forward by Douglas Richardson
< persuasive. It was an argument based on de Burgh's multiple family
< connections to bishops, earls etc (I was ignoring the connections to
< knights because at that period knighthood did not have the social
< exclusivity it later had) - I'm not sure whether you're saying that
< those connections did not actually exist, but if they didn't, then
< clearly the argument would lose all persuasive force.
<
< Though on looking again at the list of family connections, I do
notice
< that they could all equally well have resulted from de Burgh's rise
to
< power as from his family background. I suppose it would take careful
< analysis of their timing to decide which.
<
< Regards,
<
< Matt
Dear Matt ~
If you read my original post again, you'll see I stated that Earl
Hubert de Burgh's known kinswoman, Alice Pouchard, was the
granddaughter of Sir William Pouchard, of Wreningham, Norfolk, which
individual was certainly a knight. I've found evidence that Sir
William Pouchard was alive in 1166. This predates Hubert de Burgh's
rise to power by at least a generation.
Speaking of which, I should mention that prior to 1200, it is difficult
to determine if any one given individual was a knight or not. Before
1200, when someone is named in the records, their knighthood is usually
not mentioned in connection with their name. After 1200, the records
refer specifically to Sir John Doe or John Doe, knight, with
regularity. We only know that William Pouchard was a knight, because
his granddaughter's charters after 1200 provide us that information.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
< I didn't say I had evidence that de Burgh came from the upper
< echelons of the knightly class (to be honest I have very little
interest
< in his origins). What I did say was just a passing comment that I
found
< the argument to that effect put forward by Douglas Richardson
< persuasive. It was an argument based on de Burgh's multiple family
< connections to bishops, earls etc (I was ignoring the connections to
< knights because at that period knighthood did not have the social
< exclusivity it later had) - I'm not sure whether you're saying that
< those connections did not actually exist, but if they didn't, then
< clearly the argument would lose all persuasive force.
<
< Though on looking again at the list of family connections, I do
notice
< that they could all equally well have resulted from de Burgh's rise
to
< power as from his family background. I suppose it would take careful
< analysis of their timing to decide which.
<
< Regards,
<
< Matt
Dear Matt ~
If you read my original post again, you'll see I stated that Earl
Hubert de Burgh's known kinswoman, Alice Pouchard, was the
granddaughter of Sir William Pouchard, of Wreningham, Norfolk, which
individual was certainly a knight. I've found evidence that Sir
William Pouchard was alive in 1166. This predates Hubert de Burgh's
rise to power by at least a generation.
Speaking of which, I should mention that prior to 1200, it is difficult
to determine if any one given individual was a knight or not. Before
1200, when someone is named in the records, their knighthood is usually
not mentioned in connection with their name. After 1200, the records
refer specifically to Sir John Doe or John Doe, knight, with
regularity. We only know that William Pouchard was a knight, because
his granddaughter's charters after 1200 provide us that information.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Tompkins, M.L.
RE: Knightly class
<<If you read my original post again, you'll see I stated that Earl
Hubert de Burgh's known kinswoman, Alice Pouchard, was the granddaughter
of Sir William Pouchard, of Wreningham, Norfolk, which individual was
certainly a knight. I've found evidence that Sir William Pouchard was
alive in 1166. This predates Hubert de Burgh's rise to power by at
least a generation.
Speaking of which, I should mention that prior to 1200, it is difficult
to determine if any one given individual was a knight or not. Before
1200, when someone is named in the records, their knighthood is usually
not mentioned in connection with their name. After 1200, the records
refer specifically to Sir John Doe or John Doe, knight, with regularity.
We only know that William Pouchard was a knight, because his
granddaughter's charters after 1200 provide us that information.>>
Dear Doug,
But the reason it's difficult to find references to knightly status in
the 12C is that it wasn't very special at that time - many landowners (I
mean manorial lords, not peasant freeholders, customary or burgage
tenants etc) were knights, and so were many members of the same caste
who didn't have any land. So connections to a knight don't indicate
anything very special in the way of family background - the knight in
question could have held just a single small manor, or even been
landless.
As you say, in the following century that began to change.
Regards,
Matt
Hubert de Burgh's known kinswoman, Alice Pouchard, was the granddaughter
of Sir William Pouchard, of Wreningham, Norfolk, which individual was
certainly a knight. I've found evidence that Sir William Pouchard was
alive in 1166. This predates Hubert de Burgh's rise to power by at
least a generation.
Speaking of which, I should mention that prior to 1200, it is difficult
to determine if any one given individual was a knight or not. Before
1200, when someone is named in the records, their knighthood is usually
not mentioned in connection with their name. After 1200, the records
refer specifically to Sir John Doe or John Doe, knight, with regularity.
We only know that William Pouchard was a knight, because his
granddaughter's charters after 1200 provide us that information.>>
Dear Doug,
But the reason it's difficult to find references to knightly status in
the 12C is that it wasn't very special at that time - many landowners (I
mean manorial lords, not peasant freeholders, customary or burgage
tenants etc) were knights, and so were many members of the same caste
who didn't have any land. So connections to a knight don't indicate
anything very special in the way of family background - the knight in
question could have held just a single small manor, or even been
landless.
As you say, in the following century that began to change.
Regards,
Matt
-
Leo van de Pas
Relationships was Re: Queen Henriette Marie
I do not know where in medieval times people started counting when
establishing how A was related to B. Do they start with A and include B in
the count? Or do they start with a parent of A and include B or stop with a
parent of B?
This is what I meant with "I do not know how Richardson counts". I tried to
help him as he seemed to think that _only_ Charles I was related to Edward
Somerset, but the Queen who, according to Richardson, addressed Somerset as
'cousin', was almost as closely related to Somerset.
This is the second time in a week that I tried to give Richardson what he
asked for and both times he displayed his spleen.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
establishing how A was related to B. Do they start with A and include B in
the count? Or do they start with a parent of A and include B or stop with a
parent of B?
This is what I meant with "I do not know how Richardson counts". I tried to
help him as he seemed to think that _only_ Charles I was related to Edward
Somerset, but the Queen who, according to Richardson, addressed Somerset as
'cousin', was almost as closely related to Somerset.
This is the second time in a week that I tried to give Richardson what he
asked for and both times he displayed his spleen.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: Queen Henriette Marie
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
====I do not know how Richardson counts, ...
That's easy, Pas. 1, 2, 3, ...
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Chris Phillips
Re: Relationships was Re: Queen Henriette Marie
Leo van de Pas wrote:
There's a useful discussion of this by Nat Taylor here:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~medieval/consang.htm
Chris Phillips
I do not know where in medieval times people started counting when
establishing how A was related to B. Do they start with A and include B in
the count? Or do they start with a parent of A and include B or stop with
a
parent of B?
There's a useful discussion of this by Nat Taylor here:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~medieval/consang.htm
Chris Phillips
-
Gjest
Re: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
"Tony Hoskins" schrieb:
You're lucky - I can only go back five, less than 200 years. That's
still one more than my patrilineal line, though. Thank goodness in
between there has been more than enough to keep me busy.
MAR
"I wonder if some of the 'regulars' would be willing to comment on
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
certainly is - back a mere 7 generations to a certain Mary (Evans ?)
Miles (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent, and Llandeyrn, Glamorgan. I envy
my father - his goes back nicely 12 generations to Mary (---) Osborne,
wife (married in 1652) of Jeremiah Osborne, of New Haven, Connecticut.
You're lucky - I can only go back five, less than 200 years. That's
still one more than my patrilineal line, though. Thank goodness in
between there has been more than enough to keep me busy.
MAR
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
Dear Tony ~
My matrilineal line goes into Germany near Hanover back to the 1680's,
when the parish records commence.
I guess that's why I like sauerkraut and a good beer.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
My matrilineal line goes into Germany near Hanover back to the 1680's,
when the parish records commence.
I guess that's why I like sauerkraut and a good beer.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
"Tony Hoskins" schrieb:
"I wonder if some of the 'regulars' would be willing to comment on
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
certainly is - back a mere 7 generations to a certain Mary (Evans ?)
Miles (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent, and Llandeyrn, Glamorgan. I envy
my father - his goes back nicely 12 generations to Mary (---) Osborne,
wife (married in 1652) of Jeremiah Osborne, of New Haven, Connecticut.
You're lucky - I can only go back five, less than 200 years. That's
still one more than my patrilineal line, though. Thank goodness in
between there has been more than enough to keep me busy.
MAR
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
"I wonder if some of the 'regulars' would be willing to comment on
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
[snip]
For sheer American interest, my distant cousin Irina Nelidow is
noteworthy. Her mother Dorothy Gordon (King) Nelidow (1895-1966), was
daughter of Annie Mackenzie (Coats) King, daughter of Sarah
(Auchincloss) Coats, daughter of Elizabeth (Buck) Auchincloss, daughter
of Susannah (Manwaring) Buck, daughter of Martha (Saltonstall)
Manwaring, daughter of Rebecca (Winthrop) Saltonstall, daughter of Anne
(Dudley) Winthrop, daughter of Rebecca (Tyng) Dudley.
(I guess this will at least keep me from commenting on the naming of the
State of Delaware.)
mt = Mary [Goode (probably apocryphal)], wife of Samuel Hurlbut, m. ca.
1668, lived Wethersfield, Conn.
Y = Hans Jurg Formarÿ, d. 1695, Cocheren, Moselle, France.
XY (alternativing male/female) = Isabel, wife of James Beard, b. ca.
1735, lived Northampton Co., Pa.
taf
-
Gjest
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
John Thompson's wife was Dorothy Gilbert, dau of Richard Gilbert
according to the Parish Register of Husborne-Crawley, Beds. Her death
notice there says, " Da. of Richard Gilbert (Az., a chev. erm. betw. 3
eagles displayed or.) of co. Suff., & widow of John Thomson, Auditor of
the Exchequer, who ob. 3 Apr 1597, aet. 76 - M.I."
Parish Registers Saint Matthew Friday Street, London 1538-1812:
John Kede and Dorthey Gilberd were married 17 April 1541.
The Kede is a misspelling for Rede as both their daughters were
baptized at Saint Matthew Friday Street:
Elizabeth Rede daughter of John Rede baptized March 19, 1541/2
Anne Rede daughter of John Rede baptized March 12,, 1544/5
Elizabeth Reade married George Fishe.
Parish Registers Husborne Crawley, Beds 1558-1709:
George Fishe and Elizabeth Reyde were married 7 July 1561.
They had a daughter Dorothy Fishe baptized there on 30 Nov 1562.
(They also must be the parents of John Fishe and Elizabeth Fishe)
Elizabeth Fishe married Richard Sutton on Sept. 11 1581.
Elizabeth Sutton had a dau. Elizabeth who m. James Altham.
Sorry I didn't provide this earlier. I got tangled in my database and
had forgotten the earlier marriage of Dorothy Thompson. The above
information was the result of a joint research effort between
MichaelAnne Guido and myself in 2003.
Mardi
according to the Parish Register of Husborne-Crawley, Beds. Her death
notice there says, " Da. of Richard Gilbert (Az., a chev. erm. betw. 3
eagles displayed or.) of co. Suff., & widow of John Thomson, Auditor of
the Exchequer, who ob. 3 Apr 1597, aet. 76 - M.I."
Parish Registers Saint Matthew Friday Street, London 1538-1812:
John Kede and Dorthey Gilberd were married 17 April 1541.
The Kede is a misspelling for Rede as both their daughters were
baptized at Saint Matthew Friday Street:
Elizabeth Rede daughter of John Rede baptized March 19, 1541/2
Anne Rede daughter of John Rede baptized March 12,, 1544/5
Elizabeth Reade married George Fishe.
Parish Registers Husborne Crawley, Beds 1558-1709:
George Fishe and Elizabeth Reyde were married 7 July 1561.
They had a daughter Dorothy Fishe baptized there on 30 Nov 1562.
(They also must be the parents of John Fishe and Elizabeth Fishe)
Elizabeth Fishe married Richard Sutton on Sept. 11 1581.
From the Visitation of Essex (Harl. v. 14 p 539), DNB, and Will of Sir
Richard Sutton (PCC Seager pr. 1634), we determined that Richard and
Elizabeth Sutton had a dau. Elizabeth who m. James Altham.
Sorry I didn't provide this earlier. I got tangled in my database and
had forgotten the earlier marriage of Dorothy Thompson. The above
information was the result of a joint research effort between
MichaelAnne Guido and myself in 2003.
Mardi
-
JeffChipman
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
John Rees kindly emailed me 7 pages from the Kempe (1902) reference
cited in PA3, which says that Mary Digges was baptized at Wye 14 Mar
1590; she was named third in Dorothy (Thompson) Kempe's will after Anne
Cutts and Dorothy Chicheley and before Amy Skipwith, but the Kempe book
says that Anne and Mary were daughters of the first wife, who is not
named. It says that Dudley Digges, Mary's husband, was born in 1583.
Thomas Kempe had an IPM 7 James I.
There's an interesting paragraph in this source which reads as follows:
"On the distribution of the Kempe property in 1610, his [Digges] wife
secured, by arrangement with her sisters, the castle and lands at
Chilham, which her grandfather, Sir Thomas Kempe, had bought from his
first wife's relative--Henry, Lord Chaney--and to the church of which
the Kempes had presented clergy." p. 35
cited in PA3, which says that Mary Digges was baptized at Wye 14 Mar
1590; she was named third in Dorothy (Thompson) Kempe's will after Anne
Cutts and Dorothy Chicheley and before Amy Skipwith, but the Kempe book
says that Anne and Mary were daughters of the first wife, who is not
named. It says that Dudley Digges, Mary's husband, was born in 1583.
Thomas Kempe had an IPM 7 James I.
There's an interesting paragraph in this source which reads as follows:
"On the distribution of the Kempe property in 1610, his [Digges] wife
secured, by arrangement with her sisters, the castle and lands at
Chilham, which her grandfather, Sir Thomas Kempe, had bought from his
first wife's relative--Henry, Lord Chaney--and to the church of which
the Kempes had presented clergy." p. 35
-
Kelsey Williams
Re: matrilineal comments
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
Curious. For me it would be:
mt = Nadejda (------) Shevchenko, b. ca. 1881-82, Ukraine; d. 1943,
Kazakhstan.
Y = John Slayden, immigrated to Virginia ca. 1695, d. 1727x1734,
Hanover County, Virginia.
XY = Charles C. King, b. 1796, Virginia, d. after 1880, Weakley County,
Tennessee.
Kelsey J. Williams
"I wonder if some of the 'regulars' would be willing to comment on
their
own matrilineal/ mitochondrial line."
Matrilineal lineages, though fascinating, can be frustrating. My own
[snip]
For sheer American interest, my distant cousin Irina Nelidow is
noteworthy. Her mother Dorothy Gordon (King) Nelidow (1895-1966), was
daughter of Annie Mackenzie (Coats) King, daughter of Sarah
(Auchincloss) Coats, daughter of Elizabeth (Buck) Auchincloss, daughter
of Susannah (Manwaring) Buck, daughter of Martha (Saltonstall)
Manwaring, daughter of Rebecca (Winthrop) Saltonstall, daughter of Anne
(Dudley) Winthrop, daughter of Rebecca (Tyng) Dudley.
(I guess this will at least keep me from commenting on the naming of the
State of Delaware.)
mt = Mary [Goode (probably apocryphal)], wife of Samuel Hurlbut, m. ca.
1668, lived Wethersfield, Conn.
Y = Hans Jurg Formarÿ, d. 1695, Cocheren, Moselle, France.
XY (alternativing male/female) = Isabel, wife of James Beard, b. ca.
1735, lived Northampton Co., Pa.
taf
Curious. For me it would be:
mt = Nadejda (------) Shevchenko, b. ca. 1881-82, Ukraine; d. 1943,
Kazakhstan.
Y = John Slayden, immigrated to Virginia ca. 1695, d. 1727x1734,
Hanover County, Virginia.
XY = Charles C. King, b. 1796, Virginia, d. after 1880, Weakley County,
Tennessee.
Kelsey J. Williams
-
Ginny Wagner
RE: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
When you say your matrilineal line goes back, do you mean
that you have birth certificates, marriage licenses and
death certificates for everyone back that far, or do you
mean that there has been research published back that far?
Best,
Ginny Wagner
that you have birth certificates, marriage licenses and
death certificates for everyone back that far, or do you
mean that there has been research published back that far?
Best,
Ginny Wagner
-
Gjest
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
MichaelAnne asked me to post her notes on our research which reiterates
what I wrote earlier, but in more detail:
Dorothy Gilbert was married twice. Her first husband was John Reade.
They were married April 17, 1541 at St. Matthew Friday Street, London.
They had two daughters Anne Reade and Elizabeth Reade. Elizabeth Reade
married George Fishe of Husborne Crawley, Co. Bedford on July 7, 1561.
They had three children John Fishe, Dorothy Fishe and Elizabeth Fishe.
Elizabeth Fishe married Richard Sutton who died in 1634 in Acton, co.
Middlesex. This is the Elizabeth Sutton mentioned in Dorothy Gilbert
Thompson's will.
Dorothy Gilbert married fro the second time John Thompson, Esq. Auditor
of the Exchequer on July 26, 1546 at St. Matthew Friday Street, London.
By her second husband she had two children Dorothy Thompson that
married Sir Thomas Kempe and Robert Thompson that married Jane
Coningsby.
These are the major points of Dorothy Gilbert Thompson's will:
PCC Will dated October 31, 1618, probated May 24, 1619.
Dorothie Thomson, widow, wife of late John Thomson of Husborne Crawley,
co. Bedford, esquire, deceased.
Son: Robert Thomson and wife Jane [Coningsby]
Daughter: Lady Kempe [ Dorothy Thomson Kempe]
Grandchildren:
Sir John Thomson
Susan Thomson
wife of Richard Sutton, esquire
Richard Harvey, clerk
Dorothy the wife of Mr. Rudolph Andrews
Lady Chichley
Lady Cutts
Lady Skipwith and her husband Henry Skipwith
Lady Diggs
wife of Sir James Altham
wife of Mr. Edward Blofield
John Fishe
Loving friend: Francis Stanton
Kinswomen: Mary Allen, Dorothy Lorraine, Anne Merry.
Notes for John Thompson:
Published London 1887:Page 159:
1559 - John Tomson alias John Thompson of the Exchequer received
pardon.
Note: There is no indication of why he received a pardon from the
queen.
Page 332:
John Thompson is named as one of the seven auditors of the Exchequer
appointed for life.
He is listed on the pedigree of Thompson of Boothby Graffoe, Rorkby and
Wellingore in Lincolnshire Pedigrees MSS C. 23 and D. 23. Herald's
College. Harleian MSS 757, 1486, 1550, 530 which is also published in
Harleian Publications Vol. 52 page 959-960 from which this family
ancestry and descendants are taken.
John Thompson left a will naming his wife and heirs. Robert Thompson
predeceased his father as his sons are named as heirs in John
Thompson's will.
PCC 24 Cobham - 39 Elizabeth I (1597).
John Thompson's ancestry can be taken back several generations in the
Lincolnshire pedigrees.
what I wrote earlier, but in more detail:
Dorothy Gilbert was married twice. Her first husband was John Reade.
They were married April 17, 1541 at St. Matthew Friday Street, London.
They had two daughters Anne Reade and Elizabeth Reade. Elizabeth Reade
married George Fishe of Husborne Crawley, Co. Bedford on July 7, 1561.
They had three children John Fishe, Dorothy Fishe and Elizabeth Fishe.
Elizabeth Fishe married Richard Sutton who died in 1634 in Acton, co.
Middlesex. This is the Elizabeth Sutton mentioned in Dorothy Gilbert
Thompson's will.
Dorothy Gilbert married fro the second time John Thompson, Esq. Auditor
of the Exchequer on July 26, 1546 at St. Matthew Friday Street, London.
By her second husband she had two children Dorothy Thompson that
married Sir Thomas Kempe and Robert Thompson that married Jane
Coningsby.
These are the major points of Dorothy Gilbert Thompson's will:
PCC Will dated October 31, 1618, probated May 24, 1619.
Dorothie Thomson, widow, wife of late John Thomson of Husborne Crawley,
co. Bedford, esquire, deceased.
Son: Robert Thomson and wife Jane [Coningsby]
Daughter: Lady Kempe [ Dorothy Thomson Kempe]
Grandchildren:
Sir John Thomson
Susan Thomson
wife of Richard Sutton, esquire
Richard Harvey, clerk
Dorothy the wife of Mr. Rudolph Andrews
Lady Chichley
Lady Cutts
Lady Skipwith and her husband Henry Skipwith
Lady Diggs
wife of Sir James Altham
wife of Mr. Edward Blofield
John Fishe
Loving friend: Francis Stanton
Kinswomen: Mary Allen, Dorothy Lorraine, Anne Merry.
Notes for John Thompson:
From "The Patent Rolls of Elizabeth I 1557-1560" From the Public Record
Office,
Published London 1887:Page 159:
1559 - John Tomson alias John Thompson of the Exchequer received
pardon.
Note: There is no indication of why he received a pardon from the
queen.
Page 332:
John Thompson is named as one of the seven auditors of the Exchequer
appointed for life.
He is listed on the pedigree of Thompson of Boothby Graffoe, Rorkby and
Wellingore in Lincolnshire Pedigrees MSS C. 23 and D. 23. Herald's
College. Harleian MSS 757, 1486, 1550, 530 which is also published in
Harleian Publications Vol. 52 page 959-960 from which this family
ancestry and descendants are taken.
John Thompson left a will naming his wife and heirs. Robert Thompson
predeceased his father as his sons are named as heirs in John
Thompson's will.
PCC 24 Cobham - 39 Elizabeth I (1597).
John Thompson's ancestry can be taken back several generations in the
Lincolnshire pedigrees.
-
Gjest
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
On the Gilbert connection, I find the following in Burke's General
Armory:
Gilbert (Somerson, co. Suffolk, and London; Sir Robert Gilbert, Knt.,
co. Suffolk, son of Henry Gilbert, citizen of London, third son of
Richard Gilbert, of the first place. Visit. London 1568) Az. a
chev.erm.betw.three eagles displ.or. Crest - An eagle displ.az.
Gilbert (Mayfield, Sussex) Same Arms. Crest - An eagle's head ppr.
issuing out of rays or.
Armory:
Gilbert (Somerson, co. Suffolk, and London; Sir Robert Gilbert, Knt.,
co. Suffolk, son of Henry Gilbert, citizen of London, third son of
Richard Gilbert, of the first place. Visit. London 1568) Az. a
chev.erm.betw.three eagles displ.or. Crest - An eagle displ.az.
Gilbert (Mayfield, Sussex) Same Arms. Crest - An eagle's head ppr.
issuing out of rays or.
-
Gjest
re: Mayflower ancestors
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds? My gut feeling is that a
specific Mayflower group may have more exact knowledge of what primary records
there are for this family.
Thanks
Will Johnson
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds? My gut feeling is that a
specific Mayflower group may have more exact knowledge of what primary records
there are for this family.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Merilyn Pedrick
re: Mayflower ancestors
Here is a list of all the Mayflower passengers:
http://members.aol.com/calebj/passenger.html
Merilyn Pedrick
(descendant of John Alden and Priscilla Mullins from Mayflower)
-------Original Message-------
From: WJhonson@aol.com
Date: 01/26/06 10:45:37
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: re: Mayflower ancestors
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds? My gut feeling is that a
specific Mayflower group may have more exact knowledge of what primary
records
there are for this family.
Thanks
Will Johnson
http://members.aol.com/calebj/passenger.html
Merilyn Pedrick
(descendant of John Alden and Priscilla Mullins from Mayflower)
-------Original Message-------
From: WJhonson@aol.com
Date: 01/26/06 10:45:37
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: re: Mayflower ancestors
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds? My gut feeling is that a
specific Mayflower group may have more exact knowledge of what primary
records
there are for this family.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: matrilineal comments
In article <1138233053.712228.19760@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Kelsey Williams" <zetetes_sofias@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise? I just noticed that for me it gets
to one of those gateway American colonists with medieval ancestry:
Elizabeth Stratton, daughter of John Stratton & Anne Derehaugh, who came
to Salem with her mother about 1639. The strict XY ends with her
father's mother, Dorothy Nichols, fl. 1580s, wife of Thomas Stratton of
Shotley, Suffolk (he was buried 29 Mar 1596).
Y = Richard Taylor, of Old Rappahannock County, Virginia, by 1663; d.
1679.
mt = Adelheid Siemans, immigrant to New York City (presumably from
Germany) by 1863; d. 16 November 1905, Brookline, Massachusetts. Her
father's name was Johann Siemans, but I do not know her mother's name
nor whether her parents also immigrated.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
"Kelsey Williams" <zetetes_sofias@yahoo.com> wrote:
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
mt = Mary [Goode (probably apocryphal)], wife of Samuel Hurlbut, m. ca.
1668, lived Wethersfield, Conn.
Y = Hans Jurg Formarÿ, d. 1695, Cocheren, Moselle, France.
XY (alternativing male/female) = Isabel, wife of James Beard, b. ca.
1735, lived Northampton Co., Pa.
mt = Nadejda (------) Shevchenko, b. ca. 1881-82, Ukraine; d. 1943,
Kazakhstan.
Y = John Slayden, immigrated to Virginia ca. 1695, d. 1727x1734,
Hanover County, Virginia.
XY = Charles C. King, b. 1796, Virginia, d. after 1880, Weakley County,
Tennessee.
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise? I just noticed that for me it gets
to one of those gateway American colonists with medieval ancestry:
Elizabeth Stratton, daughter of John Stratton & Anne Derehaugh, who came
to Salem with her mother about 1639. The strict XY ends with her
father's mother, Dorothy Nichols, fl. 1580s, wife of Thomas Stratton of
Shotley, Suffolk (he was buried 29 Mar 1596).
Y = Richard Taylor, of Old Rappahannock County, Virginia, by 1663; d.
1679.
mt = Adelheid Siemans, immigrant to New York City (presumably from
Germany) by 1863; d. 16 November 1905, Brookline, Massachusetts. Her
father's name was Johann Siemans, but I do not know her mother's name
nor whether her parents also immigrated.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
CE Wood
Re: Mayflower ancestors
General Society of Mayflower Descendants
PO Box 3297
Plymouth, Massachusetts 02361-3297
508 746-3188
http://www.mayflower.org/
CE Wood
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
PO Box 3297
Plymouth, Massachusetts 02361-3297
508 746-3188
http://www.mayflower.org/
CE Wood
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds? My gut feeling is that a
specific Mayflower group may have more exact knowledge of what primary records
there are for this family.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: matrilineal comments
Dear Nat, Tony, Ginny, Doug, Kelsey, et al.,
An interesting exercise. Unfortunately, unlikely to get us to
any medieval individuals, unless someone named Mountbatten, Windsor or
Dunbar chimes in.
As for my own lines, of the three choices given the matrilineal
trumps the other two:
mt = Chierstin Persdotter, born/christened 1742, Kraxhult, Kristdala
parish, Kalmar län, Sverige [Sweden]; d. 3 November 1826, Ingatorp
parish, Jonkoping län, Sverige [Sweden]. 5th Great-grandmother.
Y = William Ravilous, b. Tonbridge, Kent, 2 Jan 1780; d. after 7 Jan.
1816, probably Tonbridge, Kent. 3rd Great-grandfather.
XY = Laura (Blond) Seay, b. probably Belize, British Honduras [now
Belize], m. 3 May 1883 to John Thomas Seay (originally of Madison Co.,
Alabama), d. 27 December 1928, Belize, British Honduras.
Great-grandmother.
* Concerning the last of which, as we all have brick walls
somewhere, this one just happens to rise up in one of the more recent
colonies. Should anyone have any familiarity with the Blond, Ambrister
or Usher families of British Honduras (now Belize), I'd be delighted to
hear of same.
As someone else had mentioned, there are a few other lines which
run back some additional generations. Maybe if we change the sequence
to something like XYYYXXYYYYYYXY, I can make it a little more
interesting.....
Cheers,
John
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
An interesting exercise. Unfortunately, unlikely to get us to
any medieval individuals, unless someone named Mountbatten, Windsor or
Dunbar chimes in.
As for my own lines, of the three choices given the matrilineal
trumps the other two:
mt = Chierstin Persdotter, born/christened 1742, Kraxhult, Kristdala
parish, Kalmar län, Sverige [Sweden]; d. 3 November 1826, Ingatorp
parish, Jonkoping län, Sverige [Sweden]. 5th Great-grandmother.
Y = William Ravilous, b. Tonbridge, Kent, 2 Jan 1780; d. after 7 Jan.
1816, probably Tonbridge, Kent. 3rd Great-grandfather.
XY = Laura (Blond) Seay, b. probably Belize, British Honduras [now
Belize], m. 3 May 1883 to John Thomas Seay (originally of Madison Co.,
Alabama), d. 27 December 1928, Belize, British Honduras.
Great-grandmother.
* Concerning the last of which, as we all have brick walls
somewhere, this one just happens to rise up in one of the more recent
colonies. Should anyone have any familiarity with the Blond, Ambrister
or Usher families of British Honduras (now Belize), I'd be delighted to
hear of same.
As someone else had mentioned, there are a few other lines which
run back some additional generations. Maybe if we change the sequence
to something like XYYYXXYYYYYYXY, I can make it a little more
interesting.....
Cheers,
John
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
In article <1138233053.712228.19760@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Kelsey Williams" <zetetes_sofias@yahoo.com> wrote:
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
mt = Mary [Goode (probably apocryphal)], wife of Samuel Hurlbut, m. ca.
1668, lived Wethersfield, Conn.
Y = Hans Jurg Formarÿ, d. 1695, Cocheren, Moselle, France.
XY (alternativing male/female) = Isabel, wife of James Beard, b. ca.
1735, lived Northampton Co., Pa.
mt = Nadejda (------) Shevchenko, b. ca. 1881-82, Ukraine; d. 1943,
Kazakhstan.
Y = John Slayden, immigrated to Virginia ca. 1695, d. 1727x1734,
Hanover County, Virginia.
XY = Charles C. King, b. 1796, Virginia, d. after 1880, Weakley County,
Tennessee.
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise? I just noticed that for me it gets
to one of those gateway American colonists with medieval ancestry:
Elizabeth Stratton, daughter of John Stratton & Anne Derehaugh, who came
to Salem with her mother about 1639. The strict XY ends with her
father's mother, Dorothy Nichols, fl. 1580s, wife of Thomas Stratton of
Shotley, Suffolk (he was buried 29 Mar 1596).
Y = Richard Taylor, of Old Rappahannock County, Virginia, by 1663; d.
1679.
mt = Adelheid Siemans, immigrant to New York City (presumably from
Germany) by 1863; d. 16 November 1905, Brookline, Massachusetts. Her
father's name was Johann Siemans, but I do not know her mother's name
nor whether her parents also immigrated.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
Don Stone
Re: matrilineal comments
John P. Ravilious wrote:
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Y: William atte Stone, d. 1430 or 1431; descent charted at
http://www.donstonetech.com/StoneChart.
-- Don Stone
Dear Nat, Tony, Ginny, Doug, Kelsey, et al.,
An interesting exercise. Unfortunately, unlikely to get us to
any medieval individuals, unless someone named Mountbatten, Windsor or
Dunbar chimes in.
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Y: William atte Stone, d. 1430 or 1431; descent charted at
http://www.donstonetech.com/StoneChart.
-- Don Stone
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: matrilineal comments
Dear Don,
Thanks for those details. I'm not familiar with Old Mother
Hubbard, but the Stone ancestry appears rock solid.
This also is where we have a definite link I can put my finger on.
1. Deacon Gregory Stone = 2) Lydia _____
2. Sarah Stone = Joseph Merriam
3. Mary Merriam = Isaac Stearns
4. Miriam Stearns = Thomas Patten
5. Thomas Patten = Anna Woolson
6. Thomas Patten = Mary Roberdeau
7. Selina Blair Patten = Rev. John Thomas Wheat
8. Selina Patten Wheat = Dr. John Seay
9. John Thomas Seay = Laura Blond
10. Roberdeau Samuel Seay = Alice Emelia Olson
11. Tilly Seline Seay = C. Frederick Ravilious
12. John P. Ravilious
It appears thereby we are 10th cousins. Likely there are other
Stone descendants amongst the list, although Deacon Gregory Stone's
progeny is likely not that spread around. I assume Rev. John Lathrop
is still the Kilroy of American colonial genealogy [need to check with
JSG on that].
Cheers,
John
Don Stone wrote:
Thanks for those details. I'm not familiar with Old Mother
Hubbard, but the Stone ancestry appears rock solid.
This also is where we have a definite link I can put my finger on.
1. Deacon Gregory Stone = 2) Lydia _____
2. Sarah Stone = Joseph Merriam
3. Mary Merriam = Isaac Stearns
4. Miriam Stearns = Thomas Patten
5. Thomas Patten = Anna Woolson
6. Thomas Patten = Mary Roberdeau
7. Selina Blair Patten = Rev. John Thomas Wheat
8. Selina Patten Wheat = Dr. John Seay
9. John Thomas Seay = Laura Blond
10. Roberdeau Samuel Seay = Alice Emelia Olson
11. Tilly Seline Seay = C. Frederick Ravilious
12. John P. Ravilious
It appears thereby we are 10th cousins. Likely there are other
Stone descendants amongst the list, although Deacon Gregory Stone's
progeny is likely not that spread around. I assume Rev. John Lathrop
is still the Kilroy of American colonial genealogy [need to check with
JSG on that].
Cheers,
John
Don Stone wrote:
John P. Ravilious wrote:
Dear Nat, Tony, Ginny, Doug, Kelsey, et al.,
An interesting exercise. Unfortunately, unlikely to get us to
any medieval individuals, unless someone named Mountbatten, Windsor or
Dunbar chimes in.
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Y: William atte Stone, d. 1430 or 1431; descent charted at
http://www.donstonetech.com/StoneChart.
-- Don Stone
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: matrilineal comments
In article <1138248045.835058.165170@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote:
Don't know about Lothrop, but as you can see from the bottom link in my
..sig, both my wife's parents descend from Stone. They're up there in
Kilroy factor.
Was she the one with the bare cupboard? Being descended from a nursery
rhyme hero is pretty cool; fits well with the Dick Whittington thread.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Don,
Thanks for those details. I'm not familiar with Old Mother
Hubbard, but the Stone ancestry appears rock solid.
This also is where we have a definite link I can put my finger on.
1. Deacon Gregory Stone = 2) Lydia _____
2. Sarah Stone = Joseph Merriam
3. Mary Merriam = Isaac Stearns
4. Miriam Stearns = Thomas Patten
5. Thomas Patten = Anna Woolson
6. Thomas Patten = Mary Roberdeau
7. Selina Blair Patten = Rev. John Thomas Wheat
8. Selina Patten Wheat = Dr. John Seay
9. John Thomas Seay = Laura Blond
10. Roberdeau Samuel Seay = Alice Emelia Olson
11. Tilly Seline Seay = C. Frederick Ravilious
12. John P. Ravilious
It appears thereby we are 10th cousins. Likely there are other
Stone descendants amongst the list, although Deacon Gregory Stone's
progeny is likely not that spread around. I assume Rev. John Lathrop
is still the Kilroy of American colonial genealogy [need to check with
JSG on that].
Don't know about Lothrop, but as you can see from the bottom link in my
..sig, both my wife's parents descend from Stone. They're up there in
Kilroy factor.
Don Stone wrote:
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Was she the one with the bare cupboard? Being descended from a nursery
rhyme hero is pretty cool; fits well with the Dick Whittington thread.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
Don Stone
Re: matrilineal comments
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
Martin Hollick is another Stone descendant on this list. Incidentally, both
Simon and Gregory Stone immigrated to Massachusetts in 1635.
I'm afraid my tongue was in my cheek on this one. According to _The
Annotated Mother Goose_ by William and Ceil Baring-Gould, Old Mother Hubbard
was a stock nursery-tale character; no specific historical basis for this
character is proposed. The poem that is well-known today appeared in 1805
in _The Comic Adventures of Old Mother Hubbard and Her Dog_, by Sarah
Catherine Martin, an early love of Prince William Henry, afterwards William IV.
-- Don Stone
Don't know about Lothrop, but as you can see from the bottom link in my
.sig, both my wife's parents descend from Stone. They're up there in
Kilroy factor.
Martin Hollick is another Stone descendant on this list. Incidentally, both
Simon and Gregory Stone immigrated to Massachusetts in 1635.
Don Stone wrote:
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Was she the one with the bare cupboard? Being descended from a nursery
rhyme hero is pretty cool; fits well with the Dick Whittington thread.
I'm afraid my tongue was in my cheek on this one. According to _The
Annotated Mother Goose_ by William and Ceil Baring-Gould, Old Mother Hubbard
was a stock nursery-tale character; no specific historical basis for this
character is proposed. The poem that is well-known today appeared in 1805
in _The Comic Adventures of Old Mother Hubbard and Her Dog_, by Sarah
Catherine Martin, an early love of Prince William Henry, afterwards William IV.
-- Don Stone
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: Mayflower ancestors
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Fortunately, unlike some of the other ships that are claimed, we have a
pretty good idea exactly who was and was not on the Mayflower (and lived
to tell). One need only check the list. [This is why there are a
higher than normal number of "traveling under assumed name" claims,
because we know all the names, and if your guy isn't among them, well .
.. . . I have seen at least three different people said to have been
hiding their identity under the name of the otherwise obscure passenger
John Goodman.]
Mary was not on the Mayflower, but George was, as a servant to Edward
Winslow. Mary is only known for certain by her given name, but thought
to have been Marie Buckett, who arrived 1623 on the Anne, the only Mary
known to have been available in the settlement at the time they married.
A good place to start for any specific passenger is the appropriate
'Silver Book'. The Mayflower Soc. is tracing with thorough
documentation the first five generations of each passenger, and
publishing them in a set called Mayflower Families through Five
Generations. Take a look at the one for George Soule.
taf
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
Fortunately, unlike some of the other ships that are claimed, we have a
pretty good idea exactly who was and was not on the Mayflower (and lived
to tell). One need only check the list. [This is why there are a
higher than normal number of "traveling under assumed name" claims,
because we know all the names, and if your guy isn't among them, well .
.. . . I have seen at least three different people said to have been
hiding their identity under the name of the otherwise obscure passenger
John Goodman.]
Mary was not on the Mayflower, but George was, as a servant to Edward
Winslow. Mary is only known for certain by her given name, but thought
to have been Marie Buckett, who arrived 1623 on the Anne, the only Mary
known to have been available in the settlement at the time they married.
A good place to start for any specific passenger is the appropriate
'Silver Book'. The Mayflower Soc. is tracing with thorough
documentation the first five generations of each passenger, and
publishing them in a set called Mayflower Families through Five
Generations. Take a look at the one for George Soule.
taf
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other. A woman gets one X from her mother,
representing 50/50 of each maternal grandparent, while she gets the
other from the father, but it comes entirely from the paternal
grandmother (the paternal grandfather providing the father with his Y- a
man gets his sole X exclusively from his mother). Thus, any line with
two successive male generations contributes nothing to the X of their
descendant, while for all other lines, the percent contribution is
divided in half for each female generation, but remains undivided for
each male generation. The line with the most male generations, without
two in a row, is that which alternates, having twice the contribution
per generation as the all-female line.
Curiously, this line differs for siblings of different genders - mine is
Isabel, wife of James Baird, b. ca. 1730, or Northampton Co. Pa., my
sister's is Joh. Heinrich Kauffer, b. ca. 1730, somewhere in Germany.
taf
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise?
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other. A woman gets one X from her mother,
representing 50/50 of each maternal grandparent, while she gets the
other from the father, but it comes entirely from the paternal
grandmother (the paternal grandfather providing the father with his Y- a
man gets his sole X exclusively from his mother). Thus, any line with
two successive male generations contributes nothing to the X of their
descendant, while for all other lines, the percent contribution is
divided in half for each female generation, but remains undivided for
each male generation. The line with the most male generations, without
two in a row, is that which alternates, having twice the contribution
per generation as the all-female line.
Curiously, this line differs for siblings of different genders - mine is
Isabel, wife of James Baird, b. ca. 1730, or Northampton Co. Pa., my
sister's is Joh. Heinrich Kauffer, b. ca. 1730, somewhere in Germany.
taf
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: Mayflower ancestors
----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 8:14 PM
Subject: re: Mayflower ancestors
This couple are ancestral to HRH Prince William of Wales, through his
mother.
I believe that Rootsweb has such a message board.
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 8:14 PM
Subject: re: Mayflower ancestors
After a bit of digging about today, I've succeeded in outlining a skeleton
line that appears to take one of my ancestors back to George Soule and
Mary
Becket who are supposed to be passangers on the Mayflower.
This couple are ancestral to HRH Prince William of Wales, through his
mother.
Does anyone know if there is a specific "Mayflower" message board or list
where I can post the details to see who responds?
Thanks
Will Johnson
I believe that Rootsweb has such a message board.
-
R. Battle
Re: Mayflower ancestors
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
<snip>
This is true for virtually every Mayflower passenger with a
five-generation study out. However, the word of caution in Robert C.
Anderson's "The Pilgrim Migration: Immigrants to Plymouth Colony
1620-1633" (Boston, 2004), p. 436, is worth noting:
"In 1980 the General Society of Mayflower Descendants published a
genealogy of five generations of descent from George Soule as the third
volume in its series of silver volumes....This is a seriously flawed
volume, which should not be relied upon. George E. McCracken and Neil D.
Thompson published lengthy reviews pointing out some of the problems [TG
1:225-58; TAG 57:57-58]. Between 2000 and 2003 the General Society of
Mayflower Descendants replaced the 1980 volume with a series of four
volumes in its /Mayflower Families in Progress/ series, revised by Robert
S. Wakefield and Louise Walsh Throop, with the first four generations of
descendants in the first of the four volumes."
-Robert Battle
<snip>
A good place to start for any specific passenger is the appropriate
'Silver Book'. The Mayflower Soc. is tracing with thorough
documentation the first five generations of each passenger, and
publishing them in a set called Mayflower Families through Five
Generations. Take a look at the one for George Soule.
snip
This is true for virtually every Mayflower passenger with a
five-generation study out. However, the word of caution in Robert C.
Anderson's "The Pilgrim Migration: Immigrants to Plymouth Colony
1620-1633" (Boston, 2004), p. 436, is worth noting:
"In 1980 the General Society of Mayflower Descendants published a
genealogy of five generations of descent from George Soule as the third
volume in its series of silver volumes....This is a seriously flawed
volume, which should not be relied upon. George E. McCracken and Neil D.
Thompson published lengthy reviews pointing out some of the problems [TG
1:225-58; TAG 57:57-58]. Between 2000 and 2003 the General Society of
Mayflower Descendants replaced the 1980 volume with a series of four
volumes in its /Mayflower Families in Progress/ series, revised by Robert
S. Wakefield and Louise Walsh Throop, with the first four generations of
descendants in the first of the four volumes."
-Robert Battle
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: matrilineal comments
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathaniel Taylor" <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: matrilineal comments
mt=Marie J. de Reine, m. (prior to 1766, probably ca. 1763) Joseph Masson
Y=Joos (Judocus) Mommaerts, (Brabant) m. 20 Feb. 1635 Anthonette de Pauw,
(161111-4 Aug. 1650).
XY=Margaret Eggleson, m. John Brown
YX=Anna Wankova (Vanek), m., (pre-1834), Matthias Vondras, (Austria-Hungary,
currently, The Czech Republic, [the Sudetenland]).
Ford
'It is indeed desirable to be well descended; but the glory belongs to our
ancestors.'
-- Plato
From: "Nathaniel Taylor" <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: matrilineal comments
In article <1138233053.712228.19760@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Kelsey Williams" <zetetes_sofias@yahoo.com> wrote:
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
mt = Mary [Goode (probably apocryphal)], wife of Samuel Hurlbut, m.
ca.
1668, lived Wethersfield, Conn.
Y = Hans Jurg Formarÿ, d. 1695, Cocheren, Moselle, France.
XY (alternativing male/female) = Isabel, wife of James Beard, b. ca.
1735, lived Northampton Co., Pa.
mt = Nadejda (------) Shevchenko, b. ca. 1881-82, Ukraine; d. 1943,
Kazakhstan.
Y = John Slayden, immigrated to Virginia ca. 1695, d. 1727x1734,
Hanover County, Virginia.
XY = Charles C. King, b. 1796, Virginia, d. after 1880, Weakley County,
Tennessee.
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise? I just noticed that for me it gets
to one of those gateway American colonists with medieval ancestry:
Elizabeth Stratton, daughter of John Stratton & Anne Derehaugh, who came
to Salem with her mother about 1639. The strict XY ends with her
father's mother, Dorothy Nichols, fl. 1580s, wife of Thomas Stratton of
Shotley, Suffolk (he was buried 29 Mar 1596).
Y = Richard Taylor, of Old Rappahannock County, Virginia, by 1663; d.
1679.
mt = Adelheid Siemans, immigrant to New York City (presumably from
Germany) by 1863; d. 16 November 1905, Brookline, Massachusetts. Her
father's name was Johann Siemans, but I do not know her mother's name
nor whether her parents also immigrated.
Nat Taylor
mt=Marie J. de Reine, m. (prior to 1766, probably ca. 1763) Joseph Masson
Y=Joos (Judocus) Mommaerts, (Brabant) m. 20 Feb. 1635 Anthonette de Pauw,
(161111-4 Aug. 1650).
XY=Margaret Eggleson, m. John Brown
YX=Anna Wankova (Vanek), m., (pre-1834), Matthias Vondras, (Austria-Hungary,
currently, The Czech Republic, [the Sudetenland]).
Ford
'It is indeed desirable to be well descended; but the glory belongs to our
ancestors.'
-- Plato
-
Gjest
Re: matrilineal comments
And mine are:
Y: Hirschel Levy
(Jewish, no surname)
a resident of Schnaittach, Germany, circa 1740.
mt: Marie Degraux, wife of Jean Brachot,
living in 1690s at Montignies sur Sambre, Hainaut, Belgium
XY: Edmund Tarver,
born 1815, somewhere in northern Gloucestershire, England
(son of John Tarver)
and died in Kansas 1898.
Leslie
Y: Hirschel Levy
(Jewish, no surname)
a resident of Schnaittach, Germany, circa 1740.
mt: Marie Degraux, wife of Jean Brachot,
living in 1690s at Montignies sur Sambre, Hainaut, Belgium
XY: Edmund Tarver,
born 1815, somewhere in northern Gloucestershire, England
(son of John Tarver)
and died in Kansas 1898.
Leslie
-
Vicki Perry
Re: matrilineal comments
Hi,
I just checked my XYXY... line and, would you believe it, I ended up with
the illegitimate female ancestor that I spent hours looking through
overseers accounts for last time I was in Oxfordshire Record Office, trying
(to no avail) to find out who her father was! If anyone's interested, she is
Elizabeth Stonill, bap 23 March 1783 in Watlington (England), the daughter
of Maria (who incidently married a few months later and appears to have
produced another of my ancestors).
My X ends fairly late on in Ireland: Edward Perry, who lived in Liscannor Co
Clare in the 19th century.
Vicki
I just checked my XYXY... line and, would you believe it, I ended up with
the illegitimate female ancestor that I spent hours looking through
overseers accounts for last time I was in Oxfordshire Record Office, trying
(to no avail) to find out who her father was! If anyone's interested, she is
Elizabeth Stonill, bap 23 March 1783 in Watlington (England), the daughter
of Maria (who incidently married a few months later and appears to have
produced another of my ancestors).
My X ends fairly late on in Ireland: Edward Perry, who lived in Liscannor Co
Clare in the 19th century.
Vicki
-
Tompkins, M.L.
RE: Source being Morant and others.
Stenton may be Sir Frank Merry Stenton, a prominent medieval historian
in the early-mid 20C, but he wrote so many books I couldn't hazard a
guess as to which one is referred to here. The information for which it
is given as source might provide some clue.
Thrupp may be Sylvia Thrupp, another well-known medieval social and
economic historian, who published several works in the post-war decades.
Matt Tompkins
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Phillips [mailto:cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk]
Sent: 26 January 2006 11:10
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Source being Morant and others.
John H wrote:
It's strange if the book doesn't give more precise bibliographical
details somewhere.
Some guesses could be hazarded:
"Morant" _could_ be Philip Morant's History of Essex
John Warrington produced an edition of the Paston Letters in 1956
Yeatman could be John Pym Yeatman, who published a number of works on
medieval Derbyshire
Nikolaus Pevsner is a well known architectural historian (as Google will
tell you quickly)
Marshall is probably G. W. Marshall, The genealogist's guide, and in
that case Thomson is probably T. R. Thomson, A catalogue of British
family histories.
There is a history of Northamptonshire by George Baker.
But it's difficult to be sure whether these are the right authors and
works without more information.
Chris Phillips
in the early-mid 20C, but he wrote so many books I couldn't hazard a
guess as to which one is referred to here. The information for which it
is given as source might provide some clue.
Thrupp may be Sylvia Thrupp, another well-known medieval social and
economic historian, who published several works in the post-war decades.
Matt Tompkins
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Phillips [mailto:cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk]
Sent: 26 January 2006 11:10
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Source being Morant and others.
John H wrote:
I have a book which refers at different times (as sources etc) to
these names; Morant, Thrupp(s), Stenton, Butler, Warrington (The
Paston letters), King, Midmer, Yeatman, Pevsner, Marshall (ref to
Harleian), Thomson, & Baker.
I assume these people or publications would be known by those in the
genealogical world, so can anyone tell me more about them as google
didnt achieve much.
It's strange if the book doesn't give more precise bibliographical
details somewhere.
Some guesses could be hazarded:
"Morant" _could_ be Philip Morant's History of Essex
John Warrington produced an edition of the Paston Letters in 1956
Yeatman could be John Pym Yeatman, who published a number of works on
medieval Derbyshire
Nikolaus Pevsner is a well known architectural historian (as Google will
tell you quickly)
Marshall is probably G. W. Marshall, The genealogist's guide, and in
that case Thomson is probably T. R. Thomson, A catalogue of British
family histories.
There is a history of Northamptonshire by George Baker.
But it's difficult to be sure whether these are the right authors and
works without more information.
Chris Phillips
-
Gjest
Re: Mayflower ancestors
I'm sorry but that's not true. The American ancestry of the late
Princess of Wales has no Mayflower lines.
Princess of Wales has no Mayflower lines.
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
Y = William Brandon, d. 1778, Halifax Co., VA
XY = ------, wife of Johannes Hoffman of Lebanon Co., PA (fl. late
1700s). See http://www.rootsweb.com/~paberks/books/ ... y/h22.html
, under "Hoffman, John P." I wonder if anyone would be able to help
with her identity, as we have so many people here with Pennsylvania
German ancestry ...
XY = ------, wife of Johannes Hoffman of Lebanon Co., PA (fl. late
1700s). See http://www.rootsweb.com/~paberks/books/ ... y/h22.html
, under "Hoffman, John P." I wonder if anyone would be able to help
with her identity, as we have so many people here with Pennsylvania
German ancestry ...
-
Bob Turcott
crusaders
To all, I have been researching my surname Turcott, for quite some time. I
have read a few heraldic
books that indicate the Turcott surname was applied to a crusader, as far as
I know, there are quite a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc &
Leturc surname. I have known one researcher Tony Turk that has researched
some variants of the turk surname and this is his website, but I think my
origin may be different from the lines he is researching.
http://www.turkgenealogy.com/
However, is there someone out there that knows about crusaders and some
surnames assocaited with them, below is one paper about one possible origin.
I read one book authored by johnathan riley smith about crusaders but really
could not find any such referance to the turcott surname, but found some
referance to turks, but I still dont think that a Turcott originating out of
france would
be of such turkish root.
The Turcott Surname in France
Turcott of french surnames, it has been said that they came into existance
around the year 1000 and were mostly confined to the nobility. The
employment of surnames in England in the eleventh century was one of the
results of the Norman (French) conquest of 1066 which was carried out under
William the Conquerer.
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
The crusades (from Latin "crux" meaning "Cross") were a series of religious
wars waged by the cristian nations of Europe during the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the recovery of the holy land from the Moslems.
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname. Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
Crest: The head of the turk.
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb 1993
Registration no#10439
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm0 ... direct/01/
have read a few heraldic
books that indicate the Turcott surname was applied to a crusader, as far as
I know, there are quite a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc &
Leturc surname. I have known one researcher Tony Turk that has researched
some variants of the turk surname and this is his website, but I think my
origin may be different from the lines he is researching.
http://www.turkgenealogy.com/
However, is there someone out there that knows about crusaders and some
surnames assocaited with them, below is one paper about one possible origin.
I read one book authored by johnathan riley smith about crusaders but really
could not find any such referance to the turcott surname, but found some
referance to turks, but I still dont think that a Turcott originating out of
france would
be of such turkish root.
The Turcott Surname in France
Turcott of french surnames, it has been said that they came into existance
around the year 1000 and were mostly confined to the nobility. The
employment of surnames in England in the eleventh century was one of the
results of the Norman (French) conquest of 1066 which was carried out under
William the Conquerer.
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
The crusades (from Latin "crux" meaning "Cross") were a series of religious
wars waged by the cristian nations of Europe during the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the recovery of the holy land from the Moslems.
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname. Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
Crest: The head of the turk.
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb 1993
Registration no#10439
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm0 ... direct/01/
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: crusaders
In article <BAY106-F9768A09DA6E409377DD27D5150@phx.gbl>,
bobturcott@msn.com ("Bob Turcott") wrote:
<...>
<...>
I would be hesitant to accept this derivation of your surname.
'Turcott' as such does not appear in P. H. Reaney's authoritative
_Dictionary of English Surnames_, but the second element of the name
suggests that it is not a nickname, originally, but a place-name, in
English, with '-cot' or '-cote' being a cottage or dwelling (as in the
surname 'Prescott', etc.). The vowel in the first element may have
shifted, and it is possible that it derives from some element 'ter-',
'tur-', or 'tor-', that may have nothing to do with the documented
epithet 'Turk'. Reaney notes that 'Turk' itself is of disputed origins:
he reports that NED just assigns the word continental (i.e. French)
origins, coming into England as a nickname around the time of the third
crusade, but Reaney says that it is found in London a half century
earlier. And there are some documented instances of it as a well before
the crusades: e.g. the 'Turch' in Cambridgeshire Domesday Book (1080s),
which Reaney reports another author explaining as a hypochoristic pet
form of the Scandinavian Germanic name 'Thorkel'. Reaney does admit
that most of the documented surnames (burgeoning in the 13th c.) of the
form 'le Turk' or 'fitz Turk', etc., were probably derived from the
continental import. But at any rate, I would doubt that the later
surname 'Turcott' necessarily has any relation to earlier instances of
'Turk', whether the latter derives from a continental or Germanic name.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
bobturcott@msn.com ("Bob Turcott") wrote:
<...>
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
<...>
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
I would be hesitant to accept this derivation of your surname.
'Turcott' as such does not appear in P. H. Reaney's authoritative
_Dictionary of English Surnames_, but the second element of the name
suggests that it is not a nickname, originally, but a place-name, in
English, with '-cot' or '-cote' being a cottage or dwelling (as in the
surname 'Prescott', etc.). The vowel in the first element may have
shifted, and it is possible that it derives from some element 'ter-',
'tur-', or 'tor-', that may have nothing to do with the documented
epithet 'Turk'. Reaney notes that 'Turk' itself is of disputed origins:
he reports that NED just assigns the word continental (i.e. French)
origins, coming into England as a nickname around the time of the third
crusade, but Reaney says that it is found in London a half century
earlier. And there are some documented instances of it as a well before
the crusades: e.g. the 'Turch' in Cambridgeshire Domesday Book (1080s),
which Reaney reports another author explaining as a hypochoristic pet
form of the Scandinavian Germanic name 'Thorkel'. Reaney does admit
that most of the documented surnames (burgeoning in the 13th c.) of the
form 'le Turk' or 'fitz Turk', etc., were probably derived from the
continental import. But at any rate, I would doubt that the later
surname 'Turcott' necessarily has any relation to earlier instances of
'Turk', whether the latter derives from a continental or Germanic name.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: matrilineal comments
In article <dr9s5s$l0v$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Exactly. My daughters share my XY line, but my son's XY goes only back
to Cynthia (surname unknown, but perhaps a Whiting), widow in 1828 of
Isaac Dudley, of North Haven, Connecticut. I believe they are the
parents of Whiting Dudley, b. in North Haven in 1823, but I am not sure.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise?
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other. A woman gets one X from her mother,
representing 50/50 of each maternal grandparent, while she gets the
other from the father, but it comes entirely from the paternal
grandmother (the paternal grandfather providing the father with his Y- a
man gets his sole X exclusively from his mother). Thus, any line with
two successive male generations contributes nothing to the X of their
descendant, while for all other lines, the percent contribution is
divided in half for each female generation, but remains undivided for
each male generation. The line with the most male generations, without
two in a row, is that which alternates, having twice the contribution
per generation as the all-female line.
Curiously, this line differs for siblings of different genders - mine is
Isabel, wife of James Baird, b. ca. 1730, or Northampton Co. Pa., my
sister's is Joh. Heinrich Kauffer, b. ca. 1730, somewhere in Germany.
Exactly. My daughters share my XY line, but my son's XY goes only back
to Cynthia (surname unknown, but perhaps a Whiting), widow in 1828 of
Isaac Dudley, of North Haven, Connecticut. I believe they are the
parents of Whiting Dudley, b. in North Haven in 1823, but I am not sure.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: matrilineal comments
In article <v6ZBf.18112$iD.8940@trnddc08>,
Don Stone <don.stone@verizon.net> wrote:
I wasn't fooled! But I do remember a fierce on-line debate about where
the chestnut tree was, under which the village blacksmith stood, with
some genealogy types some years back.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
Don Stone <don.stone@verizon.net> wrote:
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
Don Stone wrote:
mt: (presumably) Old Mother Hubbard, mother of Mary (Hubbard) Cain, the
latter of whom is said to have lived from 1798 to 1859.
Was she the one with the bare cupboard? Being descended from a nursery
rhyme hero is pretty cool; fits well with the Dick Whittington thread.
I'm afraid my tongue was in my cheek on this one. According to _The
Annotated Mother Goose_ by William and Ceil Baring-Gould, Old Mother Hubbard
was a stock nursery-tale character; no specific historical basis for this
character is proposed. The poem that is well-known today appeared in 1805
in _The Comic Adventures of Old Mother Hubbard and Her Dog_, by Sarah
Catherine Martin, an early love of Prince William Henry, afterwards William
IV.
I wasn't fooled! But I do remember a fierce on-line debate about where
the chestnut tree was, under which the village blacksmith stood, with
some genealogy types some years back.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
-
Tompkins, M.L.
RE: crusaders
<<The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and
LeTurc is of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or
physical characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this
instance, the name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc"
which in turn comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk".
Turk was a term used to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is
non-Christians. Thus the surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied
to a crusader.>>
That last sentence leaps a sizeable logic gap. I can believe that the
surname Turk is connected to the middle eastern Turks (or middle eastern
people generally), but it isn't obvious that it must therefore be a
nickname given to a crusader. It could equally well be a nickname given
to a man with a swarthy complexion, or perhaps with personality traits
that were thought to be characteristic of Turks.
I have looked Turk up in Reaney and Wilson's Dictionary of English
surnames. The format there is to give a number of early occurrences of
each surname and then to comment on them.
The earliest example is an individual in the Cambridgeshire Domesday
Book called Turch, Turcus. This early date rather puts paid to the
crusader idea.
There are several examples from the 12th and 13th centuries, among them
Ricardus filius Torke and Ricardus filius Turk from Yorks in 1188 and
Kent in 1205 respectively, which suggest that it was a personal name
rather than a nickname - though there are also two examples in le Turc,
le Turch, so perhaps it has multiple origins.
In their commentary Reaney and Wilson say that the Domesday Book name is
explained by von Feilitzen as the Old Norse personal name Thorkell, with
an A-N loss of the -ell, and that it seems clear that it was also used
as a pet form of the Scandinavian name.
However they also say that most of the surnames appear to be nicknames
from Old French 'turc' (Turk), a word which NED suggests was introduced
into England during the 3rd crusade (1187-92), but which is found as a
nickname in London half a century earlier.
But that is the surname Turk - is Turcott the same surname? I don't
really see that is has to be - it looks rather as if its origin is an
English place-name. I don't know of any place called Turcott or Turcote
or something like that, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't one.
-cott and -cote are common place-name elements (meaning 'cottage(s)' or
the place where the cottagers dwell) but they tended to be the names of
small, marginal settlements (cottagers were villagers who had a house
but very little land, or none at all, and scraped a living working for
others), some of which have not survived, or if they have survived
remain small and don't appear in gazetteers.
Alternatively Turcott might be a pet form of the personal name Turk, or
even of Thurkel - pet forms were often made by adding -et, sometimes to
a shortened form of the name.
Matt Tompkins
LeTurc is of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or
physical characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this
instance, the name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc"
which in turn comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk".
Turk was a term used to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is
non-Christians. Thus the surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied
to a crusader.>>
That last sentence leaps a sizeable logic gap. I can believe that the
surname Turk is connected to the middle eastern Turks (or middle eastern
people generally), but it isn't obvious that it must therefore be a
nickname given to a crusader. It could equally well be a nickname given
to a man with a swarthy complexion, or perhaps with personality traits
that were thought to be characteristic of Turks.
I have looked Turk up in Reaney and Wilson's Dictionary of English
surnames. The format there is to give a number of early occurrences of
each surname and then to comment on them.
The earliest example is an individual in the Cambridgeshire Domesday
Book called Turch, Turcus. This early date rather puts paid to the
crusader idea.
There are several examples from the 12th and 13th centuries, among them
Ricardus filius Torke and Ricardus filius Turk from Yorks in 1188 and
Kent in 1205 respectively, which suggest that it was a personal name
rather than a nickname - though there are also two examples in le Turc,
le Turch, so perhaps it has multiple origins.
In their commentary Reaney and Wilson say that the Domesday Book name is
explained by von Feilitzen as the Old Norse personal name Thorkell, with
an A-N loss of the -ell, and that it seems clear that it was also used
as a pet form of the Scandinavian name.
However they also say that most of the surnames appear to be nicknames
from Old French 'turc' (Turk), a word which NED suggests was introduced
into England during the 3rd crusade (1187-92), but which is found as a
nickname in London half a century earlier.
But that is the surname Turk - is Turcott the same surname? I don't
really see that is has to be - it looks rather as if its origin is an
English place-name. I don't know of any place called Turcott or Turcote
or something like that, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't one.
-cott and -cote are common place-name elements (meaning 'cottage(s)' or
the place where the cottagers dwell) but they tended to be the names of
small, marginal settlements (cottagers were villagers who had a house
but very little land, or none at all, and scraped a living working for
others), some of which have not survived, or if they have survived
remain small and don't appear in gazetteers.
Alternatively Turcott might be a pet form of the personal name Turk, or
even of Thurkel - pet forms were often made by adding -et, sometimes to
a shortened form of the name.
Matt Tompkins
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other.
What does the X chromosome indicate, biologically speaking? (I was
never very good at science ...)
-
Susan Johanson
Mayflower list
My husband is also a descendent of George Soule and several other
Mayflower passengers. I have belonged to the rootsweb Mayflower list for
several years and have found it very helpful.
Listname: MAYFLOWER
To Post: mailto:MAYFLOWER-L@rootsweb.com
BTW My husband descends from two of Gregory Stone's sons, one each from
his two wives. They were Daniel Stone whose mother was Margaret, and
Samuel Stone, Sr. whose mother was Lydia
Susan
--
---
Susan C. Johanson, Haymarket, VA
...Searching for footprints in the sands of time...
Mayflower passengers. I have belonged to the rootsweb Mayflower list for
several years and have found it very helpful.
Listname: MAYFLOWER
To Post: mailto:MAYFLOWER-L@rootsweb.com
BTW My husband descends from two of Gregory Stone's sons, one each from
his two wives. They were Daniel Stone whose mother was Margaret, and
Samuel Stone, Sr. whose mother was Lydia
Susan
--
---
Susan C. Johanson, Haymarket, VA
...Searching for footprints in the sands of time...
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: Mayflower ancestors
----- Original Message -----
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
I should, (for courtesy, as well as scholarship), have added that this was
according to Gary Boyd Roberts. It could well be that this line has been
disproved. It has been years since I have looked at these things, and could
very well have missed it. IIRC, it went through the Boude line.
Contritely,
Ford
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
I'm sorry but that's not true. The American ancestry of the late
Princess of Wales has no Mayflower lines.
I should, (for courtesy, as well as scholarship), have added that this was
according to Gary Boyd Roberts. It could well be that this line has been
disproved. It has been years since I have looked at these things, and could
very well have missed it. IIRC, it went through the Boude line.
Contritely,
Ford
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: matrilineal comments
Very interesting. I'm intrigued by the XY line, Todd. Thanks for
bringing it up. Much to my surprise and interest, my own XY line takes
me to early 17th century Friesland, Netherlands.
Tony Hoskins' umbilical, agnate, and XY recap:
mt (umbilical):
MARY (EVANS ?) MILES (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent and Llanedeyrn,
Glamorganshire, Wales. Wife of THOMAS MILES.
-----------------------------------------
Y (agnate):
JOHN HODGKINSON (bc 1613), of Preston, Lancashire, England.
----------------------------------
XY:
NN (---) DOUW (b say 1630), of Leuwarden, Frielsand, Netherlands. Wife
of JAN DOUW.
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
bringing it up. Much to my surprise and interest, my own XY line takes
me to early 17th century Friesland, Netherlands.
Tony Hoskins' umbilical, agnate, and XY recap:
mt (umbilical):
MARY (EVANS ?) MILES (bc 1765), of St Mellons, Gwent and Llanedeyrn,
Glamorganshire, Wales. Wife of THOMAS MILES.
-----------------------------------------
Y (agnate):
JOHN HODGKINSON (bc 1613), of Preston, Lancashire, England.
----------------------------------
XY:
NN (---) DOUW (b say 1630), of Leuwarden, Frielsand, Netherlands. Wife
of JAN DOUW.
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
-
Bob Turcott
RE: crusaders
Matt,
My answers below
shortened version of Turc
but not certain and without a doubt be of french origin. but further
investigation in this area will
be done to be sure.
not certain thats why I am checking with the experts here for help, it is
quite possible they are fake
they may not be for my family, keep in mind sometimes arms were given to
groups of crusaders with variants, however, for my family specifically,
probably not, But I will investage all possibilties.
have to take into acount that there may be some very good books and very bad
french heraldic books out there and the only way to clarify is for me to get
the source book and cite the referance then decide as a group if its a good
source or not.
the heraldic books
that indicate the full name Turcott derived from some shortened version of
it as a crusader.
Till the next post
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/o ... direct/01/
My answers below
From: "Tompkins, M.L." <mllt1@leicester.ac.uk
To: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com
Subject: RE: crusaders
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:01:53 -0000
Hello Bob,
Sorry - I sent my first reply you alone, not to the list, accidentally, so
I re-sent it to the list shortly afterwards.
I think we have to be careful to distinguish between the surnames Turk and
Turcott. There's no strong etymological reason why they should have the
same origins, unless perhaps (as I suggested) Turcott may have originated
as Turket, ie a diminutive form of Turk (itself a diminutive form of the
Anglo-Norse name Thurkell). But an origin in an English place-name seems
the most probable.
So I don't think any of the origins listed below are very likely to be
relevant to your surname, since they relate to a different name.
I really think Turcott possibly could be a pet form of Turc or Le Turc or
shortened version of Turc
but not certain and without a doubt be of french origin. but further
investigation in this area will
be done to be sure.
Even if Turcott did originate as Turket, none of the derivations below
would apply to it. Derivation 7 because it is a modern (post 1930!)
Turkish surname; derivations 1, 2 and 4 because they are German; and
derivations 3, 5 and 6 because Turket would be a personal name, not a
nickname or a description of someone's place of origin. But that does not
matter because if Turcott does originate as a pet form of the Anglo-Norse
personal name Thurkel, then that is another, new, derivation. You could
call it derivation 8.
I'm afraid coats of arms seldom provide guidance to a surname's origins -
that is an old wive's tale. It is usually the other way round - the coat
of arms derives from the surname. Medieval people loved what they called
canting arms - arms which contained a pun on the family's surname. It
isn't surprising that a family called Turk couldn't resist using a Turk's
Head as their arms.
some cases, but not all anything is worth a shot.
But are you sure that these are the arms of a family called Turcott, not
one called Turk? And if yes, are you sure that they are arms used by your
Turcott family, not a different Turcott family? I've never heard of The
Historical research Institute, Inc, but it sounds suspiciously like one of
these bucket shops which sell meaningless certificates, with fake
statements about a surname's origins and heraldry.
Bucket/butcher shops, yes indeed a good possible name for them!!!!!
not certain thats why I am checking with the experts here for help, it is
quite possible they are fake
they may not be for my family, keep in mind sometimes arms were given to
groups of crusaders with variants, however, for my family specifically,
probably not, But I will investage all possibilties.
What you sometimes find in heraldry books is a statement that a Turk's Head
(or Saracen's Head, or Blackamoor's Head) on a coat of arms is a sign that
someone in the family had once been on crusade. This is seldom true, and a
good book will mention it only as a mistaken belief which should not be
given credence.
I am not sure if I would agree with you on this 100%, my reasoning is we
have to take into acount that there may be some very good books and very bad
french heraldic books out there and the only way to clarify is for me to get
the source book and cite the referance then decide as a group if its a good
source or not.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but this is the honest answer to your queries.
Honesty and accuracy is what I am looking for here, my next post I will cite
the heraldic books
that indicate the full name Turcott derived from some shortened version of
it as a crusader.
Till the next post
Regards,
Matt (not Tom)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Turcott [mailto:bobturcott@msn.com]
Sent: 26 January 2006 16:28
To: mllt1@leicester.ac.uk
Subject: RE: crusaders
Tom,
However, I have seen in heraldic books mention the surname Turcott as a
name being applied to a crusader, I will take a look and find the book I
found it in some yaers ago at a library, I recall this mentioned in a
french heraldic book.
however Etymologists have identified the following origins:
1. Derivation from a place name, e.g. from Türkwitz in Breslau, Turknwitz
in Bohemia and Turckheim in France.
2. Derivation from a natural or manmade feature near which the original
surname bearer lived, e.g. "zum Türken" and "zum Dürken".
3. Derivation from a nickname, a physical characteristic or personal
attribute of the original bearer.
4. Derivation from a patronymic such as Dietrich from Theodorich.
5. Derivation from a shortened title of a "fighter against the Turks" given
to a returned Crusader.
6. Derivation from a descriptive title for a Turk who settled among
non-Turks, i.e. "the Turk".
7. Finally in 1930 Turkey required its citizens to assume a surname. Many
assumed the surname Turk or Türk.
In closing I may entertain the 2 items below as possibilties.
Derivation from a nickname, a physical characteristic or personal attribute
of the original bearer.
Derivation from a shortened title of a "fighter against the Turks" given to
a returned Crusader.
It would be interesting in having the coat of arms that are mentioned in my
first post examined
by an heraldic expert to see were it leads..
From: "Tompkins, M.L." <mllt1@leicester.ac.uk
To: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com
Subject: RE: crusaders
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:43:30 -0000
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and
LeTurc is of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or
physical characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this
instance, the name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc"
which in turn comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk".
Turk was a term used to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is
non-Christians. Thus the surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied
to a crusader.
That last sentence leaps a sizeable logic gap. I can believe that the
surname Turk is connected to the middle eastern Turks (or middle eastern
people generally), but it isn't obvious that it must therefore be a
nickname given to a crusader. It could equally well be a nickname given
to a man with a swarthy complexion, or perhaps with personality traits
that were thought to be characteristic of Turks.
I have looked Turk up in Reaney and Wilson's Dictionary of English
surnames. The format there is to give a number of early occurrences of
each surname and then to comment on them.
The earliest example is an individual in the Cheshire Domesday Book
called Turch, Turcus. This early date rather puts paid to the crusader
idea.
There are several examples from the 12th and 13th centuries, among them
Ricardus filius Torke and Ricardus filius Turk from Yorks in 1188 and
Kent in 1205 respectively, which suggest that it was a personal name
rather than a nickname - though there are also two examples in le Turc,
le Turch, so perhaps it has multiple origins.
In their commentary Reaney and Wilson say that the Domesday Book name is
explained by von Feilitzen as the Old Norse personal name Thorkell, with
an Anglo-Norse loss of the -ell, and that it seems clear that it was
also used as a pet form of the Scandinavian name.
However they also say that most of the surnames appear to be nicknames
from Old French 'turc' (Turk), a word which NED suggests was introduced
into England during the 3rd crusade (1187-92), but which is found as a
nickname in London half a century earlier.
But that is the surname Turk - is Turcott the same surname? I don't
really see that is has to be - it looks rather as if its origin is an
English place-name. I don't know of any place called Turcott or
Turcote, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't one. -cott and -cote
are common place-name elements (meaning 'cottage(s)' or the place where
the cottagers dwell) but they tended to be the names of small, marginal
settlements (cottagers were villagers who had a house but very little
land, or none at all, and scraped a living working for others), some of
which have not survived, or if they have survived remain small and don't
appear in gazetteers.
Alternatively Turcott might be a pet form of the personal name Turk, or
even of Thurkel - pet forms were often made by ading -et, sometimes to a
shortened form of the name.
Matt Tompkins
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/o ... direct/01/
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/o ... direct/01/
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: crusaders
In message of 26 Jan, bobturcott@msn.com ("Bob Turcott") wrote:
<snip>
Hardly pun but "canting arms" is the more usual description.
Anyhow the only relevant arms in Burke's compendiums "Armory" of 1844
and general Armory" of 1884 are those for a Turke of London of the time
of Ed3ward III and are:
Argent on a bend azure between two lions rampant gules three
bezants.
The much newer "Medieval Ordinary of British Arms" has these arms for
various Turks:
(Vol 3, p. 68 for various Mons and Sir Robert Turks) variations on: On
bend sinople between 2 lions 3 roundels
(Vol 2, p. 221 for The Great Turk who slew the emperor of
Constantinople); Per fess or and gules the base representing town wall
masoned with loopholes & gateway sable doors open & turned back or wall
ensigned with three turrets gules.
(vol 2, p. 412 for a William Turk, alderman and fishmonger who d. 1532)
Chevron between 3 lion's heads erased or on a chief or a griffin passant
or.
Volumes 3 and 4 have yet to be published.
These symbolisms are not authentic, they were probably invented in post
medieval times to humour people with not much else to do. The core of
heraldry was a need to invent some graphic design that would be easily
recognisable, either on a seal to authorise a document or in a
tournament on the apparel and armour.
These crests of a "soldan" are very common for a wide range of families
in middle medieval times. They are not unique designs. (See Hope St
John's "Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter
1348-1485", though it is a rare book.)
I have no idea on what basis this firm told you about these arms. As
you can see there are several different arms for different people named
Turk. In fact, of course, arms belong to particular families not to
names and they should have enquired what families you were descended
from. But, regrettably there are too many dealers who are more eager
to collect your money than to do a proper job.
Heraldry is bound up with genealogy. If you don't know the genealogy
of a family, you cannot say anything about their heraldry. Might I
recommend you have a look at the FAQ of the rec.heraldry newsgroup at:
http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/mfaq
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
To all, I have been researching my surname Turcott, for quite some
time. I have read a few heraldic books that indicate the Turcott
surname was applied to a crusader, as far as I know, there are quite
a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc & Leturc surname.
<snip>
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls"
of Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname.
Hardly pun but "canting arms" is the more usual description.
Anyhow the only relevant arms in Burke's compendiums "Armory" of 1844
and general Armory" of 1884 are those for a Turke of London of the time
of Ed3ward III and are:
Argent on a bend azure between two lions rampant gules three
bezants.
The much newer "Medieval Ordinary of British Arms" has these arms for
various Turks:
(Vol 3, p. 68 for various Mons and Sir Robert Turks) variations on: On
bend sinople between 2 lions 3 roundels
(Vol 2, p. 221 for The Great Turk who slew the emperor of
Constantinople); Per fess or and gules the base representing town wall
masoned with loopholes & gateway sable doors open & turned back or wall
ensigned with three turrets gules.
(vol 2, p. 412 for a William Turk, alderman and fishmonger who d. 1532)
Chevron between 3 lion's heads erased or on a chief or a griffin passant
or.
Volumes 3 and 4 have yet to be published.
Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
These symbolisms are not authentic, they were probably invented in post
medieval times to humour people with not much else to do. The core of
heraldry was a need to invent some graphic design that would be easily
recognisable, either on a seal to authorise a document or in a
tournament on the apparel and armour.
Crest: The head of the turk.
These crests of a "soldan" are very common for a wide range of families
in middle medieval times. They are not unique designs. (See Hope St
John's "Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter
1348-1485", though it is a rare book.)
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb
1993 Registration no#10439
I have no idea on what basis this firm told you about these arms. As
you can see there are several different arms for different people named
Turk. In fact, of course, arms belong to particular families not to
names and they should have enquired what families you were descended
from. But, regrettably there are too many dealers who are more eager
to collect your money than to do a proper job.
Heraldry is bound up with genealogy. If you don't know the genealogy
of a family, you cannot say anything about their heraldry. Might I
recommend you have a look at the FAQ of the rec.heraldry newsgroup at:
http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/mfaq
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: crusaders
Dear Bob,
Re. Ricardus filius Torke: Torke looks, to me, to be an Anglish [sic], (or,
possibly, Danish), name, derived from Tor (Thor), which at such a time and
place, (i.e. eleventh-to-thirteenth-century Yorkshire) was not uncommon.
Re. William le Turk: With the introduction of Norman-type surnames, which
you mentioned, the insertion of a 'de', or, less frequently, a 'le', became
common practice, in an effort to climb into the dominant paradigm socially;
much the same as American immigrants of a later period would (ironically)
shorten their names. However, the forenames William and Robert, (which you
cite), being French, would seem to indicate that such was not the case for
these more Southern 'forebarers' of your surname.
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 10:57 AM
Subject: crusaders
To all, I have been researching my surname Turcott, for quite some time. I
have read a few heraldic
books that indicate the Turcott surname was applied to a crusader, as far as
I know, there are quite a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc &
Leturc surname. I have known one researcher Tony Turk that has researched
some variants of the turk surname and this is his website, but I think my
origin may be different from the lines he is researching.
http://www.turkgenealogy.com/
However, is there someone out there that knows about crusaders and some
surnames assocaited with them, below is one paper about one possible origin.
I read one book authored by johnathan riley smith about crusaders but really
could not find any such referance to the turcott surname, but found some
referance to turks, but I still dont think that a Turcott originating out of
france would
be of such turkish root.
The Turcott Surname in France
Turcott of french surnames, it has been said that they came into existance
around the year 1000 and were mostly confined to the nobility. The
employment of surnames in England in the eleventh century was one of the
results of the Norman (French) conquest of 1066 which was carried out under
William the Conquerer.
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
The crusades (from Latin "crux" meaning "Cross") were a series of religious
wars waged by the cristian nations of Europe during the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the recovery of the holy land from the Moslems.
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname. Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
Crest: The head of the turk.
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb 1993
Registration no#10439
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm0 ... direct/01/
Re. Ricardus filius Torke: Torke looks, to me, to be an Anglish [sic], (or,
possibly, Danish), name, derived from Tor (Thor), which at such a time and
place, (i.e. eleventh-to-thirteenth-century Yorkshire) was not uncommon.
Re. William le Turk: With the introduction of Norman-type surnames, which
you mentioned, the insertion of a 'de', or, less frequently, a 'le', became
common practice, in an effort to climb into the dominant paradigm socially;
much the same as American immigrants of a later period would (ironically)
shorten their names. However, the forenames William and Robert, (which you
cite), being French, would seem to indicate that such was not the case for
these more Southern 'forebarers' of your surname.
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 10:57 AM
Subject: crusaders
To all, I have been researching my surname Turcott, for quite some time. I
have read a few heraldic
books that indicate the Turcott surname was applied to a crusader, as far as
I know, there are quite a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc &
Leturc surname. I have known one researcher Tony Turk that has researched
some variants of the turk surname and this is his website, but I think my
origin may be different from the lines he is researching.
http://www.turkgenealogy.com/
However, is there someone out there that knows about crusaders and some
surnames assocaited with them, below is one paper about one possible origin.
I read one book authored by johnathan riley smith about crusaders but really
could not find any such referance to the turcott surname, but found some
referance to turks, but I still dont think that a Turcott originating out of
france would
be of such turkish root.
The Turcott Surname in France
Turcott of french surnames, it has been said that they came into existance
around the year 1000 and were mostly confined to the nobility. The
employment of surnames in England in the eleventh century was one of the
results of the Norman (French) conquest of 1066 which was carried out under
William the Conquerer.
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
The crusades (from Latin "crux" meaning "Cross") were a series of religious
wars waged by the cristian nations of Europe during the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the recovery of the holy land from the Moslems.
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname. Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
Crest: The head of the turk.
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb 1993
Registration no#10439
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm0 ... direct/01/
-
Bob Turcott
Re: crusaders
Ford,
see below
to do further
study in this area to be certain.
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/o ... direct/01/
see below
From: "Ford Mommaerts-Browne" <FordMommaerts@Cox.net
To: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com>,<GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: crusaders
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:55:56 -0400
Dear Bob,
Re. Ricardus filius Torke: Torke looks, to me, to be an Anglish [sic],
(or,
possibly, Danish), name, derived from Tor (Thor), which at such a time and
place, (i.e. eleventh-to-thirteenth-century Yorkshire) was not uncommon.
Re. William le Turk: With the introduction of Norman-type surnames, which
you mentioned, the insertion of a 'de', or, less frequently, a 'le', became
common practice, in an effort to climb into the dominant paradigm socially;
much the same as American immigrants of a later period would (ironically)
shorten their names. However, the forenames William and Robert, (which you
cite), being French, would seem to indicate that such was not the case for
these more Southern 'forebarers' of your surname.
Ford
possibilty perhaps Turcott could be elongated version of Turc, I will need
to do further
study in this area to be certain.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 10:57 AM
Subject: crusaders
To all, I have been researching my surname Turcott, for quite some time. I
have read a few heraldic
books that indicate the Turcott surname was applied to a crusader, as far
as
I know, there are quite a few origins and variations of the Turk, Turc &
Leturc surname. I have known one researcher Tony Turk that has researched
some variants of the turk surname and this is his website, but I think my
origin may be different from the lines he is researching.
http://www.turkgenealogy.com/
However, is there someone out there that knows about crusaders and some
surnames assocaited with them, below is one paper about one possible
origin.
I read one book authored by johnathan riley smith about crusaders but
really
could not find any such referance to the turcott surname, but found some
referance to turks, but I still dont think that a Turcott originating out
of
france would
be of such turkish root.
The Turcott Surname in France
Turcott of french surnames, it has been said that they came into existance
around the year 1000 and were mostly confined to the nobility. The
employment of surnames in England in the eleventh century was one of the
results of the Norman (French) conquest of 1066 which was carried out under
William the Conquerer.
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance, the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
The crusades (from Latin "crux" meaning "Cross") were a series of religious
wars waged by the cristian nations of Europe during the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the recovery of the holy land from the
Moslems.
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
Coat of Arms/Blazon of ARMS:
Gules, on a chief argent the head of the turk sable, with a head band
argent.
Translation: The head of the turk acts as a pun on the origin of this
surname. Gules or red, symbolizes the planet mars and denotes Military
Fortitude, Valour, joy and Honor.Argent or White, symbolizes the moon and
denotes Purity and Obedience.
Crest: The head of the turk.
Origin: France
Source: The Historical Research Center, Inc. issued to me on 23rd Feb 1993
Registration no#10439
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm0 ... direct/01/
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/o ... direct/01/
-
Bob Turcott
Re: crusaders
From: Nathaniel Taylor <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: crusaders
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:27:42 GMT
In article <BAY106-F9768A09DA6E409377DD27D5150@phx.gbl>,
bobturcott@msn.com ("Bob Turcott") wrote:
...
The french name Turcott and it's variants Turco, Turc, Turq, and LeTurc
is
of nickname origin, that is, descriptive of some personal or physical
characteristic of the initial bearer of this surname. In this instance,
the
name is a nickname derived from the medieval French "turc" which in turn
comes from the middle latin "turcus" meaning "a turk". Turk was a term
used
to describe a Mohamadan or all infidels, that is non-Christians. Thus
the
surname Turcott was a medieval nickname applied to a crusader.
...
This surname can also be found in England, probably introduced there
during
the third crusade (1187-1192). In fact, the earliest written record of
this
surname is English from 1188 when one Ricardus Filius (son of) Torke is
recorded in the "pipe rolls" of Yorkshire England.
In 1193 one William Le (the) Turk is listed in the "pipe rolls" of
Gloucestershire and Robert Turk is mentioned in the "subsidy rolls" of
Sussex in 1296.
I would be hesitant to accept this derivation of your surname.
'Turcott' as such does not appear in P. H. Reaney's authoritative
_Dictionary of English Surnames_, but the second element of the name
suggests that it is not a nickname, originally, but a place-name, in
English, with '-cot' or '-cote' being a cottage or dwelling (as in the
surname 'Prescott', etc.). The vowel in the first element may have
shifted, and it is possible that it derives from some element 'ter-',
'tur-', or 'tor-', that may have nothing to do with the documented
epithet 'Turk'. Reaney notes that 'Turk' itself is of disputed origins:
he reports that NED just assigns the word continental (i.e. French)
origins, coming into England as a nickname around the time of the third
crusade, but Reaney says that it is found in London a half century
earlier. And there are some documented instances of it as a well before
the crusades: e.g. the 'Turch' in Cambridgeshire Domesday Book (1080s),
which Reaney reports another author explaining as a hypochoristic pet
form of the Scandinavian Germanic name 'Thorkel'. Reaney does admit
that most of the documented surnames (burgeoning in the 13th c.) of the
form 'le Turk' or 'fitz Turk', etc., were probably derived from the
continental import. But at any rate, I would doubt that the later
surname 'Turcott' necessarily has any relation to earlier instances of
'Turk', whether the latter derives from a continental or Germanic name.
I am very hesitant for sure!!! perhaps it could come from Turc but not Turk.
possibly derived from Turc surname of france, but not Turk, The source of
the certificate
is perhaps not a very good one and to many discrepancies in the cert as
identified by others in this forum.
However, I will find the heraldic book and post it here and see if everyone
thinks the book may be in error as well.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/ca ... p?cid=3963
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
I mean, does the fact that my XY line ends up at the (presumably)
Germanically-descended wife of Johannes Hoffman of Lebanon Co., PA,
make my genetic makeup more Germanic than would normally be the case
for a person with a single great-grandparent of completely Germanic
descent (and with no other German lines)? Slightly more Germanic?
Much more Germanic? Makes no difference?
John Brandon wrote:
Germanically-descended wife of Johannes Hoffman of Lebanon Co., PA,
make my genetic makeup more Germanic than would normally be the case
for a person with a single great-grandparent of completely Germanic
descent (and with no other German lines)? Slightly more Germanic?
Much more Germanic? Makes no difference?
John Brandon wrote:
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other.
What does the X chromosome indicate, biologically speaking? (I was
never very good at science ...)
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
John Brandon wrote:
Biologically speaking, there is no direct correlation between individual
chromosomes and functions or purposes - even with the Y chromosome, you
can have one and be female by all objective criteria (except, of course,
chromosome typing), if you just have a mutation in one single gene (e.g.
TDFY - testes determining factor Y), female being the default pathway.
The X, like the autosomal chromosomes, contains an essentially random
collection of genes (about 1000) for various proteins (e.g. the 'color
receptors' for light and one of the blood-clotting factors come
immediately to mind). There is one critical criterion however -
(almost) all of the genes on the X chromosome must be able to function
alone. For autosomal chromosomes, you have two copies of each gene, and
some of them _must_ have two copies to allow appropriate ballance.
Because men only have one X, anything on the X must be able to regulate
itself as a single copy. Further, because they work as a single copy in
males, having two copies in females would confuse things, so female
cells inactivate (randomly) one or the other of their X chromosomes,
such that only one X is functional in each cell, like in males. (The
patchy coloration in cats is the most frequently cited example of this.
Brown patches might represent where one X has been inactivated, black
the other.)
As to whether this makes you more Germanic, "Germanic" is as much a
social-cultural construct as a biological one anyhow. If you want to
point to individual traits - blond hair, blue eyes, (a tendancy to
overrun neighboring countries), these would link to individual genes,
each on their own chromosome, and each segregating independently. In
terms of numbers, you would have twice as much chromosome X from your XY
ancestor than the proportion of, say, chromosome 2 that came from any
ancestor of that generation, but in a cumulative sense, given 22
autosomal chromosomes vs. one X, the difference in total gene
contribution is of little significance. Biologically speaking, this
XY-line phenomenon is really more a curiousity than something of true
biological significance.
taf
I mean, does the fact that my XY line ends up at the (presumably)
Germanically-descended wife of Johannes Hoffman of Lebanon Co., PA,
make my genetic makeup more Germanic than would normally be the case
for a person with a single great-grandparent of completely Germanic
descent (and with no other German lines)? Slightly more Germanic?
Much more Germanic? Makes no difference?
John Brandon wrote:
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other.
What does the X chromosome indicate, biologically speaking? (I was
never very good at science ...)
Biologically speaking, there is no direct correlation between individual
chromosomes and functions or purposes - even with the Y chromosome, you
can have one and be female by all objective criteria (except, of course,
chromosome typing), if you just have a mutation in one single gene (e.g.
TDFY - testes determining factor Y), female being the default pathway.
The X, like the autosomal chromosomes, contains an essentially random
collection of genes (about 1000) for various proteins (e.g. the 'color
receptors' for light and one of the blood-clotting factors come
immediately to mind). There is one critical criterion however -
(almost) all of the genes on the X chromosome must be able to function
alone. For autosomal chromosomes, you have two copies of each gene, and
some of them _must_ have two copies to allow appropriate ballance.
Because men only have one X, anything on the X must be able to regulate
itself as a single copy. Further, because they work as a single copy in
males, having two copies in females would confuse things, so female
cells inactivate (randomly) one or the other of their X chromosomes,
such that only one X is functional in each cell, like in males. (The
patchy coloration in cats is the most frequently cited example of this.
Brown patches might represent where one X has been inactivated, black
the other.)
As to whether this makes you more Germanic, "Germanic" is as much a
social-cultural construct as a biological one anyhow. If you want to
point to individual traits - blond hair, blue eyes, (a tendancy to
overrun neighboring countries), these would link to individual genes,
each on their own chromosome, and each segregating independently. In
terms of numbers, you would have twice as much chromosome X from your XY
ancestor than the proportion of, say, chromosome 2 that came from any
ancestor of that generation, but in a cumulative sense, given 22
autosomal chromosomes vs. one X, the difference in total gene
contribution is of little significance. Biologically speaking, this
XY-line phenomenon is really more a curiousity than something of true
biological significance.
taf
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: matrilineal comments
In article <43d92876@news.ColoState.EDU>,
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Ah. So I did not inherit my male pattern baldness--or [privily touches
his desk] relative freedom from it--from John Stratton of Shotley? I
remember hearing an old wives' tale that a man's hairline destiny is got
from his mother's father.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Biologically speaking, there is no direct correlation between individual
chromosomes and functions or purposes ...
Ah. So I did not inherit my male pattern baldness--or [privily touches
his desk] relative freedom from it--from John Stratton of Shotley? I
remember hearing an old wives' tale that a man's hairline destiny is got
from his mother's father.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
Just to be clear, there are correlations between individual genes and
specific functions, and these genes are each on specific chromosomes.
What I meant is that there is not a specific chromosome that does, say
digestion, or liver function, or blood clotting, or personality -
complex traits, the multiple determining genes for which are randomly
distributed among the autosomal chromosomes and the X.
Were this true, all male siblings (and even maternal first cousins)
would be equally disenfranchised in the follicle department, which is
not the case.
taf
In article <43d92876@news.ColoState.EDU>,
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Biologically speaking, there is no direct correlation between individual
chromosomes and functions or purposes ...
Just to be clear, there are correlations between individual genes and
specific functions, and these genes are each on specific chromosomes.
What I meant is that there is not a specific chromosome that does, say
digestion, or liver function, or blood clotting, or personality -
complex traits, the multiple determining genes for which are randomly
distributed among the autosomal chromosomes and the X.
Ah. So I did not inherit my male pattern baldness--or [privily touches
his desk] relative freedom from it--from John Stratton of Shotley? I
remember hearing an old wives' tale that a man's hairline destiny is got
from his mother's father.
Were this true, all male siblings (and even maternal first cousins)
would be equally disenfranchised in the follicle department, which is
not the case.
taf
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
Were this true, all male siblings (and even maternal first cousins)
would be equally disenfranchised in the follicle department, which is
not the case.
taf
Unfortunately true ...
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
I didn't understand large chunks of that, but I think it confirmed my
suspicions -- not statistically significant.
suspicions -- not statistically significant.
-
Gjest
Re: matrilineal comments
Interesting about the XY thing, even if it is just a curio. Also
fascinating to see how people here have such geographically diverse
origins (relatively speaking), for the respective lines- a good
cross-section of American immigration from Europe, at least. My own mt,
XY and Y currently stem from Scotland, Jersey and Ireland respectively
(late, early and mid- 18th C in that order)- although the majority of
my ancestry is English.
fascinating to see how people here have such geographically diverse
origins (relatively speaking), for the respective lines- a good
cross-section of American immigration from Europe, at least. My own mt,
XY and Y currently stem from Scotland, Jersey and Ireland respectively
(late, early and mid- 18th C in that order)- although the majority of
my ancestry is English.
-
R. Battle
Re: matrilineal comments
It's slightly off-topic, but since many others are doing it...
Y-John Battle (d. 1690 VA)
mt-Elizabeth (Wener) Morse (fl. mid-1700s CT)
XY-George Bruce/Brush (fl. 1600s Middlesex Co. MA)
YX(my sisters' XY)-Jane (Evans?) Tillotson (fl. 1600s Newbury, MA)
-Robert Battle
Y-John Battle (d. 1690 VA)
mt-Elizabeth (Wener) Morse (fl. mid-1700s CT)
XY-George Bruce/Brush (fl. 1600s Middlesex Co. MA)
YX(my sisters' XY)-Jane (Evans?) Tillotson (fl. 1600s Newbury, MA)
-Robert Battle
-
John Brandon
Re: matrilineal comments
Actually, your XY line would be different from what you've
listed--start with your father (parent of the opposite sex), then go
back to his parent of the opposite sex (paternal grandmother), then her
parent of the opposite sex and so on ...
I have two lines from your Gorhams ... wonder if it is true??
listed--start with your father (parent of the opposite sex), then go
back to his parent of the opposite sex (paternal grandmother), then her
parent of the opposite sex and so on ...
I have two lines from your Gorhams ... wonder if it is true??
y:
Vicomte Haimon I of Poelet = Roianteline
Vicecomte Rivallon I of Combour = Aremburgis of Puiset
Lord of Tanniere Geoffrey FitzRivallon
St. Ralph Futaye aka Ralph Gorron (1100) = Hersendis of
Mayenne, sister of Juhel
Geoffrey de Gorham (abbot 1119-1146) = Cristina [found a
Gorram married to a Cristina in the Thorney Abbey Annals
ca. 1100]
Geoffrey de Gorham, Lord of the manor of Westwick
[Gorhambury], occ. 1182
Sir Henry de Gorham [1] d. 1212 held lands in Cransley and
Flore Northamptonshire; Wingrave and Rolvesham,
Buckinghamshire in 1202 and 1208
Sir William de Gorham same lands [2] d. 1233 = Cecilia de
Sanford, d. 1251
Sir William same lands in 1233, d. 1278
Sir Hugh de Gorham same lands in 1324 (d. 1325) knight
templar and coat of arms of Hertfordshire Gorhams in Cooks
Visitations of Lincolnshire in 1562 [3]= Margery Angevin
Sir William de Gorham [4] = ?
John Gorham (about 1492 - 1588) of Glapthorne = Eliza
James Gorham = Agnes Bernington m. 1572
Ralph Gorham (1575-1639) = Margaret Stephenson (m. 1610
Oundle)
Captain John Gorham bp. Benefield 1621 = Desire Howland (m.
1643)
Shubael Gorham = Puella Hussey
Captain George Gorham = Hannah Banks
Captain George Gorham = Sarah Stephens
Frederick Gorham = Lois White
Joseph Gorham = Emily Edith King
Chester Raymond Gorham = Jane White
Arwin Everett Gorham = Sara Margaret Johnston [Balmer(?)]
Chester Arwin Gorham = Oa Louise [Lawcock - mother's maiden]
Friegel
Creighton Johnston Gorham = Norma Dean Eskridge
Virginia Gayle Gorham
-
Gjest
Re: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
mjcar@btinternet.com schrieb:
For the sake of completeness:
Patrilineal: great-great grandfather Charles Reading (1815-1884),
illegitimate son of Charlotte Reading, a house-servant of Edmonton,
Middlesex
Matrilineal: Sarah Anderson (1825-1910), daughter of Joseph Anderson,
tailor of Middlsex; emigrated to New South Wales, 1844; her
illegitimate daughter Emma Phelps was my great-great grandmother
[please don't think my ancestry is all on the wrong side of the blanket
though!]
XY: nine generations back to Elizabeth (died 1733), first wife of
Docwra Friend (1687-1738) of Ely, Cambridgeshire. While I don't
presently know her maiden name or family, her husband's own XY ancestry
is a little more interesting, and properly mediaeval, going back a
further six generations to Thomas Hutton, JP (c1494-1552) of Dry
Drayton, Cambs - his maternal grandfather is referred to in his
father's will, but unfortunately is not named therein.
I wonder how rare it is to be able to get back beyond 1600 with either
of these three methods of ascent?
Many thanks, Tony, for this light relief, which I have found most
interesting.
Michael
You're lucky - I can only go back five, less than 200 years. That's
still one more than my patrilineal line, though. Thank goodness in
between there has been more than enough to keep me busy.
For the sake of completeness:
Patrilineal: great-great grandfather Charles Reading (1815-1884),
illegitimate son of Charlotte Reading, a house-servant of Edmonton,
Middlesex
Matrilineal: Sarah Anderson (1825-1910), daughter of Joseph Anderson,
tailor of Middlsex; emigrated to New South Wales, 1844; her
illegitimate daughter Emma Phelps was my great-great grandmother
[please don't think my ancestry is all on the wrong side of the blanket
though!]
XY: nine generations back to Elizabeth (died 1733), first wife of
Docwra Friend (1687-1738) of Ely, Cambridgeshire. While I don't
presently know her maiden name or family, her husband's own XY ancestry
is a little more interesting, and properly mediaeval, going back a
further six generations to Thomas Hutton, JP (c1494-1552) of Dry
Drayton, Cambs - his maternal grandfather is referred to in his
father's will, but unfortunately is not named therein.
I wonder how rare it is to be able to get back beyond 1600 with either
of these three methods of ascent?
Many thanks, Tony, for this light relief, which I have found most
interesting.
Michael
-
Gjest
Re: Mayflower ancestors
Actually I spoke with Gary today about this posting. His book has no
such line. Don't know where you saw it. The Boudes were in Marblehead
then Philadelphia and nowhere near Plymouth.
such line. Don't know where you saw it. The Boudes were in Marblehead
then Philadelphia and nowhere near Plymouth.
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
Ginny Wagner wrote:
This one you start off wrong. You, (I would assume) a female, would
want to go first to your father, then his mother, her father, etc.
You asked earlier whether it was birth/death/marriage certificates or
published books. For my Y line, it is Certs back to the son of the
immigrant. He and his siblings are all named in their father's will,
and this group of names eventually allowed the group to be identified in
Europe, and church birth/death/marriage records then prove it back to
the earliest generation.
For my mt, it is a bit sketchier, if only because a good bit of it came
down to me intact, and I have not gone back to reconfirm. That being
said, I can go back to the mid-1800s with certs, family Bibles, etc.,
and with censuses a generatin earlier. Then I rely on information in a
reunion book said to have been copied from a Bible to add one
generation, then a newspaper marriage notice, then a vital record, then
a will, then vital records again, then for the next to last generation a
deduction (the vital records report the marraige of the daughter, as
child of her father, and report the marriage of the father to his wife,
and he is not known to have had any other wife), and finally a
generation from a published book that I have yet to confirm (I know the
husband's name from vital records, just not the given name of his wife).
For my alternating line, certs and Bible records back to 1800, an estate
administration, a combination of a will and a deed, and a tombstone. In
other words, with a few exceptions, it is all documented in primary
sources of one type or another, although in several cases, published
books have provided a line that was then confirmed by consulting the
appropriate contemporary documentation.
taf
xy:
George Washington Eskridge = Sabrina
Kendel Louis Eskridge = Susannah
David Clay Eskridge = Carolyn Hall
Cashus Clay Eskridge = Nancy Ellen Dean
Clay David Eskridge = Helen Maude Hodgson
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
This one you start off wrong. You, (I would assume) a female, would
want to go first to your father, then his mother, her father, etc.
You asked earlier whether it was birth/death/marriage certificates or
published books. For my Y line, it is Certs back to the son of the
immigrant. He and his siblings are all named in their father's will,
and this group of names eventually allowed the group to be identified in
Europe, and church birth/death/marriage records then prove it back to
the earliest generation.
For my mt, it is a bit sketchier, if only because a good bit of it came
down to me intact, and I have not gone back to reconfirm. That being
said, I can go back to the mid-1800s with certs, family Bibles, etc.,
and with censuses a generatin earlier. Then I rely on information in a
reunion book said to have been copied from a Bible to add one
generation, then a newspaper marriage notice, then a vital record, then
a will, then vital records again, then for the next to last generation a
deduction (the vital records report the marraige of the daughter, as
child of her father, and report the marriage of the father to his wife,
and he is not known to have had any other wife), and finally a
generation from a published book that I have yet to confirm (I know the
husband's name from vital records, just not the given name of his wife).
For my alternating line, certs and Bible records back to 1800, an estate
administration, a combination of a will and a deed, and a tombstone. In
other words, with a few exceptions, it is all documented in primary
sources of one type or another, although in several cases, published
books have provided a line that was then confirmed by consulting the
appropriate contemporary documentation.
taf
-
Ginny Wagner
RE: matrilineal comments
Hi all,
I am quite interested in this thread and hope to figure out
how you guys do what you do. Anyhoo, if I understand it
properly, we are dealing with our maternal line, and
maternal then paternal lines?
It is possible that the King book in an earlier post, is the
one I use by Helen Hester King and Linetta Ainsworth Daniels
about the Gorham Descendants of Plymouth Colony in New York
State and the Western Reserve. I was given my copy by my
father's mother, Oa Louise (Lawcock) Friegel Gorham in 1955,
signed by Ms. King, 12-23-1955.
mt:
Sara Ann McMillers = Spencer Cone Youmans
Georgia Ann Youmans = Horace James Hodgson
Helen Maude Hodgson = Clay David Eskridge
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
xy:
George Washington Eskridge = Sabrina
Kendel Louis Eskridge = Susannah
David Clay Eskridge = Carolyn Hall
Cashus Clay Eskridge = Nancy Ellen Dean
Clay David Eskridge = Helen Maude Hodgson
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
DAR Line:
George Squire, Sr. (1618-1691) = Ann Squire (d. 1691)
George Squire, Jr. = Ellen Wheeler
Jonathan Squire = Mary Siely
Nathaniel Squire = Sarah Higgins
Johnathan Squire, Sr. = Elizabeth Morehouse
Johnathan Squire, Jr. = Catherine Holmes
Abigail Squire = Joseph Baily Youmans
Sara Ann McMillers = Spencer Cone Youmans
Georgia Ann Youmans = Horace James Hodgson
Helen Maud Hodgson = Clay David Eskridge
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
y:
Vicomte Haimon I of Poelet = Roianteline
Vicecomte Rivallon I of Combour = Aremburgis of Puiset
Lord of Tanniere Geoffrey FitzRivallon
St. Ralph Futaye aka Ralph Gorron (1100) = Hersendis of
Mayenne, sister of Juhel
Geoffrey de Gorham (abbot 1119-1146) = Cristina [found a
Gorram married to a Cristina in the Thorney Abbey Annals
ca. 1100]
Geoffrey de Gorham, Lord of the manor of Westwick
[Gorhambury], occ. 1182
Sir Henry de Gorham [1] d. 1212 held lands in Cransley and
Flore Northamptonshire; Wingrave and Rolvesham,
Buckinghamshire in 1202 and 1208
Sir William de Gorham same lands [2] d. 1233 = Cecilia de
Sanford, d. 1251
Sir William same lands in 1233, d. 1278
Sir Hugh de Gorham same lands in 1324 (d. 1325) knight
templar and coat of arms of Hertfordshire Gorhams in Cooks
Visitations of Lincolnshire in 1562 [3]= Margery Angevin
Sir William de Gorham [4] = ?
John Gorham (about 1492 - 1588) of Glapthorne = Eliza
James Gorham = Agnes Bernington m. 1572
Ralph Gorham (1575-1639) = Margaret Stephenson (m. 1610
Oundle)
Captain John Gorham bp. Benefield 1621 = Desire Howland (m.
1643)
Shubael Gorham = Puella Hussey
Captain George Gorham = Hannah Banks
Captain George Gorham = Sarah Stephens
Frederick Gorham = Lois White
Joseph Gorham = Emily Edith King
Chester Raymond Gorham = Jane White
Arwin Everett Gorham = Sara Margaret Johnston [Balmer(?)]
Chester Arwin Gorham = Oa Louise [Lawcock - mother's maiden]
Friegel
Creighton Johnston Gorham = Norma Dean Eskridge
Virginia Gayle Gorham
[1] Grant to [Robert de Gorham?] the Abbot of St. Alban's,
and to the Monks of Tinmouth, by Edgar son of Earl
Gospatric, of the Church of Edlingham in Northumberland.
Witnessed, on the part of the Abbot, by Geoffrey de Gorham,
Phylip de Cymai, Milo son of Hubert, Nicholas Dispensator,
Robert Janito, Alexander Bachelor, Henry son of Geoffrey de
Gorham, and Geoffrey his brother, Hugh Pincerna, Roger de
Arundel, Ralph son of Ralph de Gorham, Ralph eam [sic],
Reginald brother of Uttingus, Roger Corneille, Theoderic
Purchay. Cir. 1160. [Original in the Treasury at Durham,
3, 2. Cart. Special. A. 2, with the seal of Edgar.]
[2] 1229 held Westwick 2/3 fee; Laurence de Brok 1/3 same
fee in Sheephall [I believe he or his son was married to
Damietta or Dametta Gorham], formerly held by John de
Rungeton. Was absent in Ireland paying military svs with
Juhel; mil. svs for Westwick, 1244, 1245, 1257, witness to
charters 1270, 1271, 1274.
[3] In addition to inheriting family estate, Sir Hugh was
granted a quarter of a knight's fee in lands in Churchfield,
Oundle and Warmington, Northamptonshire. In the inquisition
taken at Thropston is the following: "Hugh of Gorham holds
of the abbot of Burgh in Churchfield, Oundle, and Warmington
a quafter of a knight's fee and the abbot is mesne towards
the King ..." (Northampton Records Society, Henry of
Pytchley's Bood of Fees, Vol2, p. 120). "He also held
estates in Whaplode, Lindolnshire, in right of his wife,
Margery, sole daughter and heiress of Sir William Angevin".
(Burke's Visitation of the Seats and Arms, Vol. 2, p. 20,
1852). He was a templar to Richard II, and in 1324 was
called to Parliament. In the account books of John Fider
REeve of the abbot of Crawland for his Manor of
Wellingborough is found: "For the fodder of three horses of
Lord Hugh de Gorham ... 3. bus. of oats". He died in 1325,
at 75 years of age, leavning three sons by his wife,
Margery --- William, Thomas and Nicholas.
[4] Inherited Gorham Manor in Churchfield, near Oundle,
Norhtamptonshire, and sold it to the Bishop of Salisbury in
1332. "In or about 1339, the Gorhams sold their possessions
at Flore and at Cransley".
Re the discussion about blood, etc. it may be interesting
that my father (Gorham) was Rh- and my mother (Eskridge) Rh+
so the doctors were always concerned about some kind of
rejection factor with her pregnancies should she have a baby
who was Rh-. She did not.
The book lists the [direct] descendants of Frederick Gorham
as:
Ainsworth, Avery, Baker, Bowdish, Browne, Camp, Chapin,
Costello, Curley, Davis, Dilley, Dusenbury, Gates, Gorham,
Greene, Hawkins, Herlston, Hester, Hickox, Hunt, Joy, King,
Kriesel, Lamphere, Lawson, Lee, Loomis, Lormore, Manning,
Martin, Meyer, Miner, Padgett, Rupert, Sherman, Smith,
Spadaro, Stroud, Thompson, Tibbets, Vandeusen, Vedder,
Vroman, Welch, White, Wright
If anyone is interested, I can post the pertinent
information about the Gorhams from the Collectanea ... there
were three branches of them.
Here is a sampling: One branch stayed in Tanniere, Maine,
whose earliest grant of land to Abbey of Marmoutier, in
Tours, Church of Brece about 4 miles from Gorram in Maine in
1112 and married Hersendis de Mayenne, daughter of Walter,
Lord of Mayenne about 1090. Maurice witnessed a grant of
land to Vitalis Abbot of Savigny, dated 29 March, 1114 ...
he was alive in 1128. William, son of Ralph and Hersendis,
occurs as witness to the same grants ca 1112 and 1120;
stated in Mt. St. Michael cartulary to have married Matrida;
but William, father of Giles de Gorham is recorded
(cartulary of Savigny) to have married Matilda; the two
different names led to Coll. Top. V, p. 186 to conjecture
that they were different persons but now, they are believed
to be the same person, Coll. Top. VIII, pg. 98. Giles de
Gorham ... ?? Gilo de Garania who crossed himself in 1162??,
Sir Ralph de Gorram, grandson of Giles under seal of Sir
Ralph, a Mt. St. Michael charter of which a duplicate
without seal at St. Lo has been printed at Coll. Top. V. p.
188. Sir Robert de Gorram who has the seal Sigill' Robini
de Gorran and a secretum, third seal of S S Rob de Goran ...
Excambium [inter Robinum de Gorram, militem, et Radulphum
Abbatum et Conventum Sci Michaelis], pro masura Galterii
Fulcherii in parochia de Livare, salva ipsis grangia sua cum
placea. [1226-7].
de Gorham of St. Alban's and of Gorhambury.
1. Ralph (oc. 1100 and 1120) = Hersendie
1.1 William = Matilda
2. dotted line Brother William = ?
2.1 Geoffrey = ?
2.1.1. Geoffrey de Gorham Ld of Westwyk oc. 1164 and 1182
2.1.2. Henry de Gorham
2.2 Ralph, Lord of Sarret, oc. 1140, Herts 1160 = ?
2.2.1 Robert de Gorham, a monk of St. Albans, ca. 1161
2.2.2 dotted line to Ralph de Gorham
2.2.3 Geoffrey de Gorham, instituted to Luton ca. 1153
2.3 Robert de Gorham, Abbot of St. Albans 1155-1166
3. dotted line to Geoffrey de Gorham, Abbot of St. Albans,
1119-1146
4. A sister [Oliva per King] = Hugh son of Humbald, Westwyk
ca. 1130 dsp
5. Henry de Gorham, godfather of Abbot Robert, oc. ca. 1160
King says that Geoffrey sent for his brother, William, and
sister, Olivia to come to join him. He built a great hall
at Gorhambury where Humbald had been given the land by Abbot
Paul, at Lanfranc's request, and renewed by Abbot Richard
d'Albini, prior to Geoffrey's arrival. Geoffrey renewed the
land to Hugh, son of Humbald, then married his sister to
Hugh, son of Humbald ... the hall was her dowry I guess.
Olivia died without children and the property reverted to
the sons of William: Ive, Robert and Ralph.
I've cobbled things together from King's book, Keats-Rohan,
Gesta Albini, Power and Rev. George Cornelius Gorham in his
Collectanea Topigraphica entries.
I know that the first Captain John Gorham, the one who
married Desire Howland, daughter of John Howland who came
over on the Mayflower, and his father, Ralph, came over on
the Philip from a website about the Gorhams ... Loafing
Cactus, I think it was ... I don't have the particulars on
that. Another website on Cornyn or Cornwall or Corneille
says that the name has also been pronounced/spelled Goram so
there seems to be a link to Cornwall and we know there is a
link to Devon from Doomsday.
Have got a back injury so can't scan things right now, but
will be glad to post as I can, further information, if it is
helpful to anyone.
Virginia Gorham Wagner
"It is a reverend thing to see an ancient castle not in
decay; how much more to behold ancient families which have
stood against the waves and weathers of time".
--Lord Francis Bacon
ginnywagner@austin.rr.com
I am quite interested in this thread and hope to figure out
how you guys do what you do. Anyhoo, if I understand it
properly, we are dealing with our maternal line, and
maternal then paternal lines?
It is possible that the King book in an earlier post, is the
one I use by Helen Hester King and Linetta Ainsworth Daniels
about the Gorham Descendants of Plymouth Colony in New York
State and the Western Reserve. I was given my copy by my
father's mother, Oa Louise (Lawcock) Friegel Gorham in 1955,
signed by Ms. King, 12-23-1955.
mt:
Sara Ann McMillers = Spencer Cone Youmans
Georgia Ann Youmans = Horace James Hodgson
Helen Maude Hodgson = Clay David Eskridge
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
xy:
George Washington Eskridge = Sabrina
Kendel Louis Eskridge = Susannah
David Clay Eskridge = Carolyn Hall
Cashus Clay Eskridge = Nancy Ellen Dean
Clay David Eskridge = Helen Maude Hodgson
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
DAR Line:
George Squire, Sr. (1618-1691) = Ann Squire (d. 1691)
George Squire, Jr. = Ellen Wheeler
Jonathan Squire = Mary Siely
Nathaniel Squire = Sarah Higgins
Johnathan Squire, Sr. = Elizabeth Morehouse
Johnathan Squire, Jr. = Catherine Holmes
Abigail Squire = Joseph Baily Youmans
Sara Ann McMillers = Spencer Cone Youmans
Georgia Ann Youmans = Horace James Hodgson
Helen Maud Hodgson = Clay David Eskridge
Norma Dean Eskridge = Creighton Johnston Gorham
Virginia Gayle Gorham
y:
Vicomte Haimon I of Poelet = Roianteline
Vicecomte Rivallon I of Combour = Aremburgis of Puiset
Lord of Tanniere Geoffrey FitzRivallon
St. Ralph Futaye aka Ralph Gorron (1100) = Hersendis of
Mayenne, sister of Juhel
Geoffrey de Gorham (abbot 1119-1146) = Cristina [found a
Gorram married to a Cristina in the Thorney Abbey Annals
ca. 1100]
Geoffrey de Gorham, Lord of the manor of Westwick
[Gorhambury], occ. 1182
Sir Henry de Gorham [1] d. 1212 held lands in Cransley and
Flore Northamptonshire; Wingrave and Rolvesham,
Buckinghamshire in 1202 and 1208
Sir William de Gorham same lands [2] d. 1233 = Cecilia de
Sanford, d. 1251
Sir William same lands in 1233, d. 1278
Sir Hugh de Gorham same lands in 1324 (d. 1325) knight
templar and coat of arms of Hertfordshire Gorhams in Cooks
Visitations of Lincolnshire in 1562 [3]= Margery Angevin
Sir William de Gorham [4] = ?
John Gorham (about 1492 - 1588) of Glapthorne = Eliza
James Gorham = Agnes Bernington m. 1572
Ralph Gorham (1575-1639) = Margaret Stephenson (m. 1610
Oundle)
Captain John Gorham bp. Benefield 1621 = Desire Howland (m.
1643)
Shubael Gorham = Puella Hussey
Captain George Gorham = Hannah Banks
Captain George Gorham = Sarah Stephens
Frederick Gorham = Lois White
Joseph Gorham = Emily Edith King
Chester Raymond Gorham = Jane White
Arwin Everett Gorham = Sara Margaret Johnston [Balmer(?)]
Chester Arwin Gorham = Oa Louise [Lawcock - mother's maiden]
Friegel
Creighton Johnston Gorham = Norma Dean Eskridge
Virginia Gayle Gorham
[1] Grant to [Robert de Gorham?] the Abbot of St. Alban's,
and to the Monks of Tinmouth, by Edgar son of Earl
Gospatric, of the Church of Edlingham in Northumberland.
Witnessed, on the part of the Abbot, by Geoffrey de Gorham,
Phylip de Cymai, Milo son of Hubert, Nicholas Dispensator,
Robert Janito, Alexander Bachelor, Henry son of Geoffrey de
Gorham, and Geoffrey his brother, Hugh Pincerna, Roger de
Arundel, Ralph son of Ralph de Gorham, Ralph eam [sic],
Reginald brother of Uttingus, Roger Corneille, Theoderic
Purchay. Cir. 1160. [Original in the Treasury at Durham,
3, 2. Cart. Special. A. 2, with the seal of Edgar.]
[2] 1229 held Westwick 2/3 fee; Laurence de Brok 1/3 same
fee in Sheephall [I believe he or his son was married to
Damietta or Dametta Gorham], formerly held by John de
Rungeton. Was absent in Ireland paying military svs with
Juhel; mil. svs for Westwick, 1244, 1245, 1257, witness to
charters 1270, 1271, 1274.
[3] In addition to inheriting family estate, Sir Hugh was
granted a quarter of a knight's fee in lands in Churchfield,
Oundle and Warmington, Northamptonshire. In the inquisition
taken at Thropston is the following: "Hugh of Gorham holds
of the abbot of Burgh in Churchfield, Oundle, and Warmington
a quafter of a knight's fee and the abbot is mesne towards
the King ..." (Northampton Records Society, Henry of
Pytchley's Bood of Fees, Vol2, p. 120). "He also held
estates in Whaplode, Lindolnshire, in right of his wife,
Margery, sole daughter and heiress of Sir William Angevin".
(Burke's Visitation of the Seats and Arms, Vol. 2, p. 20,
1852). He was a templar to Richard II, and in 1324 was
called to Parliament. In the account books of John Fider
REeve of the abbot of Crawland for his Manor of
Wellingborough is found: "For the fodder of three horses of
Lord Hugh de Gorham ... 3. bus. of oats". He died in 1325,
at 75 years of age, leavning three sons by his wife,
Margery --- William, Thomas and Nicholas.
[4] Inherited Gorham Manor in Churchfield, near Oundle,
Norhtamptonshire, and sold it to the Bishop of Salisbury in
1332. "In or about 1339, the Gorhams sold their possessions
at Flore and at Cransley".
Re the discussion about blood, etc. it may be interesting
that my father (Gorham) was Rh- and my mother (Eskridge) Rh+
so the doctors were always concerned about some kind of
rejection factor with her pregnancies should she have a baby
who was Rh-. She did not.
The book lists the [direct] descendants of Frederick Gorham
as:
Ainsworth, Avery, Baker, Bowdish, Browne, Camp, Chapin,
Costello, Curley, Davis, Dilley, Dusenbury, Gates, Gorham,
Greene, Hawkins, Herlston, Hester, Hickox, Hunt, Joy, King,
Kriesel, Lamphere, Lawson, Lee, Loomis, Lormore, Manning,
Martin, Meyer, Miner, Padgett, Rupert, Sherman, Smith,
Spadaro, Stroud, Thompson, Tibbets, Vandeusen, Vedder,
Vroman, Welch, White, Wright
If anyone is interested, I can post the pertinent
information about the Gorhams from the Collectanea ... there
were three branches of them.
Here is a sampling: One branch stayed in Tanniere, Maine,
whose earliest grant of land to Abbey of Marmoutier, in
Tours, Church of Brece about 4 miles from Gorram in Maine in
1112 and married Hersendis de Mayenne, daughter of Walter,
Lord of Mayenne about 1090. Maurice witnessed a grant of
land to Vitalis Abbot of Savigny, dated 29 March, 1114 ...
he was alive in 1128. William, son of Ralph and Hersendis,
occurs as witness to the same grants ca 1112 and 1120;
stated in Mt. St. Michael cartulary to have married Matrida;
but William, father of Giles de Gorham is recorded
(cartulary of Savigny) to have married Matilda; the two
different names led to Coll. Top. V, p. 186 to conjecture
that they were different persons but now, they are believed
to be the same person, Coll. Top. VIII, pg. 98. Giles de
Gorham ... ?? Gilo de Garania who crossed himself in 1162??,
Sir Ralph de Gorram, grandson of Giles under seal of Sir
Ralph, a Mt. St. Michael charter of which a duplicate
without seal at St. Lo has been printed at Coll. Top. V. p.
188. Sir Robert de Gorram who has the seal Sigill' Robini
de Gorran and a secretum, third seal of S S Rob de Goran ...
Excambium [inter Robinum de Gorram, militem, et Radulphum
Abbatum et Conventum Sci Michaelis], pro masura Galterii
Fulcherii in parochia de Livare, salva ipsis grangia sua cum
placea. [1226-7].
de Gorham of St. Alban's and of Gorhambury.
1. Ralph (oc. 1100 and 1120) = Hersendie
1.1 William = Matilda
2. dotted line Brother William = ?
2.1 Geoffrey = ?
2.1.1. Geoffrey de Gorham Ld of Westwyk oc. 1164 and 1182
2.1.2. Henry de Gorham
2.2 Ralph, Lord of Sarret, oc. 1140, Herts 1160 = ?
2.2.1 Robert de Gorham, a monk of St. Albans, ca. 1161
2.2.2 dotted line to Ralph de Gorham
2.2.3 Geoffrey de Gorham, instituted to Luton ca. 1153
2.3 Robert de Gorham, Abbot of St. Albans 1155-1166
3. dotted line to Geoffrey de Gorham, Abbot of St. Albans,
1119-1146
4. A sister [Oliva per King] = Hugh son of Humbald, Westwyk
ca. 1130 dsp
5. Henry de Gorham, godfather of Abbot Robert, oc. ca. 1160
King says that Geoffrey sent for his brother, William, and
sister, Olivia to come to join him. He built a great hall
at Gorhambury where Humbald had been given the land by Abbot
Paul, at Lanfranc's request, and renewed by Abbot Richard
d'Albini, prior to Geoffrey's arrival. Geoffrey renewed the
land to Hugh, son of Humbald, then married his sister to
Hugh, son of Humbald ... the hall was her dowry I guess.
Olivia died without children and the property reverted to
the sons of William: Ive, Robert and Ralph.
I've cobbled things together from King's book, Keats-Rohan,
Gesta Albini, Power and Rev. George Cornelius Gorham in his
Collectanea Topigraphica entries.
I know that the first Captain John Gorham, the one who
married Desire Howland, daughter of John Howland who came
over on the Mayflower, and his father, Ralph, came over on
the Philip from a website about the Gorhams ... Loafing
Cactus, I think it was ... I don't have the particulars on
that. Another website on Cornyn or Cornwall or Corneille
says that the name has also been pronounced/spelled Goram so
there seems to be a link to Cornwall and we know there is a
link to Devon from Doomsday.
Have got a back injury so can't scan things right now, but
will be glad to post as I can, further information, if it is
helpful to anyone.
Virginia Gorham Wagner
"It is a reverend thing to see an ancient castle not in
decay; how much more to behold ancient families which have
stood against the waves and weathers of time".
--Lord Francis Bacon
ginnywagner@austin.rr.com
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: matrilineal comments
"Interesting about the XY thing, even if it is just a curio."
Perhaps one might regard XY as a sort of "genealogical mean" - smack
dab in the "middle" of our ancestry, as it is. And, I agree, the
comparison of mt, XY, and Y geographically is of much interest. For me
(respectively) South Wales, the Netherlands, and Lancashire, England.
Quite a tight little geographical perimeter, really - and increasingly
rare, as the generations roll, I suspect (emblematic of my
antique-ness?!).
Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, California
Perhaps one might regard XY as a sort of "genealogical mean" - smack
dab in the "middle" of our ancestry, as it is. And, I agree, the
comparison of mt, XY, and Y geographically is of much interest. For me
(respectively) South Wales, the Netherlands, and Lancashire, England.
Quite a tight little geographical perimeter, really - and increasingly
rare, as the generations roll, I suspect (emblematic of my
antique-ness?!).
Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, California
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: Isabelle de Valois, duchesse de Bourbon (d.1386)
Thanks so much, Eric. Clearly, the matter of the children of Charles,
comte de Valois merits re-consideration.
Regards,
Tony
comte de Valois merits re-consideration.
Regards,
Tony
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: Ancestry of Eva of Leinster: matrilineal comments
"I wonder how rare it is to be able to get back beyond 1600 with either
of these three methods of ascent?"
Hello Michael,
Interesting question. For me, lines trcd to the 1600s are acutally
typical, probably 85% of mylines seem to go back that far. The year 1600
proves many times and for many people to be a signifucant genealogical
divide.
Tony
of these three methods of ascent?"
Hello Michael,
Interesting question. For me, lines trcd to the 1600s are acutally
typical, probably 85% of mylines seem to go back that far. The year 1600
proves many times and for many people to be a signifucant genealogical
divide.
Tony
-
Gordon Banks
Re: matrilineal comments
Interesting. Then my XY is John Faulkner Watson, m. 27 Oct 1794, St.
Michaels, Lyndhurst, Hampshire.
My Y is John Banks, liv. 9 Jun 1754, Briercliff, Lancs.
My Mt is Jane Barnard, b. 1781, Launceston, Cornwall (age 80 in 1861
Census).
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 00:02 -0700, Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
Michaels, Lyndhurst, Hampshire.
My Y is John Banks, liv. 9 Jun 1754, Briercliff, Lancs.
My Mt is Jane Barnard, b. 1781, Launceston, Cornwall (age 80 in 1861
Census).
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 00:02 -0700, Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
Is there any biological significance to the 'XY' (gender alternating)
line, or is this just an exercise?
This is the line from which you get (statistically) more of your X
chromosome(s) than any other. A woman gets one X from her mother,
representing 50/50 of each maternal grandparent, while she gets the
other from the father, but it comes entirely from the paternal
grandmother (the paternal grandfather providing the father with his Y- a
man gets his sole X exclusively from his mother). Thus, any line with
two successive male generations contributes nothing to the X of their
descendant, while for all other lines, the percent contribution is
divided in half for each female generation, but remains undivided for
each male generation. The line with the most male generations, without
two in a row, is that which alternates, having twice the contribution
per generation as the all-female line.
Curiously, this line differs for siblings of different genders - mine is
Isabel, wife of James Baird, b. ca. 1730, or Northampton Co. Pa., my
sister's is Joh. Heinrich Kauffer, b. ca. 1730, somewhere in Germany.
taf
-
Gordon Banks
Re: matrilineal comments
My cousin, Gene Devenport, through Y-DNA testing (http://www.davenportdna.com -
Gene is #8305) can trace his Y back to Orme de Davenport around 1100 in
Cheshire, based on close matches with English Davenports from various
Davenport manors in Cheshire. Rev. John Davenport also comes from that
line. Unfortunately, we can't trace the actual names of OUR Y carrier
Davenport ancestors beyond Samuel Devenport, who was in the 1790 Census
in Orange Co. NC.
The Banks DNA project hasn't helped me so far, as we seem to be a more
diverse lot. If anyone knows of any Bankses (especially English ones)
who would like to be tested, I know someone who is paying for the tests.
Gene is #8305) can trace his Y back to Orme de Davenport around 1100 in
Cheshire, based on close matches with English Davenports from various
Davenport manors in Cheshire. Rev. John Davenport also comes from that
line. Unfortunately, we can't trace the actual names of OUR Y carrier
Davenport ancestors beyond Samuel Devenport, who was in the 1790 Census
in Orange Co. NC.
The Banks DNA project hasn't helped me so far, as we seem to be a more
diverse lot. If anyone knows of any Bankses (especially English ones)
who would like to be tested, I know someone who is paying for the tests.
-
Leo
Re: Mayflower ancestors
Dear Martin,
I feel confused. Wasn't the name mentioned George Soule from the Mayflower
as an ancestor
of Lady Diana Spencer? Lady Diana does have Boude ancestors. I found them in
a book by Gary Boyd Roberts and William Addams Reitwiesner "American
Ancestors and Cousins of The Princess of Wales". As in your message the
message, you are referring to, has been removed, I may well be barking up
the wrong (family) tree.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
I feel confused. Wasn't the name mentioned George Soule from the Mayflower
as an ancestor
of Lady Diana Spencer? Lady Diana does have Boude ancestors. I found them in
a book by Gary Boyd Roberts and William Addams Reitwiesner "American
Ancestors and Cousins of The Princess of Wales". As in your message the
message, you are referring to, has been removed, I may well be barking up
the wrong (family) tree.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
Actually I spoke with Gary today about this posting. His book has no
such line. Don't know where you saw it. The Boudes were in Marblehead
then Philadelphia and nowhere near Plymouth.
-
JeffChipman
Re: Mayflower ancestors
Will--
There are a couple of good general references easily obtainable on
Mayflower genealogy: "Mayflower Increasings" by Susan E. Roser from
Genealogical Publishing Co., and "Plymouth Colony" by Eugene Stratton
avalable from amazon.
The latter book gives this info:
Geoge Soule arrived on the Mayflower and was a servant to Edward
Winslow. Soule m. Mary--, thought to be Becket. He died (will made 11
Aug 1677) in 1679 in Duxbury leaving sons Nathaniel, George & John
(sons Benjamin and Zachariah pre-deceased him) and daughters Elizabeth,
Patience, Sussanah and Mary.
Stratton says the the Soule book by Ridlon is unreliable.
"Mayflower Increasings" will give you the first few generations with
good documentation on all the passengers who had descendants. Roser has
written a number of books on Plymouth, and you can get a CDROM from GPC
containing all of them on one disk.
There are a couple of good general references easily obtainable on
Mayflower genealogy: "Mayflower Increasings" by Susan E. Roser from
Genealogical Publishing Co., and "Plymouth Colony" by Eugene Stratton
avalable from amazon.
The latter book gives this info:
Geoge Soule arrived on the Mayflower and was a servant to Edward
Winslow. Soule m. Mary--, thought to be Becket. He died (will made 11
Aug 1677) in 1679 in Duxbury leaving sons Nathaniel, George & John
(sons Benjamin and Zachariah pre-deceased him) and daughters Elizabeth,
Patience, Sussanah and Mary.
Stratton says the the Soule book by Ridlon is unreliable.
"Mayflower Increasings" will give you the first few generations with
good documentation on all the passengers who had descendants. Roser has
written a number of books on Plymouth, and you can get a CDROM from GPC
containing all of them on one disk.
-
Mary Zashin
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
Thanks to John, Jeff, and Mardi for the helpful information on this
lady's parentage. If I understand correctly, Mary Kempe's
grandmother, Dorothy Gilbert Thompson, clearly identifies Mary ("Lady
Diggs") in her will as her grandchild, and her mother, Dorothy
Thompson Kempe, clearly identifies Mary as her daughter. However,
Hitchin-Kemp (1902), although he cites Dorothy Thompson Kempe's will,
also says that Mary was instead the daughter of Thomas Kempe's
unnamed first wife. But the wills seemingly contradict this, so does
it seem reasonable to conclude that Mary is in fact Dorothy
Thompson's daughter? And that RPA , p. 273, is correct; whereas RPA,
p. 556, and MCA, p. 631, are in error? Carefully, M. Zashin
lady's parentage. If I understand correctly, Mary Kempe's
grandmother, Dorothy Gilbert Thompson, clearly identifies Mary ("Lady
Diggs") in her will as her grandchild, and her mother, Dorothy
Thompson Kempe, clearly identifies Mary as her daughter. However,
Hitchin-Kemp (1902), although he cites Dorothy Thompson Kempe's will,
also says that Mary was instead the daughter of Thomas Kempe's
unnamed first wife. But the wills seemingly contradict this, so does
it seem reasonable to conclude that Mary is in fact Dorothy
Thompson's daughter? And that RPA , p. 273, is correct; whereas RPA,
p. 556, and MCA, p. 631, are in error? Carefully, M. Zashin
From: Mary Zashin <zashin@ameritech.net
Date: January 24, 2006 5:48:58 PM CST
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Mary Kempe's Mother
In RPA, p. 273, Mary Kempe, wife of Dudley Digges (d. 1638/8), is
identified as the youngest daughter and coheiress of Thomas Kempe,
Knt., of Ollantigh, Kent, by Dorothy Thompson. However, on p. 556
of RPA and p. 631 of MCA, Mary is identified as the daughter of
Thomas Kempe and his first wife, Anne. The latter two pages cite
the will of Dorothy Kempe. Can anyone clear up the confusion and
identify the mother of Mary Kempe? Thank you, M. Zashin
-
Gordon and Jane Kirkemo
RE: matrilineal comments
This has been an interesting thread. Here are my ancestors:
Y= Bjorn (fl. 1590s) from Kvisle, Norway.
Mt=Elizabeth Ironside, wife of John Cowper (d. 1609), apparently from
Lincolnshire, Eng.
XY=Maria Fredericka Brinket (b. c.1816), wife of Helmuth Wagner from
Prussia.
Sincerely,
Gordon Kirkemo
Y= Bjorn (fl. 1590s) from Kvisle, Norway.
Mt=Elizabeth Ironside, wife of John Cowper (d. 1609), apparently from
Lincolnshire, Eng.
XY=Maria Fredericka Brinket (b. c.1816), wife of Helmuth Wagner from
Prussia.
Sincerely,
Gordon Kirkemo
-
Stewart Baldwin
Re: matrilineal comments
OK, I guess I'll play too:
Y: John Baldwin, of Howden in the parish of Gisburn, Yorkshire, in
1684, later of Wheatley, in Pendle Forest, Lancashire, d. 1729, m.
Bridget ____ (parents of the Quaker immigrant John Baldwin of
Lancashire and Bucks co., Pennsylvania, d. 1751, m. (2) Ann Scott).
mt: Dorothy Consitt, b. Yorkshire, d. Warren co., Iowa, 1862, m. Henry
Cartwright. As I have a plausible candidate for her mother (Rebecca
Rhodes, daughter of Dorothy Huntriss, daughter of Mary Goodill), this
would be a good place to do some DNA research of my own, if I could
only find a matrilineal descendant of Mary Goodill.
XY: John Baird, d. 1797/8, Abbeville co., SC (son of Adam Baird, whose
wife's name is unknown). My paternal grandfather's XY line (which is
still around in the person of a young great-great-grandson) goes back
(through the Quaker immigrant George Maris of Worcestershire and
Chester co., Pennsylvania) 14 generations to a William Wych living in
the late 1400's.
Stewart Baldwin
Y: John Baldwin, of Howden in the parish of Gisburn, Yorkshire, in
1684, later of Wheatley, in Pendle Forest, Lancashire, d. 1729, m.
Bridget ____ (parents of the Quaker immigrant John Baldwin of
Lancashire and Bucks co., Pennsylvania, d. 1751, m. (2) Ann Scott).
mt: Dorothy Consitt, b. Yorkshire, d. Warren co., Iowa, 1862, m. Henry
Cartwright. As I have a plausible candidate for her mother (Rebecca
Rhodes, daughter of Dorothy Huntriss, daughter of Mary Goodill), this
would be a good place to do some DNA research of my own, if I could
only find a matrilineal descendant of Mary Goodill.
XY: John Baird, d. 1797/8, Abbeville co., SC (son of Adam Baird, whose
wife's name is unknown). My paternal grandfather's XY line (which is
still around in the person of a young great-great-grandson) goes back
(through the Quaker immigrant George Maris of Worcestershire and
Chester co., Pennsylvania) 14 generations to a William Wych living in
the late 1400's.
Stewart Baldwin
-
Gjest
Re: Mary Kempe's Mother
That's how I understand it.
My notes state that the Visitation of Kent 1574 only gives Sir Thomas
Kempe's (2nd) wife Dorothy Thomas. Perhaps there never was a 1st wife.
I have a drop tree of the Kempe family based mainly on Hasted's History of
Kent. If anyone would like a copy, let me know.
Adrian
(Reading from the archives since mail still not getting through to AOL
users)
Mary Zashin wrote;
Thanks to John, Jeff, and Mardi for the helpful information on this lady's
parentage. If I understand correctly, Mary Kempe's grandmother, Dorothy
Gilbert Thompson, clearly identifies Mary ("Lady Diggs") in her will as her
grandchild, and her mother, Dorothy Thompson Kempe, clearly identifies Mary as
her daughter. However, Hitchin-Kemp (1902), although he cites Dorothy
Thompson Kempe's will, also says that Mary was instead the daughter of Thomas
Kempe's unnamed first wife. But the wills seemingly contradict this, so does it
seem reasonable to conclude that Mary is in fact Dorothy Thompson's
daughter? And that RPA , p. 273, is correct; whereas RPA, p. 556, and MCA, p. 631,
are in error? Carefully, M. Zashin
My notes state that the Visitation of Kent 1574 only gives Sir Thomas
Kempe's (2nd) wife Dorothy Thomas. Perhaps there never was a 1st wife.
I have a drop tree of the Kempe family based mainly on Hasted's History of
Kent. If anyone would like a copy, let me know.
Adrian
(Reading from the archives since mail still not getting through to AOL
users)
Mary Zashin wrote;
Thanks to John, Jeff, and Mardi for the helpful information on this lady's
parentage. If I understand correctly, Mary Kempe's grandmother, Dorothy
Gilbert Thompson, clearly identifies Mary ("Lady Diggs") in her will as her
grandchild, and her mother, Dorothy Thompson Kempe, clearly identifies Mary as
her daughter. However, Hitchin-Kemp (1902), although he cites Dorothy
Thompson Kempe's will, also says that Mary was instead the daughter of Thomas
Kempe's unnamed first wife. But the wills seemingly contradict this, so does it
seem reasonable to conclude that Mary is in fact Dorothy Thompson's
daughter? And that RPA , p. 273, is correct; whereas RPA, p. 556, and MCA, p. 631,
are in error? Carefully, M. Zashin
-
Gjest
Re: Isabel Moleyns, wife of Sir Robert Morley
In a message dated 1/23/06 7:52:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< ' The interest of the Moleyns family in Gresham went back a long way:
it had begun in the mid-fourteenth century as fraudulently as it was to end
in the mid-fifteenth. After Sir Edmund Bacon's death in 1336 or 1337, there
was a good deal of scuffling to lay hands on his estates (as well as on his
widow). William Moleyns, son of John Moleyns, 'the King's yeoman', married
Edmund's daughter, Margery, and made an unsuccessful attempt to deprive John
Burghersh, the grandson of Edmund's other daughter and heir, Margaret, of his
share of the inheritance. >>
Leo has that Sir Edmund Bacon died in 1349. This date would work better with
the "scuffling" and the attempt to deprive "John Burghersh" who was born 29
Sep 1343 per stirnet and a post here back in June.
Both of John's parents evidently died *in* 1349 per stirnet, and I suppose if
John Burghersh was the heir, then Margaret Bacon must have died v.p. by 1349,
but her husband William Lord Kerdeston was still living. I wonder if the
details of this scuffling are still extant and can be found and posted ? That
would help clear up the chronology here.
Will Johnson
writes:
<< ' The interest of the Moleyns family in Gresham went back a long way:
it had begun in the mid-fourteenth century as fraudulently as it was to end
in the mid-fifteenth. After Sir Edmund Bacon's death in 1336 or 1337, there
was a good deal of scuffling to lay hands on his estates (as well as on his
widow). William Moleyns, son of John Moleyns, 'the King's yeoman', married
Edmund's daughter, Margery, and made an unsuccessful attempt to deprive John
Burghersh, the grandson of Edmund's other daughter and heir, Margaret, of his
share of the inheritance. >>
Leo has that Sir Edmund Bacon died in 1349. This date would work better with
the "scuffling" and the attempt to deprive "John Burghersh" who was born 29
Sep 1343 per stirnet and a post here back in June.
Both of John's parents evidently died *in* 1349 per stirnet, and I suppose if
John Burghersh was the heir, then Margaret Bacon must have died v.p. by 1349,
but her husband William Lord Kerdeston was still living. I wonder if the
details of this scuffling are still extant and can be found and posted ? That
would help clear up the chronology here.
Will Johnson
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: crusaders
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: crusaders
<snip>
Would suggest that Turcott would indicate an ancestor who was a cotter, from
'Thor's cottage', or somesuch similar to that.
From: "Bob Turcott" <bobturcott@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: crusaders
<snip>
possibilty perhaps Turcott could be elongated version of Turc, I will need
to do further
study in this area to be certain.
Would suggest that Turcott would indicate an ancestor who was a cotter, from
'Thor's cottage', or somesuch similar to that.
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: Mayflower ancestors
----- Original Message -----
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
I believe that it was in a 'Notable Kin' column of NEXUS, low these many
years gone by. As I have mentioned recently, (though probably not here), I
am currently in a transitional residential situation, and much of my notes
are packed away. Also, they have been rummaged, none to tenderly. It would
take quite some time to dig them out. Anyway, if the statement in question
was erroneous, thank you, (for myself), for pointing it out, and thank you,
(for others), for doing so in a timely fashion, so as to prevent
perpetuation of said error.
Sincerely,
Ford
From: <mhollick@mac.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Mayflower ancestors
Actually I spoke with Gary today about this posting. His book has no
such line. Don't know where you saw it. The Boudes were in Marblehead
then Philadelphia and nowhere near Plymouth.
I believe that it was in a 'Notable Kin' column of NEXUS, low these many
years gone by. As I have mentioned recently, (though probably not here), I
am currently in a transitional residential situation, and much of my notes
are packed away. Also, they have been rummaged, none to tenderly. It would
take quite some time to dig them out. Anyway, if the statement in question
was erroneous, thank you, (for myself), for pointing it out, and thank you,
(for others), for doing so in a timely fashion, so as to prevent
perpetuation of said error.
Sincerely,
Ford
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: matrilineal comments
Ginny Wagner wrote:
Yes, and Yes. First of all, it didn't cost me that much: if the family
didn't move, then all of the birth, marriage and death records are on a
single roll of microfilm. Further, much of what I detailed represents
novel information - material unknown before I found it. I am not
satisfied with simply finding out what is already known - I want what is
unknown but there to be found.
That being said, I don't trust _anything_ that has been published
without documentation. This is not just a natural skepticism, but the
voice of experience. In one medieval line, four successive generations
in the published version of the pedigree are given the wrong wife, and
one of them in the middle of the direct descent actually had no
children, his heir being his first cousin. In some of my Pennsylvania
German material, there is error after error after error (e.g. a man born
1773 is made to be a Rev. War soldier; a man said to have died in 1875
got married again in 1879) even coming from seemingly reliable sources.
One of my Mayflower lines traced through someone who was killed at the
Battle of Brandywine, and his widow remarried - then a few years later
the dead guy remarried and moved to Vermont.
Basically, if I can't document it, I can't trust it.
taf
I found your answer about what you have done for your
genealogy very interesting. Do you think it was worth the
time and expense to verify it with primary source documents?
If you had it to do again, would you?
Yes, and Yes. First of all, it didn't cost me that much: if the family
didn't move, then all of the birth, marriage and death records are on a
single roll of microfilm. Further, much of what I detailed represents
novel information - material unknown before I found it. I am not
satisfied with simply finding out what is already known - I want what is
unknown but there to be found.
That being said, I don't trust _anything_ that has been published
without documentation. This is not just a natural skepticism, but the
voice of experience. In one medieval line, four successive generations
in the published version of the pedigree are given the wrong wife, and
one of them in the middle of the direct descent actually had no
children, his heir being his first cousin. In some of my Pennsylvania
German material, there is error after error after error (e.g. a man born
1773 is made to be a Rev. War soldier; a man said to have died in 1875
got married again in 1879) even coming from seemingly reliable sources.
One of my Mayflower lines traced through someone who was killed at the
Battle of Brandywine, and his widow remarried - then a few years later
the dead guy remarried and moved to Vermont.
Basically, if I can't document it, I can't trust it.
taf