Lineage of Gaunt of Pudsey (West Yorkshire) - descent from Earl of Lincoln Gaunts?

[J W Knight]

Hello,

Forgive me as I am new here. I am trying to validate (or debunk) a genealogy first presented, as far as I can tell, in 'Americana, Volume 32. National Americana Society 1938'.

It relates to my 13x Great Grandfather George Gaunt, who died in February 1606/07 in Pudsey, West Yorkshire. I think he must have been in his 50s or 60s as there are baptism records for his children dating back to the 1570s.

This particular George Gaunt is listed in the publication I mentioned in the first paragraph as a descendent of the Gaunts (or 'de Gants') who were the family of the Earls of Lincoln in the 12th and 13th centuries. However I am not convinced that the pedigree is reliable, at all.

The pedigree was created using records supplied by "A T Butler of the College of Arms, London". But I am unsure where to go next to investigate this further.

Here is the lineage (briefly!) as listed in the book -

Baldwin VI Count of Flanders, died 1070.
|
Gilbert de Gant (accompanied the Conqueror to England, fought at Hastings). Married Alice de Montfort, da. of Hugh de Montfort
|
Walter de Gant, died 1139. Married Maud, da. of Stephen Earl of Brittany and Count of Richmond
|
Robert de Gant, died 1191. Married 1. Alice Paganel, 2. Gunnora de Gournay
|
Gilbert de Gant (son by Gunnora de Gournay), died 1242. Married Emma.
|
Robert de Gaunt, youngest son, alive 1280.
|
Gilbert de Gaunt of Holne, died 18 Oct 1313. Married Matilda, widow of Gilbert.
|
Richard de Gaunt, underage in 1313.
|
John Gaunt of Holne, alive 1370. Married Emma.
|
Peter Gaunt of Holne, alive 1410.
|
Thomas Gaunt of Holne. Married Joan, who was a widow in 1462.
|
John Gaunt, first Gaunt to have land in Pudsey, 1492.
|
John Gaunt, alive 1545.
|
George Gaunt, buried 22 Feb 1606/07.

There is a lot more information in the book but it would have taken me ages to type! The line follows from George to Samuel Gaunt of Baltimore, Maryland.

I've known about this lineage for 5 years but am not really sure where to go with it or how to verify it.

Any idea where best to go for more information?

Thanks ever so much.

Jack Knight

[taf]

On Friday, August 3, 2018 at 1:54:04 PM UTC-7, J W Knight wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Forgive me as I am new here. I am trying to validate (or debunk) a genealogy
> first presented, as far as I can tell, in 'Americana, Volume 32. National
> Americana Society 1938'.

I am not really familiar with the specific family, but I have several observations.

> The pedigree was created using records supplied by "A T Butler of the
> College of Arms, London". But I am unsure where to go next to investigate
> this further.

Unfortunately, what passed for professional genealogy during the Stuart era left something to be desired. Everyone had to have a descent from someone at Hastings, and be related somehow to a king, and if they didn't find one, they made one up. Every family with a similar surname had to descend from someone with a similar-sounding name at Domesday, so again the intervening generations were usually made up.

> Here is the lineage (briefly!) as listed in the book -
>
> Baldwin VI Count of Flanders, died 1070.
> |
> Gilbert de Gant (accompanied the Conqueror to England, fought at Hastings). Married Alice de Montfort, da. of Hugh de Montfort

Ok, that is the first problem. Gilbert de Gant was not a son of Baldwin VI. Further, there is no reliable evidence that he fought at Hastings - he may well have been, but the number of people whom historians agree were there, based on trustworthy sources, is a surprisingly small number, and most of the participants are not known by name, while most of the Anglo-Normans of Domesday Book are not known to have specifically fought at Hastings.

> |
> Walter de Gant, died 1139. Married Maud, da. of Stephen Earl of Brittany and Count of Richmond
> |
> Robert de Gant, died 1191. Married 1. Alice Paganel, 2. Gunnora de Gournay
> |
> Gilbert de Gant (son by Gunnora de Gournay), died 1242. Married Emma.
> |

I know this is the generally-seen pedigree, but you have three generations from Gilbert to Gilbert spanning 150 years. One 50-year generation is enough to make one want to look closely to be sure there isn't a mistake. Two in a row should give anyone pause. This is three in a row.

> Robert de Gaunt, youngest son, alive 1280.

I am seeing elsewhere (equally unreliable) that Robert was the oldest son and predeceased his father. Anyhow, this is a place in the pedigree, where the Holne line is joined to the 'main' line, where you will want to look carefully, because such connections were often just pure guesswork.

> |
> Gilbert de Gaunt of Holne, died 18 Oct 1313. Married Matilda, widow of Gilbert.
> |
> Richard de Gaunt, underage in 1313.
> |
> John Gaunt of Holne, alive 1370. Married Emma.
> |
> Peter Gaunt of Holne, alive 1410.
> |
> Thomas Gaunt of Holne. Married Joan, who was a widow in 1462.
> |
> John Gaunt, first Gaunt to have land in Pudsey, 1492.

Again, look closely at the Pudsey/Holne linkup, though we may be close enough to the living informat (at the time) for this linkage to be trusted.

> |
> John Gaunt, alive 1545.
> |
> George Gaunt, buried 22 Feb 1606/07.

And again, going back a few generations there seem to be too few people in too much time.

>
> There is a lot more information in the book but it would have taken me
> ages to type! The line follows from George to Samuel Gaunt of Baltimore,
> Maryland.

Let me recommend caution here. It was very common for people to just look for someone with the same surname and convince themselves they had identified the family of an immigrant. There needs to be really good documentation (or else a really strong set of circumstantial evidence) to nail down the English family of a colonial immigrant with certainty.

taf

[Peter Stewart]

On Saturday, August 4, 2018 at 2:41:06 PM UTC+10, taf wrote:
> On Friday, August 3, 2018 at 1:54:04 PM UTC-7, J W Knight wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Forgive me as I am new here. I am trying to validate (or debunk) a genealogy
> > first presented, as far as I can tell, in 'Americana, Volume 32. National
> > Americana Society 1938'.
>
> I am not really familiar with the specific family, but I have several observations.
>
> > The pedigree was created using records supplied by "A T Butler of the
> > College of Arms, London". But I am unsure where to go next to investigate
> > this further.
>
> Unfortunately, what passed for professional genealogy during the Stuart era left something to be desired. Everyone had to have a descent from someone at Hastings, and be related somehow to a king, and if they didn't find one, they made one up. Every family with a similar surname had to descend from someone with a similar-sounding name at Domesday, so again the intervening generations were usually made up.
>
> > Here is the lineage (briefly!) as listed in the book -
> >
> > Baldwin VI Count of Flanders, died 1070.
> > |
> > Gilbert de Gant (accompanied the Conqueror to England, fought at Hastings). Married Alice de Montfort, da. of Hugh de Montfort
>
> Ok, that is the first problem. Gilbert de Gant was not a son of Baldwin VI.

Gilbert was a first cousin once removed of Baldwin VI of Flanders - he is documented as a younger son of Radulf, lord of Aalst & advocate of Saint-Pierre abbey at Ghent (hence the surname de Gant), by Gisela who was a sister of Bladwin VI's paternal grandmother Otgiva.

Peter Stewart

[Ian Goddard]

On 03/08/18 21:54, J W Knight wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Forgive me as I am new here. I am trying to validate (or debunk) a genealogy first presented, as far as I can tell, in 'Americana, Volume 32. National Americana Society 1938'.
>
> It relates to my 13x Great Grandfather George Gaunt, who died in February 1606/07 in Pudsey, West Yorkshire. I think he must have been in his 50s or 60s as there are baptism records for his children dating back to the 1570s.

%><|

> John Gaunt of Holne, alive 1370. Married Emma.
> |
> Peter Gaunt of Holne, alive 1410.
> |
> Thomas Gaunt of Holne. Married Joan, who was a widow in 1462.
> |
> John Gaunt, first Gaunt to have land in Pudsey, 1492.
> |

%><

Do we know the places to which the names refer?

Gant/Gaunt was a place name in Mirfield, meaningful until at least the
early C19th but not on any map, not even the mid C19th. See
http://familytree.dearnley.com/reports/g0/p980.htm#i9792 (I don't think
it's true to say we're completely flummoxed now as it can be
approximately placed from census data).

What's less certain is whether this place name is an independent coinage
or whether it ultimately derived from Ghent and if so whether from a
Gaunt family or from trading or settlement. There was Flemish
settlement in this part of the West Riding due to the textile
connection. It's quite possible that a family from Ghent settling in or
near Mirfield could have become named Gant or Gaunt and, as Taf points
out, connections between families of the same name were often pure
guesswork. Mirfield isn't that far from Pudsey.

And which Holne was this?

Ian

[Ian Goddard]

On 04/08/18 10:17, Ian Goddard wrote:
%><

>
> And which Holne was this?
>

Well, that didn't take long.

From the Wakefield manorial rolls:

"COURT at Birton {i.e. Kirkburton} on Wednesday, 1 the Feast of St.
Luke the Evangelist [Oct. 18],
6 Edw. II.

HOLNE {Holne or Holme was a graveship within the manor of Wakefield}
.....

Richard, s. of Gilbert de Gaunt, gives 12d. for license to heriot 3
acres with buildings in Alstanneley, after his father's death. As he is
an infant under age, he is given into the guardianship of Matilda, his
mother, with the said land. She finds sureties for his proper
maintenance, and for the holding of the tenements without waste, etc.:
Richard, s. of Michael, and Adam, s. of Hugh de Alstanneley."

(Notes in {} are mine, notes in [] are as printed. Yroks Arch Soc
Record Series Vol LVIII 1917. Court Rolls of the Manor of Wakefield Vol
III 1313 to 1316 and 1286. pp 10 - 11.

"Alstaonley" is Austonley, the township where I live.

Ian

[Ian Goddard]

The quote I gave was from volume 3 of the manorial rolls (available at
archive.org, BTW). There are several references to the de Gaunts in the
index of previous volume. Volume 2 also has a number of references to
Gilbert de Alstanley/Austonley (a local lane, Gibriding, is thought to
have been named after him). By vol 3 he's only mentioned by reference
to his son, William. Perhaps he was the former husband of Matilda.
I'll leave Jack to follow up.

Ian

[J W Knight]

Thanks to everyone who has helped so far, taf, Peter and Ian. It’s good to see that my belief that the pedigree is flawed is indeed accurate.

Yes taf I had the same concerns as you with regards to the time gap per generation. I sat with pen and paper and tried to imagine what the birth year of each individual would approximately have been if the pedigree is accurate. The result was that most men would have had to have been in their 40s and 50s when they had their children for the pedigree to work - most unlikely.

Thanks Ian for locating the source of the Wakefield Manor Rolls. These are mentioned in the publication as a source that was used but I had no idea where to find any more info. Looks like to build some picture of the family I will have to go though the rolls. The big thing is connecting the Pudsey line to the Holne line, with regards to connecting the Holne line back to the first Gilbert de Gant, that seems more unlikely and less of a priority.

I am travelling from Wales to Sunderland all today so will try and look into this situation a bit deeper when I get back. I am sending this reply during a much needed tea break!

I’m hoping more will come to light with regards to this family.

Jack

[Ian Goddard]

On 03/08/18 21:54, J W Knight wrote:

> John Gaunt of Holne, alive 1370. Married Emma.

The 1379 subsidy roll doesn't have him in Holmfirth but I very much
doubt this is complete; paying taxes was never very popular. There's a
William and a Peter Gaunt in Thornhill.

Thornhill and Mirfield parish registers have C17th Gaunt/Gants.
Dewsbury have them back to the C16th.


Ian

[J W Knight]

Thanks Ian. Yes, looking with more detail at the publication it gives indications as to the source of the information with regards to the Holne-Pudsey line.

Gilbert de Gaunt of Holne, son of Robert de Gaunt, died 18 October 1313. Admitted to land on 10 May 1308 in Alstanlay, at Manor Court for Holne: alienated his land at Thong, at court held 22 July 1309. He married Matilda, widow of Gilbert. Children: 1. Peter. 2. Richard of whom further. 3. William, was party to a suit at court 16 October 1326.
|
Richard de Gaunt, son of Gilbert and Matilda de Gaunt, was underage at the death of his father in 1313. He succeeded to the lands in Alstanlay.
|
John Gaunt of Holne, son of Richard de Gaunt, was present at Manor Court of Wakefield 9 November 1370. He married Emma
|
Peter Gaunt of Holne, son of John and Emma Gaunt, was present at Manor Court of Wakefield, held for Stanley, 14 October 1410. He was the father of two sons: 1. Thomas of whom further. 2. William
|
Thomas Gaunt of Holne, son of Peter Gaunt, settled land in Thong, on his wife, at Manor Court 25 November 1440. He married Joan, who was a widow in 1462. Children: 1. John of whom further. 2. Thomas, died 1515, married Elizabeth.
|
John Gaunt, son of Thomas and Joan Gaunt, had a grant of land in Toftsfield, in Pudsey, Parish of Calverley, West Riding, York. 7 December 1492.
|
John Gaunt II, son of John Gaunt of Pudsey in Calverley, was party to a suit in Thornhill in Wakefield Manor 3 June 1543 and taxed for his land in Pudsey in 1545. Children: 1. William. 2. George of whom further. 3. Agnes, is named in her brothers will.
|
George Gaunt etc. (line known by myself from this point).

So it is fairly clear the part of the pedigree at least does draw on records which exist, whether those records clearly state that this is the correct lineage I don't know. I don't think all of the Wakefield Manor Court Rolls are online. Some are, as you found yourself Ian, but not all. Interesting to see that John Gaunt II was party to a suit in Thornhill in 1543, so there is a Thornhill connection mentioned.

Jack

[Ian Goddard]

On 05/08/18 11:23, J W Knight wrote:
> John Gaunt of Holne, son of Richard de Gaunt, was present at Manor Court of Wakefield 9 November 1370. He married Emma

Clearly the book was based on original documents as this one isn't
published.

I don't find them in the published C16th manorial rolls but they do
persist in occasional references in the Almondbury and Kirburton PRs.

The interesting question is where they came from. The Earls of Lincoln
did have land in the graveship but I'm not sure where - it's not a thing
I've looked into. However the individuals we see here are ordinary
copyhold manorial tenants. If they had aristocratic origins they must
have been from a *very* junior branch. I'd still be inclined to see
them as immigrants named from their place of origin like the Fleming and
French families.

Ian

[Glen]

On Friday, August 3, 2018 at 1:54:04 PM UTC-7, J W Knight wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Forgive me as I am new here. I am trying to validate (or debunk) a genealogy first presented, as far as I can tell, in 'Americana, Volume 32. National Americana Society 1938'.
>
> It relates to my 13x Great Grandfather George Gaunt, who died in February 1606/07 in Pudsey, West Yorkshire. I think he must have been in his 50s or 60s as there are baptism records for his children dating back to the 1570s.
>

> |

> George Gaunt, buried 22 Feb 1606/07.
>
> There is a lot more information in the book but it would have taken me ages to type! The line follows from George to Samuel Gaunt of Baltimore, Maryland.
>
> I've known about this lineage for 5 years but am not really sure where to go with it or how to verify it.
>
> Any idea where best to go for more information?
>
> Thanks ever so much.
>
> Jack Knight

I can't help asking: Do you know if any of these Gants (Gantt/Gaunt/etc.) moved down from Baltimore Co. Maryland to the western foothills of North Carolina in the mid-1700s? I ask, because my Perkins and Gant ancestors lived together in a "Scotch-Irish" community there and many of them, including the Perkinses, had come down from Baltimore Co. Also, I recently proved that this "Perkins" family had come from Halifax (WR Yorkshire), where they had been the "Parkin" family. This Parkin family had lived in Almondbury and Wakefield Manor for centuries.

We have no idea where our Gants came from before North Carolina, but on a lark I googled Gant Maryland Yorkshire yesterday, and this thread popped up. It would be astonishing to discover that our Gant line also came from medieval Wakefield Manor.

And thanks to YOU for posting this. You've already helped.

[J W Knight]

In the publication I am referring to it states the first Gaunt from the line they trace to come to the USA (Maryland) was in 1826.

I cannot eliminate the possibility that another branch of this family may be the ancestors of your family, but the book doesn't mention this. There were a LOT of Gaunts from this Pudsey family, so you never know.

Jack