Evidences for a possible Plantagenet Descent for Sarah Barfoot, wife of Thomas Wiggin of Dover, NH

[ache...@gmail.com]

So here’s a fun supposition that perhaps someone can help to prove or disprove- What follows is a draft hypothesis, and should not be taken for a confirmed lineage. The incentive for pursuing this came from the Visitation of Suffolk of 1561 (pg. 8) in the preamble to the Blodwell of Thurlow pedigree(a link follows). When a purported pedigree includes both a Bardolph and a Drury, any decent Plantagenet researcher tends to get interested?! Particularly true if that researcher descends from the potentially Royal immigrant who appears to be associated.
As a disclaimer, I’ve already discovered several provable lines of descent for my mother from Percival Lowell (x2), Rose Stoughton, Elizabeth Taylor (md. Robert Tufton Mason), and Elizabeth (Marshall) Lewis- so I really don’t have much to lose by failure here. Even though I grew up as a 3rd generation Ulster-Scot American, I long ago had to accept that Edward “Longshanks” is my ancestor. I’m over it…! My apologies in advance for any errors or bad links-

Proposed lineage:
1) Edward I of England & Eleanor of Castille
2) Joan Plantagenet of Acre & Sir Gilbert de Clare, 7th Earl Gloucester & 6th Earl Hereford
3) Elizabeth de Clare, 11th Lady Clare & Sir Roger Damory, Lord Damory
4) Elizabeth d’Amory & Sir John Bardolf, 3rd Baron of Wormegay, Hertfordshire
5) Sir Edmund Bardolf of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Katherine Pelitot (dau. Sir Philip Pelitot- her 1st husband being Sir Ralph Boteler of Pulreback sharing a son Philip Boteler)
6) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Joan
7) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. & Miss Wentworth (his sister Maud md. Sir George Josselyn)
8) Mary Bardolf & Henry Blodwell (her sister Maud may have married Thomas Hoo)
9) John Blodwell, Gent. & Anne Drurye (dau. Sir Wm. Drury of Besthorpe)
10) Frances Blodwell & Thomas Hildersham, Esq.
11) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex; (m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell
12) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Sarah Culverwell (1/2 or perhaps step siblings it seems)
13) John Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Joane
14) Sarah Barfoot & Thomas Wiggin (son of Capt. Thos. Wiggin who settled Dover, NH & Catherine Whiting)
15) Catherine Wiggin & Robert Tufton Mason… and on … and on down to me.

The first 4 generations are firmly established down to Elizabeth d’Amory who wed John Bardolph the 3rd Baron Wormegay, and then the hunt begins…

5) Sir Edmund Bardolf & Katherine Pelitot (Memorial Brasses at Watton Church, Hertfordshire)

https://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p1121.htm#i33662

I’m not sure what source Brent Reusch used here to determine that the 3rd Lord Wormegay had a son Edmund, but they certainly had a place and time in common…

https://archive.org/details/memorialbrassesi00andr/page/48

Indeed Sir John Bardolph, 3rd Baron Wormegay did hold Watton in his lifetime, and it continued on through a few generations of his heirs until 1508, so it is perhaps not too unreasonable that the Edmund Bardolph who married Katherine Pelitot and is buried at Watton Church is in fact the 3rd Baron Wormegay’s son, or at least a close relation.

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/herts/vol3/pp158-165

From the brasses of Watton church link preceding, we also find on the floor of the south aisle that we have

6) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Joan
Presuming that the 2nd Edmund Bardolph’s missing brass effigy at Watton Church that is mentioned, is a son of, rather than a father of this couple, we may have a link to

7) Edmond Bardolfe, Esq. of Hertfordshire (Visitation of Suffolk 1561 for Blodwell of Thurlow) & Miss Wentworth?

https://books.google.com/books?id=EycAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=Thomas+Hildersham+Frances+Blodwell&source=bl&ots=AVvrtxgOKn&sig=ACfU3U0dTnF2kTzQ2Qhss5dH3AMdOHUPww&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjoku3X-

OzlAhUHvlkKHQmzDOQQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Thomas%20Hildersham%20Frances%20Blodwell&f=false

8) Mary Bardolf & Henry Blodwell (did her sister Maud married Thomas Hoo, thereby revealing perhaps the surname of her mother as Wentworth?)

https://archive.org/details/visitationsofher222732cook/page/n19

https://books.google.com/books?id=NcFCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA204&lpg=PA204&dq=Maud+Bardolph+Thomas+Hoo&source=bl&ots=BEjTt4RTVo&sig=ACfU3U3LD3JEmAP2bHNlrzgO6jGoWpyujw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjrnPKGzu3lAhUlhOAKHZ3XDns4ChDoATAGegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=Maud%20Bardolph%20Thomas%20Hoo&f=false

9) John Blodwell, Gent. & Anne Drurye

10) Frances Blodwell & Thomas Hildersham, Esq.

https://books.google.com/books?id=NFkMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA294&lpg=PA294&dq=Winifred+Hildersham+Ezekiel+Culverwell&source=bl&ots=x4KtRKY3dv&sig=ACfU3U2IwmfBKYgtKcJCf8eDk7pkY_KCCg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjL2YSo-

OzlAhXGo1kKHQ9mAPUQ6AEwBXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=Winifred%20Hildersham%20Ezekiel%20Culverwell&f=false

11) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex (md. 3 Jan 1581/2 London)

https://archive.org/details/londonmarriageli00fost/page/n67

(m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell (md. 20 Oct 1598 London)

https://archive.org/details/allegationsform01londgoog/page/n283

12) Thomas Barfoote, Gent. of Lambourne (bp. 24 Jun 1586 Lambourne, Essex) & Sarah Culverwell (Primary Beneficiary & executrix of her father’s will)

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA2

Wikitree source citation- Will of Ezekiel Culverwell of London. 1631. London Metropolitan Archives and Guildhall Library Manuscripts Section, Clerkenwell, London, England; Reference Number: Ms 9172/40; Will Number: 73.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Culverwell-4#_note-5

13) John Barfoot, Gent. (bp. 17 Apr 1616 Lambourne, Essex, d. 1671 Lambourne, Essex) & Joane

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015008291869&view=1up&seq=344

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA8

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA47

14) Sarah Barfoot (sister of Dep. Gov. /Gov. NH Walter Barfoot)& Thomas Wiggin Jr.

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=4knyCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PT93.w.3.0.0.0.1

Unviewed possible source: P. Morant’s, The history and antiquities of the county of Essex, Vol 1, pg.172 for Barfoot Pedigree (Anyone have access to it?)

Though I realize that these are not all primary sources and visitations are occasionally exaggerated, I felt as though this potential linage might be worthy of further scrutiny, and thought I’d share the fun.

Any collaborative assistance that anyone may offer to help fill in blanks would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
Richard D. Acheson, Jr.
ach...@roadrunner.com
Maine, USA

[P J Evans]

See also:
https://soc.genealogy.medieval.narkive.com/yqjSFhUO/winifred-hildersham-barefoot-culverwell

[ache...@gmail.com]

A few more nuggets

Thomas Hildersham of Stetchworth (his pedigree in Harl. MSS., 1534, folio 122, also 1449, folio 27, b)

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/cambs/vol6/pp170-176

Research Thesis paper on Hildersham Barfoot Families

http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/2794/1/WRAP_THESIS_Rowe_2009.pdf

[Andrew Lancaster]

Concerning the Barfoot pedigree in Morant, the page you give is for Lamborn-Hall, in Lamborn. It says that in 145 John Curson died (22 August) holding this estate of Jasper the Duke of Bedford, in right of Anne his Duchess. John Curson's heir was his daughter Anne, who was one and half years old. Then he writes (using asterisks to show italics and a triple dash to show his long dashes):

"*Robert Barfoot*, citizen and mercer of London held the maner of Lamborne with appertenances, as of the Hundred of Ongar, by suit at that Hundred, and the service of the Wardstaff, viz. to carry a load of straw with a cart and 6 horses, and 2 men in rapiers to watch the said Wardstaff when it is brought to the town of Abridge, and also to make a certain quantity of the Park pale at Havering when need shall be, according to the old custom, in lieu of all services. He held also a messuage, and 100 acres in High-Ongar, and the maner of Stanfrod-hall, and 80 acres called Perrills in Stanford-Rivers and Bobbingworth (o). He dyed 22 August 1546, and is buried in this Church, as likewise Catharine his wife, with an epitaph At his feet are the effigies of 4 sons and 1 daughter; and at her feet the effigies of 4 sons and 10 daughters. ---*Thomas*, his eldest son and heir, succeeded him. What further account we have of this familie, is, that ---*John Barfoot* Esq; by Mary his wife, daughter and coheir of Thomas Goodman of Leatherhead in Surrey, had Anne; and several sons, the youngest of whom ---*John*, a woolen-draper in London, married Mary, daughter of John Eldred of Little Birch Esq; and had by her ---*John*, his only son, of Lincoln's-inn, who by Mary his wife, daughter of John Eldred of Stanway Esq; had John; Mary, and Anne, wife of the Rev Thomas Bernard, Vicar of Earl's-Colne &c. He dyed 26 January 1724-5."

(o) Inquis, 1 Edw. VI. Apr [illegible in my copy]

The text continues with an account of John Forescue Aland Esq, Baron of the Exchequer etc, created Baron Fortescue, who apparently held Lamborn Hall after the above family.

[Richard Smith]

On 16/11/2019 02:58, Richard D. Acheson, Jr wrote:

> 11) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex; (m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell
> 12) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Sarah Culverwell (1/2 or perhaps step siblings it seems)
> 13) John Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Joane
> 14) Sarah Barfoot & Thomas Wiggin (son of Capt. Thos. Wiggin who settled Dover, NH & Catherine Whiting)

I'm interested to know more about this Barfoot family. In the 19th
century, the Barfoot family was very heavily concentrated in Hampshire,
particularly in the area around the town of Bishop's Waltham, and the
Hampshire family can be traced back to the early 16th century in
Curdridge, a hamlet in Bishop's Waltham parish. The relative rareness
of the surname together with its strong regional presence suggests it
may well have arisen just once. So I'm interested to hear about a
Barfoot family in the mid 16th century in Essex. Are you aware of any
other research into the early history of this Barfoot family in Essex?

Richard

[JBrand]

The Blodwell pedigree in the first posting seems to indicate the Blodwells had the Hinckley-Caldebeck-Notebeam-Pecche ancestry which is also behind the Lawrence family of New England. Another line of royal descent ...

[celticp...@gmail.com]

Dear Richard ~

As a Bardolf descendant, I have particular interest in your reconstructed pedigree of the Blodwell and Bardolf families, which two families you have proposed as being in the ancestry Sarah (Barfoot) Wiggin.

First things first. You're correct that the ancestral line you have proposed is sound down to Generation 4, which is headed by Sir John Bardolf, 3rd Lord Bardolf (1314-1363), and his wife, Elizabeth Damory.

The line breaks at that point, however. There is no evidence whatsoever that this couple had a son, Sir Edmund Bardolf, who married Katherine le Peletot, who you have placed as your Generation 5.

Sir Edmund Bardolf and his wife, Katherine, definitely existed. I've copied below what information I've collected regarding them.

As to Sir Edmund Barfolf's place in the Bardolf family tree, recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated 1330 which identifies Edmund Bardolf as the son of Thomas Bardolf. The plaintiff in this lawsuit was Agnes, widow of Thomas Bardolf, 2nd Lord Bardolf (died 1328), who was suing for her dower rights. The three defendants in this lawsuit are Thomas, John, and Edmund Bardolf, all of whom are specifically styled sons of Thomas Bardolf. John Bardolf named in the lawsuit was certainly Agnes' own son and heir born in 1314. I assume Thomas and Edmund were his brothers.

Here is a brief abstract of the 1330 Common Pleas lawsuit:

In 1330 Agnes, widow of Thomas Bardolf, sued Thomas son of Thomas Bardolf in the Court of Common Pleas regarding the third part of the manors of Greatham, Hampshire and Fillingham, Lincolnshire; she likewise sued John son of Thomas Bardolf and Elizabeth his wife regarding the third part of the manors of Plumpton, Sussex, and Strumpshaw and Scratby (in Ormesby St. Margaret), Norfolk, and Edmund son of Thomas Bardolf regarding the third part of the manor of Harthill, Yorkshire, all of which properties she claimed as dower.

Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/283, image 4f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT2/E3/CP40no283/cCP40no283fronts/IMG_0004.htm).

Given the above record, I would place Sir Edmund Bardolf as a newly identified brother (not son) of Sir John Bardolf, 3rd Lord Bardolf, who married Elizabeth Damory. This change in Sir Edmund's parentage obviously changes your proposed pedigree, but Sir Edmund still retains royal ancestry through his father, Sir Thomas Bardolf, 2nd Lord Bardolf.

For further particulars of the Bardolf family and their royal links, please see my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set) published in 2013.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

+ + + + + + +

10. RALPH LE BOTELER (or BOTILLER), Knt., of Bromham and Stagsden, Bedfordshire, and, in right of his wife, of Watton Woodhall (in Watton-at-Stone), Hertfordshire. He married before 9 Feb. 1347 (date of fine) KATHERINE LE PELETOT (or PELITOT, PELLITOTT, PELETOYT), daughter and heiress of Philip le Peletot, Knt., of Watton Woodhall (in Watton-at-Stone), Hertfordshire, Knight of the Shire for Hertfordshire. They had one son, Philip, Knt. In 1347 Richard de Ruthyn, Citizen of London, conveyed to Ralph, son of Ralph le Botiller, of Norbury, Knt., ten messuages, lands, and 100s. rent in Stagsden and Bromham, Bedfordshire. The same year Philip Pelitot conveyed to Ralph and Katherine his wife and their heirs the manor of Sele (in St. Andrew Hertford), Herefordshire. In 1349 Walter de Mauny, Knt., sued Ralph le Botiller and Adam atte Halle in the Court of Common Pleas in a Hertfordshire plea regarding a trespass [vi et armis]. His widow, Katherine, married (2nd) before 1376 (date of lawsuit) EDMUND BARDOLF, Knt., in right of his wife, of Watton Woodhall (in Watton-at-Stone), Hertfordshire, younger son of Thomas Bardolf, Knt., 2nd Lord Bardolf, of Wormegay, Cantley, Caistor, Fincham, North Runcton, Stow Bardolf, and Well, Norfolk, Colwick, Gedling, Shelford, and Stoke Bardolph, Nottinghamshire, Ruskington and Westborough, Lincolnshire, Barlings, Sussex, etc., by Agnes, said to be daughter of William de Grandison (or Graunson), Knt., 1st Lord Grandison [see BARDOLF 12 for his ancestry]. In 1376 Philip Botiller, of Bromham, Bedfordshire, sued Edmund and Katherine his wife in the Court of Common Pleas regarding waste in three houses, woods, gardens, etc. in Bromham, Bedfordshire. In 1377 Edmund Bardolf, Knt. sued Philip Boteler in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £20. The same year Philip Botiller, sued Edmund and Katherine his wife in the Court of Common Pleas regarding waste in Essex. Edmund presented to the church of Watton-at-Stone, Hertfordshire in 1366, 1375, 1377, 1384, and 1385.

References:

Clutterbuck, Hist. & Antiqs. of Hertford 2 (1821): 472–476 (Boteler ped.), 485. Chauncy, Hist. Antiqs. of Hertfordshire 2 (1826): 47–51. Waters, Chester of Chicheley 1 (1878): 138–139 (Boteler ped.), 155–158. Ormerod, Hist. of Chester 2 (1882): 728–729 (Boteler ped.). Andrews, Memorial Brasses in Hertfordshire Churches (1903): 147–149. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/359, image 9051d (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/CP40no359/bCP40no359mm1dtoEnd/IMG_9051.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/463, image 50f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/E3/CP40no463/aCP40no463fronts/IMG_0050.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/466, image 121 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/R2/CP40no466/466_0121.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/466, image 144 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/R2/CP40no466/466_0144.htm). National Archives, SC 8/156/7772 (available at http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk). National Archives, CP 25/1/5/59, #7; CP 25/1/89/82, #331 [see abstract of fines at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html].

[Richard ACHESON]

Thanks to everyone for your assistance and also your collective interest. Doug, I too am probably already a Bardolf-Drury descendant, so it's an area I'm curious to explore further. I believe I already descend from Katherine Pelitot via her 1st husband Ralph Boteler of Pulreback. I believe the line goes

Katherine Pelitot (m1) Ralph Boteler (m2) Edmund Bardolph
Sir Philip Boteler of Watton, Woodhall & Isabel
Sir Philip Boteler of Watton, Woodhall & Elizabeth Cockayne
Philip Boteler, Esq- Sheriff of Hertf. & Essex & Isabel Willoughby
John Boteler, Esq- Sheriff of Hertf. & Essex & Elizabeth Downhall
John Boteler, Esq. & Dorothy Tyrell
Sir Philip Boteler, MP (Knight of the Body of Henry VIII) & Elizabeth Drury (dau. of Sir Robt. Drury, Spkr house of Commons)
Sir John Boteler, MP & Grizelde Roche
Mary Boteler & Thomas Shotbolt, Esq.
and so on down to Elizabeth Taylor of Bradley, Hampshire who married Robert Tufton Mason
They being my purported immigrant ancestors along that line, arriving c. 1680

Elizabeth Drury preceding of course has a Royal descent from Joan of Acre and Sir Gilbert de Clare, through Calthorpe, Stapylton, Bardolf and D'Amory. Hence my Bardolf-Drury interest and my knowledge of the existence of Katherine Pelitot.

The potential Sarah Barfoot Royal ancestry link, such as it may be through a likely brother rather than son of John 3rd Baron Wormegay (birth & death dates rather undetermined for Edmund), still would seem to hinge upon the last Edmund Bardolph #7 of the Watton brasses, being the same as the Edmund in the Blodwell Visitation pedigree (all other visitation, etc. facts being presently accepted as true). Two men of about the right age and of the same county is tantalizing, but not yet a good proof in my opinion. Even still, the pedigree from Sarah Barfoot back to her Edmund Bardolph could yield some fascinating collateral lines as yet undiscovered- royal or otherwise. There's more to be learned here I'm sure. The Barfoot family seems to pop out of relative obscurity with the aforementioned Robert of Lambourne, and suddenly marries into the already gentrified Hildersham, Blodwell, & Culverwell families. There may be more to that story than meets the eye. Ezekiel Culverwell seems to have a Berney-Southwell set of g-grandparents that may be interesting as well. Anyone else here also descend from Sarah Barfoot or her brother Walter?

[John Higgins]

So...Frances Blodwell was the 1st wife of Thomas Hildersham, by whom she had Winifred who married (1) Edward Barfoot. (Is Winifred's 2nd husband known?) And Thomas's 2nd wife was Anne Pole, and their son was the controversial clergyman Rev. Arthur Hildersham (bio in ODNB). Correct? According to the thesis cited above, Rev. Arthur married Ann Barfoot, sister of Edward, husband of Sir Arthur's half-sister Winifred. Complicated....

Ruvigny's Clarence volume, table LXVI shows Ann Pole as marrying NN Hildersham of "Tetsworth", Cambridgeshire, with only a question mark as to descendants.

[Richard ACHESON]

Winifred's 2nd husband is Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell, so it's very confusing!

(m1 in 1582)Edward Barfoot, Gent. = Winifred Hildersham = (m2 in 1598) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell
| (by m1) | (by m2)
Thomas Barfoot, Gent. (b. 1586) = Sarah Culverwell (b. 1600)
|
John Barfoot, Gent. (b.1616)

If Sarah C. was truly born in 1600, then son John is the son of incestuous half sibling parents. So yes it's a convoluted family tree for sure from appearances.

[Richard ACHESON]

Ezekiel was evidently a widower with children, so it seems probable that Sarah was one of those children by the earlier wife.

https://books.google.com/books?id=NFkMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA294&lpg=PA294&dq=Ezekiel+Culverwell+Winifred+Hildersham+Sarah+Culverwell&source=bl&ots=x4KtSLZYby&sig=ACfU3U0tcamP5Gqeg6EoHNlLelnCvvDD6Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwihruCSk_DlAhWS1FkKHS9oBzoQ6AEwAnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=Ezekiel%20Culverwell%20Winifred%20Hildersham%20Sarah%20Culverwell&f=false

[Richard ACHESON]

I found somewhere that Ezekiel Culverwell had a daughter Margaret by his first wife. She must be the Margaret Chevers of his will, and her son Ezekiell must therefore be Rev. Ezekiel's grandson.

https://books.google.com/books?id=CaNCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&lpg=PA87&dq=Thomas+Barfoot+Sarah+Culverwell+london+marriages&source=bl&ots=y-677bBJqr&sig=ACfU3U1UHGHDzN5V94RFJzfD8peKNQeR3w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjmyJvUlPDlAhUOmuAKHcFfAQAQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Thomas%20Barfoot%20Sarah%20Culverwell%20london%20marriages&f=false

[Richard ACHESON]

I still haven't given up on her...

1) Henry II Plantagenet & Ida Toeni

2) William Longspee, 1st Earl of Salisbury & Ela Salisbury

3) Ida Longspee and Sir Walter fitz Robert, Lord of Little Dunmow

4) Sir Robert fitz Walter of Little Dunmow and Woodham & Devorguille de Burgh

5) Christian fitz Walter & Sir William Marshall, 1st Lord Marshall (d. Bannockburn- desc. (x2) Henry I)

6) Ellen Marshal and Robert Mautby of Flegg

See Maultby of Norfolk, pg. 92 https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=qd41AAAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA91.w.1.2.0

7) Sir John Mautby of Flegg & Isabel de Clavering

8) Alianore Mautby & William Calthorpe of Burnham Thorpe

9) William Denston of Besthorpe & Anne Calthorpe

10) Felice Denston & Sir Roger Drury of Hawstead

11) Sir Wm. Drury of Besthorpe & Margaret Briggs (dau. of Wm. Bridges, Esq. - Mayor of Thetford)

12) Anne Drurye & John Blodwell, Gent.

13) Frances Blodwell & Thomas Hildersham, Esq.

14) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex; (m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell

15) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Sarah Culverwell (1/2 or perhaps step siblings)

16) John Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Joane

17) Sarah Barfoot & Thomas Wiggin (son of Capt. Thos. Wiggin of Dover, NH & Catherine Whiting)

Sarah Barfoot is a Plantagenet in there somewhere I suspect.
Your critical eyes are appreciated as always.

[Richard ACHESON]

Sorry for the slip, generation 9 has the names reversed. Anne Calthorpe has the royal lineage proposed, not her husband William Denston.

[celticp...@gmail.com]

Dear Richard ~

Your proposed line of descent is good down to Generation 5. It fails at that point.

William le Marshal, Knt., Lord Marshal (died 1314) and his wife, Christian de Burgh (your Generation 5), had one son, John, and two daughters, Denise (died unmarried) and Hawise (wife of Robert de Morley, Knt., 2nd Lord Morley). There was no daughter named Ellen.

For further particulars, I recommend you consult my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set), published in 2013. I also suggest you consult Complete Peerage 8 (1932): 528–529 (sub Marshal).

Sincerely, Douglas Richardson, Author

[Richard ACHESON]

So the Visitation of Norfolk for Paston pg. 215 is in error?

https://archive.org/details/visitacionievisi32ryew/page/214

In truth, it doesn't seems a pedigree worthy of much exaggeration. The Norfolk Archaeology: on Miscellaneous Tracts Relating to the Antiquities of the County of Norfolk publication reiterates the union in Vol. III, pg. 159

https://books.google.com/books?id=GwAVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=ellen+marshall+robert+mautby&source=bl&ots=iI-Y-u_Ru4&sig=ACfU3U0fRf_NUDpbHqDUpNPzs-HwoF5qQw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjavKP517HmAhXOpFkKHXjRDDc4ChDoATAHegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=ellen%20marshall%20robert%20mautby&f=false

[Richard ACHESON]

Hawise Marshall & Robert Moreley, 2nd Lord Morley are already familiar to me

A partial of my own descent seems to run:
1) Hawise Marshall & Robert Morley, 2nd Lord Morley
2) William Morley, 3rd Lord Morley & Cecily Bardolf
3) Sir John Morley & Matilda Barry
4) Maud Morley & Thomas ap Guillem
5) Sir William ap Thomas Herbert & Gladys Gam
6) William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, KG & Frond verch Hoesgyn
7) Anne Herbert & Richard Greville of Lemington/Lamington
8) Eleanor Greville & Richard Taylor of Nympsfield
9) John Taylor, Esq. of Haseldon Grange & Margaret Ramsey (btw- I would love to know her parents)
10) Thomas Taylor, Esq. of Battersey & Cecily Walker
11) Thomas Taylor, Esq. of Middlesex (quite the rebel he was) & Mary Shotbolt
12) William Taylor, Esq. of Bradley & Barbara Hanbury
13) Elizabeth Taylor & Robert Tufton "Mason", Esq.

[John Higgins]

I can see at least two probable errors in this descent.

Gen. 3: According to CP 9:215, William Morley, 3rd Lord Morley and Cecily Bardolf did have a son John but he "apparently d. sp and vp." Since the next younger son William succeeded to the peerage, this is certainly correct.

Maud Morley's father Sir John Morley is referred to in various Welsh sources as of Llansanffraid in Monmouthshire - no indication of any connection to the family of the Lords Morley. This looks like a grafting of two different families together. What is your source for this?

Gen. 7: The pedigree of the Herbert family in Bartrum's Welsh Genealogies, table Godwin 8(A1) gives the 1st Earl of Pembroke no daughter Anne mar. Richard Greville - either by the indicated mistress or by any of his other partners. Again, what is your source for this?

[Richard ACHESON]

Is this a forum for dialogue? I merely posited that I was familiar with this couple from my own investigations. Please remember that terse statements over the internet can be misinterpreted as open hostility, which I don't believe is warranted in this case.

As a note- "seems to run"- does not mean I have absolutely validated the hypothesized lineage at each and every link. It means I suppose it runs thus. An obscure lineage of that sort is difficult to prove and probably not worth the time, money, and effort to derive, unless one is into selling books. Hence why I post it, so that others may lend critical analysis. It was not, and is not, intended as a statement of proven fact.

as for Gen (3)
I was unaware that John is believed to have died without heirs. It was therefore an erroneous supposition.

as for Gen (7)
Tudorplace is relatively reliable like Stirnet, although without a primary source it obviously can't be relied upon to "prove" a descent.

http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/HERBERT1.htm

So evidently someone believes that relationship occurred- if you have evidence to the contrary, please bring it to their attention to bring an end to the spread of erroneous information.

None of this brings us back to the original question of:

Is the Paston pedigree delineated in the Visitation of Norfolk know to be in error?

Just because only 2 daughters are noted as heirs as a result of one author's investigations- the first dying without offspring, the second therefore inheriting; that does not necessarily mean that a further 1, 2, 10, 15 daughters did not exist. Known, unknown, or otherwise. Paper recording had limitations. Birth control didn't exist in a reliable form, and most offspring may not have even been considered worthy of mention for inheritance or pedigree purposes.

I appreciate the professionalism of everyone's responses as though I am NOT a certified genealogist, and have not masqueraded as one, I have been performing genealogical investigations for 37 years now. I've picked up a few things. I am however in possession of a degree in Physics, so I can assure you that I am not completely devoid of intellect, and as such understand the difference between hypothesis, theory, and proof.

I similarly understand that as fascinating as this form of research may be, it all goes straight into the garbage can when someone is cuckolded along the way (around 2% per generation I believe?), which btw we will never even know- so pedigrees will always remain conjecture on some level. This is not exactly rocket science, where things explode if the calculation is even slightly wrong. I leave that to my brother, the astrophysicist. If my input is not of interest to anyone here, please simply advise me so.

[John Higgins]

I regret that you appear to have received my comments as reflecting "open hostility", as that was certainly not the intent. I simply presented, in what I though was a brief and dispassionate manner, some facts which added to the descent you had presented. I do see that I apparently didn't realize that the descent you presented was simply a hypothesized lineage and not necessarily fully supported at each link. Most lines presented in this group generally do have some degree of support for them - which is why I asked (politely, I thought) for what your sources might be.

I do think it's inaccurate to say that "Tudorplace is relatively reliable like Stirnet". In my experience, Tudorplace almost never has sources - primary or otherwise. Stirnet does almost always provide sources - generally secondary admittedly, but least they're generally known and recognized sources. But each of us can reach our own judgments about the reliability and usefulness of each source.

With respect to generation 7 (Anne Herbert & Richard Greville of Lemington), here's an additional piece of information. The 1569 visitation of Worcestershire (Harleian Society, Visitation series, vol. 21), in a pedigree of the Vampage family on page 69, has a reference to "Richard Greville of Lemington = ...da[ughter]. of ....Herbert". See here (near the bottom of the page):
https://books.google.com/books?id=ECoEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA69#v=onepage&q&f=false

But it's quite a leap to go from a unnamed Herbert daughter to Anne, daughter of William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, as is shown in Tudorplace. (And, to be clear, I'm not saying that this was the source for the statement in Tudorplace.) But I wouldn't be surprised if some eager and incautious genealogist might have jumped to such a conclusion in the past (not you, of course!).

I think the same situation holds for the Norfolk visitation you've mentioned. The pedigree there simply states that "Robert Mawtby" married "Ellen da[ughter] of William Marshall". But there's no reason to conclude that this William Marshall is the well-documented Sir William Marshall, Lord Marshall. In fact, the argument could be made that that, if he WERE indeed the more famous Sir William Marshall, he would have been more fully described as such in the visitation pedigree.

I too am not a "certified" genealogist or any other such highfalutin title. I've been working in genealogy about as long as you have, solely as a hobby and for my own personal enjoyment. I've learned a lot over the years, and I try to share what I may have learned when it might be helpful. I've enjoyed reading your posts in this thread, and I hope you'll take my comments in the spirit in which they were intended. I hope this clears the air a bit...

[Richard ACHESON]

Thank you for the clarification of your intentions, and I do appreciate your comments and thoughtful interactions. No harm done, it's just that the internet has the potential to be such a source for good, and yet somehow it is often twisted toward the opposite end. I think I've grown to almost expect it, perhaps a little too much so. Like yourself I was doing research the old fashioned way, long before such a powerful tool came along. It's truly a gift to genealogy in particular, albeit at times a double edged one. A source for spreading both truth and also myth. Genealogy is the search for truth. None of us has any say in who our ancestors were, but it certainly can provide an interesting tour through history. That's what I enjoy most, is that it reminds us we're all part of that collective of human history, and that one way another we're all brothers and sisters.

Thanks again for your input. Many minds working together can accomplish a great deal more than any one alone.

[Richard ACHESON]

Since a few of you seem to be interested in the Barfoot family of New England I thought I'd share an update. I've found a bit more information regarding one of the previously unknown wives of the Barfoot Ancestors (for Sarah, Mary and Walter Barfoot). She is Katherine Stonard/Stonerde/Stoner (Gen. 2).

To reiterate the Barfoot lineage with the addition:

1) Robert Barfoot, Esq. (b.c. 1490; d. 22 Jun 1546), merchant (1st) of Lambourne Hall, Essex md. Katherine
2) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne (b.c. 1515; d. bet. 4 Feb. 1591- 4 Apr. 1592), cloth merchant md. Katherine Stonard (d. bef. 7 Dec 1591) of Loughton Hall, Essex
3) Edward Barfoot, Gent. (b.c. 1540; m. aft 3 Jan 1582 London; d. bef 1598) of Lambourne Hall & Hatfield Broadoak, Essex md. Winifred Hildersham (b.c.1555; d. bef. 19 Nov. 1613) of Hatfield Broadoak, Essex
4) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. (bp. 24 June 1586 Lambourne; d. 1631) md. Sarah Culverwell (b.c. 1600; d.c. 1638)
5) John Barfoot, Gent. (bp. 17 April 1616 Lambourne; bd. 20 Nov 1671 Lambourne) md. ?

had

6a) Mary Barfoot md. Dr. Henry Greenland of New Jersey
6b) Capt. Walter Barfoot, Deputy Governor
6c) Sarah Barfoot md. Thomas Wiggin, Yeoman of Hampton, Royal Colony of New Hampshire

Some links regarding the Thomas Barfoot/Katherine Stonard intermarriage and the Stonard family that may be of interest-

The will of George Stonerde, Esq. mentioning his daughter Barfote and his interest in the manour of Lambourne, and also his son-in-law Thomas Barfote.

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=rAQVAAAAQAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.RA11-PA8

The Stoner/Stonard Pedigree

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=l1tIAAAAYAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA105

George & Mary Stonard's funeral brass where he is shown engraved in his armor.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Transactions_of_the_Essex_Archaeological/u5cWAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=George+Stonard+loughton&pg=PA29&printsec=frontcover

The Stonard-Fanshawe connection providing some details about George who was a forester for Waltham Abbey.

https://archive.org/details/historyoffanshaw00fans/page/n55/mode/2up?q=stonard

A visit by Queen Elizabeth to Loughton in the time of Katherine's brother John's tenure.

https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/c3844fd3/files/uploaded/wC6Y4C0DQuCSxJcYzt3R_Lysons%20Environs%20of%20London%2004%20Herts%20Essex%20Kent.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-124,752

More details of the Stonard's and a relationship with Lord Thomas Cromwell

https://books.google.com/books?id=uZUWAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA147&lpg=PA147&dq=George+Stonerde+Loughton&source=bl&ots=ecayVeblSn&sig=ACfU3U2r6OoSRq0MaYtJS9YmSiVsTovGAg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjgg8LB447qAhXRZc0KHeSAAdYQ6AEwAXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=George%20Stonerde%20Loughton&f=false

A few more tidbits in here for Loughton and the Stonerde's

http://esah1852.org.uk/images/pdf/new-series/T2070000.pdf

Seems like a very interesting, and wealthy family of foresters just outside of London. They evidently were on familiar terms with several sovereigns in different generations (Elizabeth and James I at least).

An online genealogy names George Stonard's wife Mary as a Bowles. I can find no supporting evidence as yet, however Sir Martin Bowes lived in abutting county and had 3 wives and is credited with 18 children by them, so perhaps there is an association.

I hope you find this of interest.

Regards,
Richard

[Richard ACHESON]

Sarah Barfoot/Barefoot from various visitations and pedigree charts appears to have 2 Magna Carta descents (via de Vere & Quincy) and a possible illegitimate descent from Joan of Snowdonia (via Gwladys verch Llywelyn her possible daughter)

It appears to run:

John Plantagenet, King of England and Clemence

Joan Plantagenet and Llywelyn ap Lorwerth, “the Great” Prince of Gwynedd

Gwladys verch Llywelyn (possible daughter of Joan) and Sir Ralph de Mortimer of Wigmore

Roger de Mortimer, Baron of Wigmore and Maud de Braose

Margaret de Mortimer and Robert de Vere, 6th Earl of Oxford (great-grandson of Magna Carta Sureties Robert de Vere & Saher de Quincy)

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hnzqrn&view=1up&seq=238

if unviewable see pg. 226 in

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Suffolk_in_the_XVIIth_Century/-BAQAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Breviary+of+Suffolk&printsec=frontcover

Ellen de Vere & Sir Hugo de Naunton

Sir Thomas Naunton & Mary Aspall

Margery Naunton & Sir Roger Drury

Margaret Drury & Sir William Clopton, Knight of Kentwell

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=ZxANnBnHKBQC&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA142

Alice Clopton & John Harleston, Esq. of Shimpling

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=ExI2AQAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA132

https://books.google.com/books?id=8JcbV309c5UC&pg=RA1-PA360&lpg=RA1-PA360&dq=Robert+Harleston+Esq.+Alice+Bruyn&source=bl&ots=kwqGGZPO4b&sig=ACfU3U1YnLWXmz0wiqwbB91KqjRlFRDXTQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSo8XYjLrqAhWPKM0KHey8A38Q6AEwA3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=Robert%20Harleston%20Esq.%20Alice%20Bruyn&f=false

Sir Robert Harleston & Alice Bruyn of South Ockendon

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=ifQ7AAAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA58

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Twenty_two_of_the_Churches_of_Essex_Arch/CtsHAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Sir+Robert+Harleston+Alice+Bruyn&pg=PA48&printsec=frontcover

John Harleston, Esq. of South Wokingdon & Jane Heigham

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=LCgAAAAAQAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA215

Margaret Harleston & Thomas Hildersham of Stetchworth

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=LCgAAAAAQAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA216

Then continuing as earlier mentioned in the original post here.

Thomas Hildersham, Esq. of Stetchworth & Frances Blodwell

Winifred Hildersham & Edward Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne

Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Sarah Culverwell

John Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Joane?

Sarah Barefoot & Thomas Wiggin, Yeoman of Dover and Hampton, NH

Thoughts & critiques welcome as always,

Richard

[Johnny Brananas]

Unsure about the particular line you give here, but the reference to the Bruyn-Harleston marriage made me remember an appendix in Eugene A. Stratton, _Applied Genealogy_ (1988). Pp. 301-15 is "Appendix D: A New Royal Line for John Harleston of South Carolina."

Paul Reed later published a much better line that comes in through marriages of the Harlestons after the Bruyn-Harleston generation, but Stratton seemingly documents a line to Charlemagne that goes through Bruyn.

It goes via the two Pepins, Vermandoises, to Beaumont, Clare, and Marshal. He picks up in greater detail in the following generations:

--Maud Marshal, m. Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk

--Isabel Bigod, m. (2) Sir John FitzGeoffrey

--Maud FitzJohn m. (2) William de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick

--Isabel de Beauchamp m. Hugh le Despencer, Earl of Winchester

--Margaret le Despencer, m. John de St. Amand

--Isabella de St. Amand m. Richard de Haudlo (citing Boarstall Cartulary: she was a sister, not daughter, of Aumerie/ Almeric St. Amand)

--Elizabeth de Haudlo m. Sir Edmund de la Pole

--Elizabeth de la Pole m. Sir Ingram Bruyn (citing Napier's _Historical Notices of Swyncombe and Ewelme, Oxford_)

--Sir Maurice de Bruyn m. (3) Elizabeth Retford

--Sir Henry Bruyn m. Elizabeth Darcy

--Alice Bruyn m. Robert Harleston

I suppose this hasn't been disproved in the meantime.

[Richard ACHESON]

Nothing quite so invigorating as another line down from Earl Hugh le Despencer... At least they had the decency to hang him in his armor.

[Johnny Brananas]

Paul Reed's article appears to say, "Thomas, Richard and William, Thomas Hildersham's three sons, were all by Mary Harleston."

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Genealogist/AMRnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=hildersham

Does it fit that the next Hildersham in your line could be born after 1520, the date of death of Thomas Hildersham's first wife, Agnes Hewson?

[wjhonson]

Do you have a better source which makes it more clear *which* Robert Earl of Oxford was her father?

There were two in a row, right here.

[Richard ACHESON]

Thomas the younger the apparent eldest of the 3 named sons was probably born just about that time yes, no firm dates as yet.

From "Hildersham of Moulton" is mentioned a Miss Hewson (1st wife) of the elder Thomas Hildersham; they having 2 daughters. Then the same 3 sons are mentioned by the 2nd wife Margaret Harleston.

https://archive.org/details/visitationsofsuf00harvuoft/page/42/mode/2up

Preamble to Blodwell of Great Thurlow- The younger Thomas married Frances Blodwell

https://archive.org/details/visitationsofsuf00harvuoft/page/8/mode/2up

[wjhonson]

I have answered my own question.

The source for placing her as a daughter of *some* Earl of Oxford is the exact same Breviary which states, clearly, that she was the daughter of Robert the *THIRD* earl of Oxford by his wife Isabel Bulbec

[Richard ACHESON]

No I don't have any proof as yet. However, Ellen/Eleanor is not here noted as a daughter of the elder Robert de Vere by Alice Sampford. Since said elder Robert had his lands first taken away and given to Roger de Mortimer (the father of Margaret that wed the 6th Earl?), and then restored to him it would seem the deal may have been sealed by a marriage to smooth things over.

https://books.google.com/books?id=8JcbV309c5UC&pg=RA3-PA264&lpg=RA3-PA264&dq=Robert+de+Vere+Margaret+de+Mortimer&source=bl&ots=kwqGHWIN44&sig=ACfU3U3-FiIdL6oUKKSNR5hsdulrE57q_Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjt293-9rvqAhXIPM0KHT0zC9M4ChDoATAGegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=Robert%20de%20Vere%20Margaret%20de%20Mortimer&f=false

[Richard ACHESON]

It seems unlikely that Sir Roger Drury who died in October of 1420 could have married Margery Naunton as the great-granddaughter of the 3rd Earl Robert who died in 1221.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/107890705/roger-drury

[wjhonson]

On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 1:16:23 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> It seems unlikely that Sir Roger Drury who died in October of 1420 could have married Margery Naunton as the great-granddaughter of the 3rd Earl Robert who died in 1221.
>
> https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/107890705/roger-drury

The problem of course, is using a source to claim *one* thing, and ignoring that it also claims *another* thing. It's the same source. Same.

You can pick and choose, however *many* (not just one) source state quite plainly that the 6th Earl died S.P. (without any issue)

[wjhonson]

On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 1:16:23 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:

> It seems unlikely that Sir Roger Drury who died in October of 1420 could have married Margery Naunton as the great-granddaughter of the 3rd Earl Robert who died in 1221.
>
> https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/107890705/roger-drury

Oh no I quite agree that this can not be the case.

Which is why my preferred reconstruction is that the Naunton family made the entire thing up out of whole cloth.

[Richard ACHESON]

I have claimed nothing save that a series of visitations and pedigrees seems to suggest this is the case. As you know that's not a proof.

The citation you mention evidently from pg. 165 also states in the time of Edward II (reigned 1307 to 1327). That suggests the couple has clearly been misplaced in that particular chart.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Suffolk_in_the_XVIIth_Century/-BAQAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=naunton

I am not claiming to be a professional and am only here depositing the interesting things I find for the greater good of the genealogical community. A proof of a descent like one of these is more a curiosity to me. To others it may have a great deal more urgency to prove. I have several Edward I descents, and am not in this for the money or to build my ego. Just sharing what I find.

[wjhonson]

In order to dispute decades of received wisdom, you cannot simply cite modern source which itself cites NO sources for its claim.

You need to dig more than that.

[Richard ACHESON]

Pardon me, as I mistook this as a forum for dialogue and discovery, not one for verbal abuse. I've not had occasion to examine the de Vere family at any length. Thank you for your received wisdom, though not so much for your chosen manner of sharing it.

[wjhonson]

On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 4:02:10 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> Pardon me, as I mistook this as a forum for dialogue and discovery, not one for verbal abuse. I've not had occasion to examine the de Vere family at any length. Thank you for your received wisdom, though not so much for your chosen manner of sharing it.

Well now you know.

[taf]

On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 4:02:10 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:

> Pardon me, as I mistook this as a forum for dialogue and discovery, not
> one for verbal abuse.

I had to go back through and read this thread because it wasn't clear what this verbal abuse was. It is a little hard to follow, as it is unclear to what some of the posts are responding, and I still don't know see the abuse.

Certainly you were told that you need better sourcing, but that is par for the course. Any argument over the relative reliability of Stirnet vs Tudorplace misses the point that neither of them is worth very much when it comes to demonstrating a new line of descent, and one should never cite FindaGrave for anything but the burial marker images, not whatever text a profile manager has decided to put on a page.

There is nothing wrong with floating an idea, but when you do that is an inherent invitation for critique, and that critique may not be gentle if there isn't good sourcing to back it up. Still, a harsh critique is not verbal abuse.

taf

[Richard ACHESON]

Perhaps because he took it to another thread...

"Speaking of the pretentious Naunton's who dared to claim such a utterly ridiculous descent from the Earl of Oxford, that a child could destroy their claim with one word.... "

[taf]

And this criticism of the Naughton family that recorded this pedigree in the 17th(?) century abuses you . . . how?

taf

[Richard ACHESON]

The answer to that is so simple a child can figure it out I suppose...

Enough of this wasteful bickering.

Thanks to Johnny Brananas BTW for your positive interaction, and for pointing out the possible Hugh le Bigod descent.

[taf]

On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 7:26:06 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> The answer to that is so simple a child can figure it out I suppose...

I have no idea what you are talking about.

> Enough of this wasteful bickering.

Physician, heal thyself.

taf

[Peter Stewart]

On 08-Jul-20 12:26 PM, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> The answer to that is so simple a child can figure it out I suppose...

I expect that - like me - Todd was not reading "a child could destroy
their claim with one word" as directed at you: though I can't speak for
Will Johnson, this was apparently a general observation aimed at the
Naunton family and not his usual very direct style when he sets out to
insult someone posting to the newsgroup.

In any case, it was poor form on his part to pick on their pretensions
while himself pretentiously inserting a misplaced apostrophe in the
plural of their surname.

Peter Stewart

[Richard ACHESON]

Perhaps my approach to ancient genealogy doesn't sit well with that of others.

There are relatively few immigrant ancestors to the early colonies who can more or less definitively be connected with their place and family of origin. Of those few, many of them have already been investigated for decades by the work of others.

When I find one or a married couple whose point of origin is known that I'm interested in investigating, I peruse the visitations to see if they are of any assistance in fleshing out a general descent of some sort. That is not to say that I agree with every connection and bit of information that I find within the visitations however.

From there I begin to work backwards in time investigating familial inter connections and verifying the ones that I am able. Hence my recent post about the connection I found with Katherine Stoner/Stonard a short time ago who married into the Barfoot family. The visitations were of no assistance in her case, but I was fortunate enough to find a will.

All of us have innumerable connections back in time. We cannot thoroughly investigate them all. We pick and choose. The visitations, though clearly flawed, do provide a basis of predicting whether or not information may still be in existence about these individuals, and also suggests which ones might be among the more interesting to follow, to further clarify, and to expend time and energy on.

Spending a great deal of my personal time, resources and effort providing every learnable detail about a purported de Vere descent for a single early immigrant, and their possible subsequent connection to one of the worst of history's ancient sovereign's was not my intent. I merely brought the potential pedigree connections to the attention of this group, and thought it better than straightaway discarding what I had discovered.

[taf]

On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 5:24:03 AM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> Perhaps my approach to ancient genealogy doesn't sit well with that of others.
>

Since you raise the issue, with all due respect, it is not your approach to medieval genealogy that is causing the problem here. Earlier in the thread you all but accused John Higgins of open hostility for the sin of saying "I can see at least two probable errors in this descent" and then describing the likely errors. It seems you are personalizing your lines, such that you are misinterpreting criticism of them as criticism of you.

taf

[Richard ACHESON]

Well said, and I'm sure that there's truth in that statement. There is also truth in the statement that many individuals who frequent this group are openly hostile toward other individuals who are merely attempting to make contributions to the greater genealogical community. Doug Richardson is regularly harassed here, and still somehow has decided to continue to share his findings. Kudos to him for his resilience. So yes, my guard is certainly up. Moderation of tone of postings could be helpful.

"Richard, I see a potential problem with the Nauntom pedigree as delineated." would seem to be a more agreeable way of approaching it, rather than accusing someone of a "claim" and the immediate assumption of fraudulent intent by the visitation official and/or family in question.

It may be that there was an Ellen de Vere, who was perhaps a descendant of the 3rd Earl of Oxford, but clearly it is not as the pedigree supposes. It may be a half truth from the families oral history that has been contorted over the centuries, or it may be completely erroneous, but it's the tone of people's criticisms that I have issue with. At times overly so, and at other times rightly so.

Working together doesn't have to involve "virtual" shouting matches as we try to down someone's shared contribution.

[Richard ACHESON]

Some of you might be interested in Winifred Hildersham's half brother Arthur Hildersham the celebrated Puritan. His royal descent is well documented, though I have not verified it myself. His mother evidently being Anne Pool/Pole, 2nd wife of Thomas Hildersham (the 1st being Frances Blodwell)

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=dqVbarc4qt8C&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA65

It would suggest that their father Thomas Hildersham of Stetchworth was a well connected man in some fashion, marrying into the then recent descendants of one of the last Plantagenets.

[Johnny Brananas]

Yes, Arthur Hildersham was a known descendant of George "Malmsey" Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence, via his daughter Margaret "Botched Execution" Plantagenet, Countess of Salisbury.

[wjhonson]

Well let's see, when I pointed out that this *source* which has this woman even existing at all, let alone being a daughter of some Earl of Oxford, *also* claims her connection to an unrealistic father, given the dates we know of her supposed children....

You then instead of adding more research to figure out what is truly going on, just resort to the old *legand and family tradition* claim.

That is not how medieval genealogy is done.

If you want to *shore up* this family, you should try to figure out the truths of them, instead of the legends.

[Richard ACHESON]

I attempted to supply links pertaining to the supposed lineage from those available to me. The lineage clearly fails as enunciated. Had I more information to provide, I'd have done that at the outset. With the evidence at hand little more can be said on it. Thank you for your input.

Ironically from what I understand of it, the Visitations were carried out in order to clear up the vast multitude of spuriously claimed pedigrees of armigerous or otherwise families. It seems apparent that in many cases they fell far short of that mark.

[John Higgins]

On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 10:55:12 AM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> I attempted to supply links pertaining to the supposed lineage from those available to me. The lineage clearly fails as enunciated. Had I more information to provide, I'd have done that at the outset. With the evidence at hand little more can be said on it. Thank you for your input.
>
> Ironically from what I understand of it, the Visitations were carried out in order to clear up the vast multitude of spuriously claimed pedigrees of armigerous or otherwise families. It seems apparent that in many cases they fell far short of that mark.

From the discussion in this thread, I don't think the Naunton family belief of a descent from a Vere Earl of Oxford was based on a visitation pedigree, but rather on a family tradition that was eventually published, in this case, in "A Breviary of Suffolk". I don't recall any mention of a visitation pedigree in that source.

As to the visitations themselves, my understanding is that they were originally carried out by the heralds to substantiate a family's claim to a particular coat of arms - not to record or validate any further ancestry that the family might have. And the published versions of the visitations, beginning in the 19th century, generally go far beyond the original work of the heralds, adding material from any number of other sources. So, it's something of an overstatement to say that the visitations "fell far short of that mark", at least with respect to their original mission.

[Richard ACHESON]

Thanks for the clarified perspective John. Perhaps an examination of any extant early Naunton arms could reveal if the de Vere coat was impaled with any of them. Something to look into...

[Richard ACHESON]

From the entries for Naunton & Vere in Burke's General Armory there don't appear to be any versions with impaling evident.

[John Higgins]

On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 4:33:17 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> Thanks for the clarified perspective John. Perhaps an examination of any extant early Naunton arms could reveal if the de Vere coat was impaled with any of them. Something to look into...

The only instance that I'm aware of in which the Naunton and Vere arms are mentioned together is the so-called "Naunton Pedigree". I don't recall if this has been mentioned in the present lengthy thread, but it was discussed briefly in this group in Feb. 2019 here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/soc.genealogy.medieval/%22suffolk$20institute%22|sort:date/soc.genealogy.medieval/YXo9Xb-Y0s0/0MFi9eCcBAAJ

You should retrieve the cited article "The Naunton Pedigree" from the Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology at the website mentioned in the post. Read it VERY carefully, especially the section on correspondence on the history of the pedigree near the end of the article.

The bottom line is that the pedigree was developed in the 18th or 19th century reflecting the family tradition of the Naunton family's ancestry. (It's more complicated than that - read the article!) But there is no evidence given for any of the connections stated. In particular, the connection between Naunton and Vere is the same one shown in "The Breviary of Suffolk" mentioned in the current thread - without any evidence.

I think we have to conclude that the Naunton-Vere connection is based solely on family tradition - and that there is no other evidence to support it.

[Richard ACHESON]

Very interesting reading. The John de Vere of #98 (the 7th Earl who inherited from the title his uncle Robert 6th Earl with no heirs) who married Maud/Matilda Badlesmere has the same root arms that appear for Eleanor de Vere #103 the purported wife of Hugh Naunton #102, said to be living in the time of Edw. I & II. If this John de Vere (son of the deceased Alphonse de Vere & Jane Foliot) had derived his arms from his grandfather the 5th Earl Robert, then any sisters of his would have had the right to impale the same arms with their husbands- as I understand heraldry. As such it would seem to suggest that the chart from the Breviary was indeed in error, and that it was the 5th Earl Robert the Naunton's were suggesting was their ancestor. Chronologically that appears to work far better than Ellen/Eleanor being a daughter of the 3rd Earl Robert.

[Richard ACHESON]

A link might prove useful.... lol

http://suffolkinstitute.pdfsrv.co.uk/customers/Suffolk%20Institute/2014/01/10/Volume%20XXIX%20Part%201%20(1961)_The%20Naunton%20pedigree%20and%20family%20papers%20F%20W%20Steer_34%20to%2066.pdf

[Richard ACHESON]

So assuming John de Vere 7th Earl of Oxford had his grandfather's arms extended to him through his predeceased father Alphonse, then Ellen or Eleanore could have been a sister of Alphonse as well. Some hard dates for these individuals would prove useful.

[Richard ACHESON]

Evidently there is more than one pedigree that mentions Hugh Naunton & Eleanor de Vere (daughter of Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford). The Argentine Pedigree would also seem to suggest this couple existed as well, according to Magna Carta Ancestry by Douglas Richardson

https://books.google.com/books?id=8JcbV309c5UC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=Bartholomew+Naunton&source=bl&ots=kwqGIXHWd6&sig=ACfU3U1aM54hUZ6mcm3Zwk-rAQ5HT1VJ9A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwif7_3ekL_qAhXFXc0KHfkhAiEQ6AEwBHoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=Bartholomew%20Naunton&f=false

He notes that Sir Bartholomew Naunton (son of Hugh & Eleanor) married Joan Argentine, and provides 2 sources:

1) Clutterbuck's- Hist. & Antiqs. of Hertfor 2 (1821): pgs. 537-544 (Argentine ped.)
and
2) Supp. to Suffolk Traveller (1844): pgs 123-124

Neither of which I am presently able to find online?!!!

[John Higgins]

Clutterbuck's Herts (all 3 vols.) is online via the FHL here:
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/188626?availability=Family%20History%20Library

And so is the "Supplement to the Suffolk Traveller" here:
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/3425648

The latter book is also available at several sites on Google Books - here is one of them:
https://books.google.com/books/about/A_Supplement_to_the_Suffolk_Traveller_Or.html?id=TP8HAAAAQAAJ

Happy reading!

[Richard ACHESON]

Thank You so much for the assistance John. I had to retire for the night or I'd have kept hunting for them myself. Perhaps there is more than a grain of sand to this after all?!

[Richard ACHESON]

Lady Eleanor is looking a lot less than fictitious at this point.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/County_of_Suffolk/c4lJAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=hUGH+NAUNTON&pg=PA24&printsec=frontcover

[Richard ACHESON]

At least a few historians certainly felt the early part of the Naunton pedigree had some truth to it.

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo1.ark:/13960/t46q2jg2m&view=1up&seq=339&q1=Naunton

Quite a few Fines for this couple and their offspring in Suffolk and also Essex.

[wjhonson]

I would say instead of chasing grass horses, that you simply accept that this weird idea of the Naunton's that they descend from some Earl of Oxford, is simply a poor remembrance.

When Bartholomew Naunton, married Joan Argentine (and had one surviving sole heiress who took the lands to the Bacon family, then to the Leighs), that is was Joan herself who was the gggdaughter of Hugh de Vere 4th Earl of Oxford.

And that is how this mish-mash came about.

[taf]

I am not going to delve into this - I have much more important things I am procrastinating doing, but let me just put this out there.

The fact that there existed a woman named Eleanor as in the traditional pedigree in no way demonstrates the authenticity of the prominent connection. One quite typical approach of the pedigree forgers was to take a known woman of uncertain parentage, and invent a desirable paternity for her (Gundred and Lucy are just two notable examples). Finding these references eliminates the possibility that she was invented out of whole cloth, but does not indicate she was who the pedigree says she was.

taf

[taf]

On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 4:47:28 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> From the entries for Naunton & Vere in Burke's General Armory there don't appear to be any versions with impaling evident.

Burke's rarely describes impaling. You are better off seeking it in county antiquarian publications that describe church monuments and glass.

taf

[John Higgins]

On Thursday, July 9, 2020 at 1:01:12 PM UTC-7, Richard ACHESON wrote:
> Lady Eleanor is looking a lot less than fictitious at this point.
>
> https://www.google.com/books/edition/County_of_Suffolk/c4lJAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=hUGH+NAUNTON&pg=PA24&printsec=frontcover

All this source confirms is that Hugh de Naunton had a wife named Eleanor - not that she was Eleanor de Vere. You still have nothing other than the traditional pedigree (repeated in various sources) that she was Eleanor de Vere. You don't have primary evidence of this identification.

[Leslie Mahler]

On Friday, November 15, 2019 at 6:58:57 PM UTC-8, ache...@gmail.com wrote:
> So here’s a fun supposition that perhaps someone can help to prove or disprove- What follows is a draft hypothesis, and should not be taken for a confirmed lineage. The incentive for pursuing this came from the Visitation of Suffolk of 1561 (pg. 8) in the preamble to the Blodwell of Thurlow pedigree(a link follows). When a purported pedigree includes both a Bardolph and a Drury, any decent Plantagenet researcher tends to get interested?! Particularly true if that researcher descends from the potentially Royal immigrant who appears to be associated.
> As a disclaimer, I’ve already discovered several provable lines of descent for my mother from Percival Lowell (x2), Rose Stoughton, Elizabeth Taylor (md. Robert Tufton Mason), and Elizabeth (Marshall) Lewis- so I really don’t have much to lose by failure here. Even though I grew up as a 3rd generation Ulster-Scot American, I long ago had to accept that Edward “Longshanks” is my ancestor. I’m over it…! My apologies in advance for any errors or bad links-
>
> Proposed lineage:
> 1) Edward I of England & Eleanor of Castille
> 2) Joan Plantagenet of Acre & Sir Gilbert de Clare, 7th Earl Gloucester & 6th Earl Hereford
> 3) Elizabeth de Clare, 11th Lady Clare & Sir Roger Damory, Lord Damory
> 4) Elizabeth d’Amory & Sir John Bardolf, 3rd Baron of Wormegay, Hertfordshire
> 5) Sir Edmund Bardolf of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Katherine Pelitot (dau. Sir Philip Pelitot- her 1st husband being Sir Ralph Boteler of Pulreback sharing a son Philip Boteler)
> 6) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Joan
> 7) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. & Miss Wentworth (his sister Maud md. Sir George Josselyn)
> 8) Mary Bardolf & Henry Blodwell (her sister Maud may have married Thomas Hoo)
> 9) John Blodwell, Gent. & Anne Drurye (dau. Sir Wm. Drury of Besthorpe)
> 10) Frances Blodwell & Thomas Hildersham, Esq.
> 11) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex; (m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell
> 12) Thomas Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Sarah Culverwell (1/2 or perhaps step siblings it seems)
> 13) John Barfoot, Gent. of Lambourne & Joane
> 14) Sarah Barfoot & Thomas Wiggin (son of Capt. Thos. Wiggin who settled Dover, NH & Catherine Whiting)
> 15) Catherine Wiggin & Robert Tufton Mason… and on … and on down to me.
>
> The first 4 generations are firmly established down to Elizabeth d’Amory who wed John Bardolph the 3rd Baron Wormegay, and then the hunt begins…
>
> 5) Sir Edmund Bardolf & Katherine Pelitot (Memorial Brasses at Watton Church, Hertfordshire)
>
> https://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p1121.htm#i33662
>
> I’m not sure what source Brent Reusch used here to determine that the 3rd Lord Wormegay had a son Edmund, but they certainly had a place and time in common…
>
> https://archive.org/details/memorialbrassesi00andr/page/48
>
> Indeed Sir John Bardolph, 3rd Baron Wormegay did hold Watton in his lifetime, and it continued on through a few generations of his heirs until 1508, so it is perhaps not too unreasonable that the Edmund Bardolph who married Katherine Pelitot and is buried at Watton Church is in fact the 3rd Baron Wormegay’s son, or at least a close relation.
>
> https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/herts/vol3/pp158-165
>
> From the brasses of Watton church link preceding, we also find on the floor of the south aisle that we have
>
> 6) Edmund Bardolf, Esq. of Watton, Woodhall, Hertfordshire & Joan
> Presuming that the 2nd Edmund Bardolph’s missing brass effigy at Watton Church that is mentioned, is a son of, rather than a father of this couple, we may have a link to
>
> 7) Edmond Bardolfe, Esq. of Hertfordshire (Visitation of Suffolk 1561 for Blodwell of Thurlow) & Miss Wentworth?
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=EycAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=Thomas+Hildersham+Frances+Blodwell&source=bl&ots=AVvrtxgOKn&sig=ACfU3U0dTnF2kTzQ2Qhss5dH3AMdOHUPww&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjoku3X-
>
> OzlAhUHvlkKHQmzDOQQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Thomas%20Hildersham%20Frances%20Blodwell&f=false
>
> 8) Mary Bardolf & Henry Blodwell (did her sister Maud married Thomas Hoo, thereby revealing perhaps the surname of her mother as Wentworth?)
>
> https://archive.org/details/visitationsofher222732cook/page/n19
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=NcFCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA204&lpg=PA204&dq=Maud+Bardolph+Thomas+Hoo&source=bl&ots=BEjTt4RTVo&sig=ACfU3U3LD3JEmAP2bHNlrzgO6jGoWpyujw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjrnPKGzu3lAhUlhOAKHZ3XDns4ChDoATAGegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=Maud%20Bardolph%20Thomas%20Hoo&f=false
>
> 9) John Blodwell, Gent. & Anne Drurye
>
> 10) Frances Blodwell & Thomas Hildersham, Esq.
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=NFkMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA294&lpg=PA294&dq=Winifred+Hildersham+Ezekiel+Culverwell&source=bl&ots=x4KtRKY3dv&sig=ACfU3U2IwmfBKYgtKcJCf8eDk7pkY_KCCg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjL2YSo-
>
> OzlAhXGo1kKHQ9mAPUQ6AEwBXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=Winifred%20Hildersham%20Ezekiel%20Culverwell&f=false
>
> 11) Winifred Hildersham (m1) Edward Barefoot, Gent. of Lambourne, Essex (md. 3 Jan 1581/2 London)
>
> https://archive.org/details/londonmarriageli00fost/page/n67
>
> (m2) Rev. Ezekiel Culverwell (md. 20 Oct 1598 London)
>
> https://archive.org/details/allegationsform01londgoog/page/n283
>
> 12) Thomas Barfoote, Gent. of Lambourne (bp. 24 Jun 1586 Lambourne, Essex) & Sarah Culverwell (Primary Beneficiary & executrix of her father’s will)
>
> https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA2
>
> Wikitree source citation- Will of Ezekiel Culverwell of London. 1631. London Metropolitan Archives and Guildhall Library Manuscripts Section, Clerkenwell, London, England; Reference Number: Ms 9172/40; Will Number: 73.
>
> https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Culverwell-4#_note-5
>
> 13) John Barfoot, Gent. (bp. 17 Apr 1616 Lambourne, Essex, d. 1671 Lambourne, Essex) & Joane
>
> https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015008291869&view=1up&seq=344
>
> https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA8
>
> https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=eQQVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA47
>
> 14) Sarah Barfoot (sister of Dep. Gov. /Gov. NH Walter Barfoot)& Thomas Wiggin Jr.
>
> https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=4knyCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PT93.w.3.0.0.0.1
>
> Unviewed possible source: P. Morant’s, The history and antiquities of the county of Essex, Vol 1, pg.172 for Barfoot Pedigree (Anyone have access to it?)
>
> Though I realize that these are not all primary sources and visitations are occasionally exaggerated, I felt as though this potential linage might be worthy of further scrutiny, and thought I’d share the fun.
>
> Any collaborative assistance that anyone may offer to help fill in blanks would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
> Richard D. Acheson, Jr.
> ach...@roadrunner.com
> Maine, USA



The parish register for Lambourne, Essex, does not have baptismal records
for Walter Barfoot, with sisters Mary and Sarah:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Parish_Register_of_Lambourne_Essex/eQQVAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Lambourne+Essex+parish+registers&printsec=frontcover

What evidence is there for the parentage of this family group ?

Leslie (Lmahler at att.net)

[wjhonson]

This book called Our Royal Titled Ancestors... is worthless

On the issue of Winnifred Hildersham we have

1) that she is referred to as the "half-sister" of Arthur
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Proceedings_of_the_Massachusetts_Histori/NFkMAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA294&printsec=frontcover

and her marriage to edward barfoot which does not name her parents

So the problem is that Frances Blodwell seems to not be her mother.

[ache...@gmail.com]

Not a primary source obviously, but

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3499686&view=1up&seq=239

[ache...@gmail.com]

This Fine suggests that Mary Bardolph the wife of Henry Blodwell, daughter of "an" Edmund Bardolph in the Blodwell pedigree, is the daughter of the Edmund Bardolph "of Watton".

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=msu.31293024017927&view=1up&seq=33&q1=blodwell%20bardolf%20watton

Refresher on the Henry Blodwell Mary Bardolf connection in the Blodwell pedigree preamble

https://archive.org/details/visitationsofsuf00harvuoft/page/8/mode/2up?q=blodwell+bardolfe

There's evidently an interconnected Rogers family as well.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Lists_and_Indexes/oO4MAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=edmond+bardolf+watton&pg=PA36&printsec=frontcover

Hopefully the links work. I hope you're all doing well.