John Rhodes

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

John Rhodes was a Quaker cordwainer who immigrated to Pennsylvania by 1686. His Wikitree profile is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jessop-10.
He is often claimed to have been the same as the son of Sir Francis Rhodes and Elizabeth Lascelles and to have married Elizabeth Jessup. However, https://books.google.pt/books?id=LKIKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA449&lpg=PA449&dq=Simon+Jessop+and+Mary&source=bl&ots=4WJXx4hhjJ&sig=JHv_qRp0eLoNWFZB3g3ks9UJn4E&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Simon%20Jessop%20&f=false shows this to be a different man who had two sons who immigrated to the colonies. https://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00377474&tree=LEO shows his wife as Jason, instead of Jessup. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4242206?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents shows the same. Could someone, please, help me sort out this mess?

[Will Johnson]

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:08:28 PM UTC-7, paulorica...@gmail.com wrote:
> John Rhodes was a Quaker cordwainer who immigrated to Pennsylvania by 1686. His Wikitree profile is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jessop-10.
> He is often claimed to have been the same as the son of Sir Francis Rhodes and Elizabeth Lascelles and to have married Elizabeth Jessup. However, https://books.google.pt/books?id=LKIKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA449&lpg=PA449&dq=Simon+Jessop+and+Mary&source=bl&ots=4WJXx4hhjJ&sig=JHv_qRp0eLoNWFZB3g3ks9UJn4E&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Simon%20Jessop%20&f=false shows this to be a different man who had two sons who immigrated to the colonies. https://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00377474&tree=LEO shows his wife as Jason, instead of Jessup. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4242206?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents shows the same. Could someone, please, help me sort out this mess?

So it seems likely that the son of a wealthy family with lands and titles, would be a cordwainer?

[pj.ev...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:08:28 PM UTC-7, paulorica...@gmail.com wrote:

> John Rhodes was a Quaker cordwainer who immigrated to Pennsylvania by 1686. His Wikitree profile is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jessop-10.
> He is often claimed to have been the same as the son of Sir Francis Rhodes and Elizabeth Lascelles and to have married Elizabeth Jessup. However, https://books.google.pt/books?id=LKIKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA449&lpg=PA449&dq=Simon+Jessop+and+Mary&source=bl&ots=4WJXx4hhjJ&sig=JHv_qRp0eLoNWFZB3g3ks9UJn4E&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Simon%20Jessop%20&f=false shows this to be a different man who had two sons who immigrated to the colonies. https://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00377474&tree=LEO shows his wife as Jason, instead of Jessup. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4242206?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents shows the same. Could someone, please, help me sort out this mess?

Probably not the son of a titled family. It's not an unusual family name. (Go with Genealogics; it should have sources.)

[Will Johnson]

By the way, the John Rodes, who was the son of
Francis /Rodes/ of Barlborough, co Derby; esq; Knt 1641; Bnt 1641
by his wife
Elizabeth /Lascelles/
Sole heiress of her father "aged 19" 1614

was himself baptised
25 Nov 1624
Worksop, co Nott (Batch P00862-1 wj)

[John Higgins]

Genealogics cites RD500 for this descent, which is from Edward III. RD900 pp. 342-3 continues to show this descent - and cites sources for it. The question of Elizabeth Jason versus Elizabeth Jessup doesn't affect the descent

[John Higgins]

The Wikitree pedigree that Paulo cited has confused John Rodes of Sturton with John Rhoads [sic] of Winegreaves. And it was John Rodes' son Charles, not John himself, who emigrated to America. Note that the Wikitree pedigree does NOT make John Rhoads the son of Sir Francis Rhodes [or Rodes] and Elizabeth Lascelles.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

I am aware of the unlikelihood of that and, actually, considered mentioning that.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Still, who waa the wife of John Rhoes of Sturton, Elizabeth Jessup or Elizabeth Jason? Also, do we know who was the wife of John Rhodes of Winegreaves?

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

However, note the Burke's does make a member of the family a line draper.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Rhoads#Early_life_and_family says John was from a prominent family but was persecuted after becoming a Quaker

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Oops, that Jstor, not the Burke's.

[taf]

On Friday, September 24, 2021 at 3:30:05 AM UTC-7, paulorica...@gmail.com wrote:

> > However, note the Burke's does make a member of the family a line draper.
> Oops, that Jstor, not the Burke's.

How about trying that again. JSTOR is not a source, it is a web host of published periodicals. Citing JSTOR is like citing a library. What journal article were you looking at?

taf

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

I linked to it in my original post.
BTW, does anyone here have access to "The Rhodes Family in the Americas"?https://archive.org/details/rhodesfamilyinam113rhoa shows the first pages, which list the different Rhodes familied of ghe US and their founders.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Here is a Jstor article that discusses John Rhodes of Winegreaves but not his parentage, resd
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41943823?read-now=1&refreqid=excelsior%3A18df99ab2bfa59281661338ae2ab1439&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

[Will Johnson]

On Friday, September 24, 2021 at 5:46:00 AM UTC-7, paulorica...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here is a Jstor article that discusses John Rhodes of Winegreaves but not his parentage, resd
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/41943823?read-now=1&refreqid=excelsior%3A18df99ab2bfa59281661338ae2ab1439&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

I have fixed the Wikipedia article, which made it seem like this *specific* family was notable, which it does not state. It states that the family, in a general way, was "of note" meaning the surname itself. Not this exact family.

[John Higgins]

The VMHB article that you cited via JSTOR says that John Rodes, the son of John Rodes of Sturton and Elizabeth Jason, was a linen draper - not a "line" draper.

[John Higgins]

Do you have any source that says that John Rodes of Sturton was married to anyone other than Elizabeth Jason? And your Wikitree citation says that John Rhoads (or Rhodes) of Winegreaves was married to Elizabeth Jessop. The distinction seems pretty clear....

[John Higgins]

Obviously we all have access to this book via the Internet Archive. The first few pages it clear it clear that there were two or more families named Rodes/Rhodes/Rhoads who emigrated to America. The chart that appears to claim that some or all were somehow related to one another seems to be an invention.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Oops, that was a small typo.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

The Burke's link shows the wife of John Rhodes of Sturton as Elizabeth Jessup.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

The Internet Archive only has the first few pages.

[John Higgins]

The three parts of "The Rhodes Family in America" that seem to have been published have been digitized by the FHL. You can (supposedly) find them at the following links (one for each issue);
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/2819355
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/2819356
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/2819357
To view and download the files, you need to login with a (free) Family Search account.

However, it appears that all three links lead to the same publication: vol. 1 no. 1. Apparently a cataloging error at the FHL

The chart which appeared in the Internet Archive item you cited is apparently held separately by the FHL, according to this catalog entry:
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/324787?availability=Family%20History%20Library
It has been digitized, but it can be viewed only at the FHL or at a Family Histry Center - per the icon under "Format" at the bottom of the catalog entry.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

A sexta-feira, 24 de setembro de 2021 à(s) 01:08:28 UTC+1, paulorica...@gmail.com escreveu:
> John Rhodes was a Quaker cordwainer who immigrated to Pennsylvania by 1686. His Wikitree profile is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jessop-10.
> He is often claimed to have been the same as the son of Sir Francis Rhodes and Elizabeth Lascelles and to have married Elizabeth Jessup. However, https://books.google.pt/books?id=LKIKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA449&lpg=PA449&dq=Simon+Jessop+and+Mary&source=bl&ots=4WJXx4hhjJ&sig=JHv_qRp0eLoNWFZB3g3ks9UJn4E&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Simon%20Jessop%20&f=false shows this to be a different man who had two sons who immigrated to the colonies. https://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00377474&tree=LEO shows his wife as Jason, instead of Jessup. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4242206?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents shows the same. Could someone, please, help me sort out this mess?

I made a mistake. I linked to Elizabeth Jessup's profile instead of that of John Rhodes of Winegreaves, https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Rhodes-2091.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

In addition, according to https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Rhodes-4175, Charles Rhodes of Virginia migrated as an indentured servant.

[John Higgins]

Just to keep these two families straight, Charles Rhodes the immigrant to Virginia was the son of John Rhodes of Sturton and Elizabeth Jason, not of John Rhodes of Winegreaves and Elizabeth Jessop. Your posts keep switching between the two families. :-)

Can you determine what the source is for the statement in the Wikitree profile that Charles was an indentured servant? I can't....

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

The Wikitree profile cites "The Arnolds and allied families".

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

A sexta-feira, 24 de setembro de 2021 à(s) 05:51:54 UTC+1, jhigg...@yahoo.com escreveu:

Could you, please, tell me what are Roberts's sources? His books are unavailable in Portugal

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

A sábado, 25 de setembro de 2021 à(s) 19:25:13 UTC+1, jhigg...@yahoo.com escreveu:

Also, do we have any clues as to the parentage of John Rhodes of Winegreaves?

[John Higgins]

This appears to be a book by Janis Kerr Arnold, published in 1976 and available at fewer than a dozen libraries. It is apparently available also via Heritage Quest for those who have access to that.

[John Higgins]

The likeliest source cited in RD900 (as well as RD500) for the Rodes family is Joseph Hunter's Familiae Minorum Gentium, vol. 2, pp. 585-6, which contains a lengthy pedigree of the Rodes family. It was published in 1894-96 as vol. 38 of The Harleian Society's Visitation Series and is available in digital form via the FHL at this site (download vol. 38):
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/422605?availability=Family%20History%20Library

Since the the work was published so long ago, it's quite likely available via either Google Books or the Internet Archive - search for the title given above.

[John Higgins]

At least per the Wikitree pedigree you cited, his parentage is unknown. Have you done any searching for him?

[William Erbes]

> Since the the work was published so long ago, it's quite likely available via either Google Books or the Internet Archive

Yes, at https://www.google.com/books/edition/Familiae_minorum_gentium/Sm1KAAAAYAAJ?hl=en

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

Early Maltby: With Some Roades History and that of the Maulsby Family in America, Descendants of William and Mary Maltby, Emigrants from Nottinghamshire,England to Pennsylvania deals with this issue and concludes that John Rhodes of Winegreaves and John Rhodes of Sturton were different but related. Read https://archive.org/details/earlymaltby00barn/page/325/mode/1up.

[paulorica...@gmail.com]

All my research across the Internet leads me to doubt John Rhodes of Winegreaves was married to Elizabeth Jessup at all. The Burke's pedigree states that was the wife of John Rhodes of Sturton was Elizabeth Jessup and Familiae Minorum Gentium shows Elizabeth Jason's father to be Simon. I suspect Jason is just an error. We do know, though, that the wife of John Rhodes of Winegreaves was named Elizabeth. https://archive.org/details/shorthistorygene00patt/page/10/mode/2up has a different version in which the husband of Elizabeth Jason was son of Sir Francis Rhodes and Elizabeth Lascelles while the son of his brother Clifton was husband od Elizabeth Jessup.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

Does anyone else have any more thoughts on this?

[John Higgins]

On Tuesday, September 28, 2021 at 12:40:59 PM UTC-7, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
> Does anyone else have any more thoughts on this?

This new source that you've cited seems to almost exactly follow the Rodes pedigrees given in Burke's Commoners 3:563ff and Burke's Extinct Baronetcies p. 448ff. In fact I'd suggest that it was copied from one of these two source - although it doesn't specify its source AFAIK. The Rodes pedigree in Familiae Minorum Gentium 2:583 also matches BC and BEB, although it lops off the first 5 generations of the pedigree and starts with John Rodes of Staveley Woodthorpe who married Attelina Hewet.

(I'm setting aside the issue of the surname of Elizabeth the wife of John Rodes of Sturton, which i don't think has been resolved.)

The single significant difference in this new account is that it makes John Rodes of Sturton (whose son Charles emigrated to Virginia) the son of Clifton Rodes, rather than his brother as the other three sources indicate. (And the other three sources say that Clifton's son John d. without issue.) Is there any reason that we should consider this new source more reliable than the other three sources?

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

I didn't say we should consider it more reliable.
Regardless, what do you think of the argument of the Maulsby family book I linked to that John Rhodes of Winegreaves was related to John Rhodes of Sturton? The Rhodes family book also states there is no reason to doubt John Rhodes of Winegreaves was descended from Justice Francis Rhodes.

[John Higgins]

Let me rephrase the question more exactly: Do you feel that the new source you presented, "A short history and genealogy of the English family Rodes" (1929) presents a more accurate pedigree of the Rodes family than the other three sources mentioned - and specifically with respect to the placement of John Rodes of Sturton (whose son Charles emigrated to Virginia)? If so, why?

I'll separately provide my thoughts on the the Rhodes/Rhoades pedigree in Ella Barnard'e "Early Maltby",

[John Higgins]

I'll start my comments on the Rhodes family narrative in the "Early Maltby" book by asking you this question:

Where exactly in that book do you see the statement that "there is no reason to doubt John Rhodes of Winegreaves was descended from Justice Francis Rhodes"?

In fact, I think the author makes exactly the opposite argument: that John Roads [or Roades] of Ripley, while being a fellow Quaker with Sir John Rodes, 4th Bt., of Barlbourgh, cannot be shown to be the same person as John Rodes of Sturton - and there is presently no other known connection between the two families (see. pp. 325-326 and also p. 329.)

The book also mentions (p. 330) that two sons of John Roades of Ripley are among the early emigrants to Pennsylvania. It also makes a satisfactory case (pp. 331ff) that John Roades of Ripley is the same person as John Roades of Winegreaves, who also went to Pennsylvania. But still doesn't indicate a connection the Rodes famil of Barlborough, other than the surname being the same.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

In page 326, it says "We then must search further back in the
pedigree for the ancestry of John of Ripley.

Possibly we may find it in the next generation, and that it may be
from Henry or George, buried at Barlboro, 27 Dec, 1665. Or in the pre-
vious generation, and from one of the three younger sons of Francis, the
Judge — Peter, Robert, or Francis." The following pages also discuss how John Rhodes of Winegreaves was from the same are as trhe Rhodes family of Barlborough and they were both Quakers at the sams time.

[John Higgins]

"We then must search further back in the pedigree for the ancestry of John of Ripley" is quite different than "there is no reason to doubt John Rhodes of Winegreaves was descended from Justice Francis Rhodes".

I ask again: does the latter statement appear in the "Early Maltby" book - anywhere?

The relationship MAY be possible, but "there is no reason to doubt..." is going a bit far.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

It's a paraphrase of a statement in thr Rhodes Family Book.

[John Higgins]

Which specific "Rhodes Family Book" are you talking about? I've lost track with all the books that have been discussed here. Can you re-post the link to the specific book in question? I don't believe it's this book, which doesn't mention John Rhoads of Winegreave at all.
https://archive.org/details/shorthistorygene00patt

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

It's https://archive.org/details/rhodesfamilyinam113rhoa.

[Will Johnson]

John and Peter Rodes, mentioning their father Francis deceased

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5706908

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5706550

[Will Johnson]

That Godfrey Rodes of Great Houghton was already an adult by 1591

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/a2470fdb-93be-41c7-87f8-6f73205d2e92

[Will Johnson]

The estate of Francis Rodes who died 7 Jan 1588/9

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/1d082eff-8129-47c0-831d-4c9bab4e580a

[Will Johnson]

That Francis was an adult by 1562

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/991b7f24-bca8-4877-80f8-4d529c6172c9

[Will Johnson]

I just want to here point out, that the oft repeated claim that Francis' *father* was that John who was Sheriff co Derby inn 1591 cannot stand.

It appears far more likely that that Sheriff was Francis' *son* also named John

[Will Johnson]

Francis as Gent here in 1564 dealing with the Manor of Rowmley

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/3db23e4e-2d84-486a-8cb2-fdc1ba2e191c

[Will Johnson]

We know that Francis Rodes mother was named Attelina, or Ateline
And we know that Francis is supposed to by his last wife had a daughter also of that name

https://archive.org/details/earlymaltby00barna/page/307/mode/1up

So here is that daughter's will

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/36122be5-91d7-4fa1-a022-c3fd206ca2c4

[Will Johnson]

Here is a curious one where Godfrey is called "son and heir"

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/1e86b5a7-61b6-45c6-bb0e-a364f43c61cf

I believe this is referring to Godfrey's mother Mary Charlton's inheritence
so he would then be the heir of his mother to her portions

[Will Johnson]

It seems part of the fallout for the treasonous activities of the Lords Dacre of the North
was that Francis purchased their manor of Great Houghton

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/3dc5196a-b342-4b3d-a9ca-112eeef133e2

[Will Johnson]

A more specific date for the marriage of Godfrey Rodes to Anne Lewknor

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/2525e03c-3129-416b-b276-f5221dbec22d

[Will Johnson]

We have seen that Francis is supposed to have had a son Francis "aged 12", John "aged 7" and Peter "aged 3"

And the backflips people have done to assume perhaps that Francis should be there called aged 2...

I wonder

It's clear from his will that he did have two sons named Francis
I wonder if he didn't actually have this older son, and disinherited him in favor of John


https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/a2eaa934-7c03-4ce3-94ee-c40b15c87e83

[Will Johnson]

It's possible neither 12 nor 2 is correct, and a review of the actual manuscript might show the ages assigned to the two eldest sons, and themselves flipped. So it should be JOHN who is 12 and FRANCIS who is 7

At any rate, it does seem clear from this below that Francis was older than Peter

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/05efb205-7896-40dd-8e5f-7f456c49fbec

[Will Johnson]

That John Rodes first wife Anne Benson, was the daughter of George Benson of Hugill by his wife Elizabeth Braithwaite, and that George was dead, Elizabeth was living, and a more exact date for the marriage of Anne

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/024aebfb-184e-48d1-928b-802b49bfd339

[John Higgins]

Thanks for posting this link.

The author can easily assert that "there seems no reason to doubt that John [Rhoads] of Winegreave was descended from Francis Rhodes", but that's just an assertion and no evidence has yet been found to support that assertion - as the author himself admits immediately after that assertion.

Despite all the talking over a century or more, no one has yet been able to establish a confirmed connection between John Rhoads of Winegreave and the Rodes family of Barlborough. I don't see that any further progress has been made in this thread - except perhaps to highlight the flaws in some of the earlier attempts.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

A quinta-feira, 30 de setembro de 2021 à(s) 18:00:28 UTC+1, wjhons...@gmail.com escreveu:
> That John Rodes first wife Anne Benson, was the daughter of George Benson of Hugill by his wife Elizabeth Braithwaite, and that George was dead, Elizabeth was living, and a more exact date for the marriage of Anne
>
> https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/024aebfb-184e-48d1-928b-802b49bfd339

Thanks for all your research on this, Will.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

> > > > > "We then must search further back in the pedigree for the anc estry of John of Ripley" is quite different than "there is no reason to doubt John Rhodes of Winegreaves was descended from Justice Francis Rhodes".

> > > > >
> > > > > I ask again: does the latter statement appear in the "Early Maltby" book - anywhere?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The relationship MAY be possible, but "there is no reason to doubt..." is going a bit far.
> > > > It's a paraphrase of a statement in thr Rhodes Family Book.
> > > Which specific "Rhodes Family Book" are you talking about? I've lost track with all the books that have been discussed here. Can you re-post the link to the specific book in question? I don't believe it's this book, which doesn't mention John Rhoads of Winegreave at all.
> > > https://archive.org/details/shorthistorygene00patt
> > It's https://archive.org/details/rhodesfamilyinam113rhoa.
> Thanks for posting this link.
>
> The author can easily assert that "there seems no reason to doubt that John [Rhoads] of Winegreave was descended from Francis Rhodes", but that's just an assertion and no evidence has yet been found to support that assertion - as the author himself admits immediately after that assertion.
>
> Despite all the talking over a century or more, no one has yet been able to establish a confirmed connection between John Rhoads of Winegreave and the Rodes family of Barlborough. I don't see that any further progress has been made in this thread - except perhaps to highlight the flaws in some of the earlier attempts.

Where did you read the author stated there was no evidence? My reading of the account in page 6 doesn't show that. The author just states there wasn't a proven link.
Regarding evidence, as I said earlier, they were from the same area and were both Quakers at the same time.
As the Maulsby family book stated in pages 325-26, BTW, as the Barlborough family appears to have been non-conformist before becoming Quaker, there is a lack of recods and it may be impossible to prove a link.
However, in page 329, it also stated there would be a book by Joseph Rhodes that could shed light on this. Was it ever published? From my search, apparently not.

[John Higgins]

That was MY paraphrase from The Rhodes Family Book - you're not the only one who can paraphrase!! The author's sentence actually reads " but at just what point in the lineage his first ancestor is found has not yet been found". That says to me that, at the date the book was written, there was no evidence to support the linkage - I don't see that further research has altered that conclusion. Yes, there's circumstantial evidence that may SUGGEST that there's a linkage. But it's just that - circumstantial.

If you want to keep beating this dead horse, feel free to do so. Personally, I see no point in it.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

I don't. I just wanted clarification on what you said. Thanks.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

.
The only question I want to reevaluate is whether the wife of John Rhodes of Sturton was Elizabeth Jessup or Elizabeth Jason. I am inclined to think it was Jessup and Jason was just a misreading. Both Elizabeth Jessup and Elizabeth Jason are supposed to have been daughters of a Simon from Nottinghamshire and Elizabeth Jessup actually has a pedigree at Wikitree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Jessop-Family-Tree-10.

[John Higgins]

On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 4:21:10 PM UTC-7, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
> .
> The only question I want to reevaluate is whether the wife of John Rhodes of Sturton was Elizabeth Jessup or Elizabeth Jason. I am inclined to think it was Jessup and Jason was just a misreading. Both Elizabeth Jessup and Elizabeth Jason are supposed to have been daughters of a Simon from Nottinghamshire and Elizabeth Jessup actually has a pedigree at Wikitree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Jessop-Family-Tree-10.

Oh, so you want to start beating this dead horse again…. There are a number of reasons why your latest conclusion doesn’t hold water – at least if you choose to cite the Wikitree pedigree as the basis for your conclusion.

The Wikitree pedigree explicitly says that Elizabeth Jessup married John Rhodes of Winegreaves, not John Rodes of Sturton. I think we’ve pretty clearly established that these two men are not the same person.

Also, the Wikitree pedigree assigns the supposed John Rodes of Sturton (if he is the same man as John Rhodes of Winegreaves) far more children than are given in other sources we’ve previously discussed (e.g., Burke’s Commoners, Burke’s Extinct Baronetages, Hunter’s Familiae Minorium Gentium). The Wikitree pedigree seems to be a clumsy attempt to combine two different families: that of John Rhodes of Winegreaves and that of John Rodes of Sturton. And the pedigree is very unevenly sourced – most entries are unsourced.

If you really want to pursue the issue of whether the wife of John Rodes of Sturton was Elizabeth Jessup or Elizabeth Jason, this faulty Wikitree pedigree is definitely not the place to start (if there is indeed any place to start…).

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

I know Wikitree has Elizabeth Jessup as wife of John Rhodes of Winegreaves. However, the Burke's shows her as the wife of John Rhodes of Sturton and her Wikitree pedigree includes people born in Sturton.

[Will Johnson]

Wikitree is managed, and curated, by people who sometimes have absolutely no clue what they are doing.
Wikitree is not a reliable source, and should never be cited as a source of any individual fact whatsoever.

Wikitree does have sources within it. Those sources are conflicting, or silent on the issue at hand.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

The Wikitree pedigree shows Elizabeth Jessup having ancestors in Sturton, which is a plausible pedigree for a wife of John Rhodes of Sturton. The Burke's does show her father as Simon Jessup.

[John Higgins]

Yes, the Wikitree pedigree does show some of the purported ancestors of Elizabeth Jessop [not Jessup] go have been born in Sturton. Specifically, her supposed paternal grandparents Francis Jessop and Frances White and also Frances' parents Alexander White and Eleanor Smith are all said to have been born in Sturton (although you should check the sources for these individuals).

However...look at the sources for Elizabeth Jessop's parents Simon Jessop and Mary White. For Simon there are NO sources at all, and for Mary only BEB is mentioned - and BEB (sub Rodes of Barlborough) doesn't mention Mary at all, only Simon. So, at present you have no basis at all for the connection of Simon Jessop to his supposed parents Francis Jessop and Frances White - unless you should happen to be lucky enough to find such support in the sources given for his parents, which i doubt you will.

So, just because the pedigree SAYS there are connections between Elizabeth Jessop (whose husband John Rodes lived in Sturton) and some other individuals who were born in Sturton does NOT mean there actually IS a connection between these individuals. You have to check every single link in the pedigree. You should never accept a Wikitree tree at face value without checking it thoroughly.

[Johnny Brananas]

Eleanor Smith and husband Alexander White of Sturton are in this pedigree in A. R. Maddison's _Lincolnshire Pedigrees_:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Lincolnshire_Pedigrees_P_Z/06NCAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=maddison+%22alexander+white%22+smith&pg=PA899&printsec=frontcover

See also:
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Lincolnshire_Pedigrees_P_Z/06NCAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=william+smith+of+honnington+porter&pg=PA791&printsec=frontcover

[John Higgins]

Here are the two books cited as sources for Francis Jessop in the Wikitree pedigree:
https://archive.org/details/edwardjessupofwe00jesu
https://archive.org/details/jessupfamilycont00jess

Francis Jessop is discussed on pp. 22ff of the 1st book and on pp. 20ff of the 2nd book. You really don't need to read the 2nd book, as it simply copies the same information verbatim from the 1st book - and cites the 1st book!

The bottom line is that neither book mentions Simon Jessop as a son of Francis Jessop by either of his two wives. So you'll have to look elsewhere for support for the connection of Simon Jessop to Francis Jessop that is stated by the Wikitree pedigree.

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

Thanks for your research on this. I didn't say I trusted the Wikitree pedigree. I just said it looked plausible. Anyways, the Burke's does show John Rhodes of Sturton's wife as Elizabeth Jessup. Either way, I really doubt she was John Rhodes of Winegreaves' wife. The primary sources cited in the Maulsby family book just make his wife Elizabeth without mentioning any surname.

[John Higgins]

The Wikitree pedigree is “plausible” to the extent that (1) it identifies Elizabeth Jessop as the daughter of Simon Jessop; (2) it identifies Elizabeth Jessop as the wife of “a” John Rodes (although it equates and combines John Rodes of Sturton with John Rhoads of Winegreaves); and (3) it assigns the 4 known children of John Rodes of Sturton to Elizabeth Jessop (although it also assigns the various children of John Rhoads of Winegreaves to her). Beyond that, the pedigree is either unsupported (the ancestry of Simon Jessop) or downright wrong (in assigning two separate sets of children to Elizabeth Jessop).

In the three points where the pedigree is “plausible”, it does agree with Burke’s Commoners and Burke’s Extinct Baronetages – not that those two sources are paragons of accuracy. I believe the various publications on the Rodes family probably relied on BC and/or BEB if they identified Elizabeth Jessup as the wife of John Rodes.

Having probably exhausted the analysis of the Elizabeth Jessop alternative for the wife of John Rodes of Sturton, perhaps we should go back and consider more fully the Elizabeth Jason alternative as the wife of John Rodes.

In the very first post in this thread (almost two weeks ago!), you noted that Genealogics identifies the wife of John Rodes as Elisabeth Jason. https://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00377474&tree=LEO
You also cited an article in the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography which identifies Elizabeth as the daughter of Simon Jason of Etial, Staffordshire.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4242206?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
This article is also available on Google Books. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Virginia_Magazine_of_History_and_Bio/fWqgwNUF4TYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=simon+jason+edial&pg=PA419&printsec=frontcover
Gnealogics cited RD500 as its source for Elizabeth Jason, and that identification is carried forward to RD900, the latest version of the RD series. All the RD books, as mentioned before, cite Hunter's Familiae Minorum Gentium, vol. 2, pp. 585-6, which identifies the wife of John Rodes as Elizabeth, the daughter of Simon Jason of Edial (sic), Staffordshire. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Familiae_minorum_gentium/Sm1KAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=jason

I’ve now found an additional source – independent from all the works on the Rodes family – which identifies Elizabeth as the daughter of Simon Jasson [sic] of Edyall, Staffordshire, and the wife of John Rodes, the son of Sir Francis Rodes, Bart., of “Barleborough”. This is the Visitations of Staffordshire taken in 1614 and 1663/63 (H. Sydney Grazebrook, ed.), p. 188. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Heraldic_Visitations_of_Staffordshir/gfwcAAAAYAAJ?q=&gbpv=1#f=false
(BTW according to the GENUKI Gazetteer, the standard form of the name of that locality is now Edial)

At the bottom of the first page of the Jasson pedigree, there is a fairly long note on Simon Jasson. It has a summary of his will, with a list of the people who are mentioned in the will – including his granddaughter Elizabeth Rodes This mention of a granddaughter named Elizabeth Rodes is, for me, pretty conclusive evidence that Elizabeth Jason, not Elizabeth Jessup, was the wife of John Rodes of Sturton.

What do you think?

[Paulo Ricardo Canedo]

Thanks for this. I agree with you. I should note again I doubt Elizabeth Jessup was wife of John Rhodes of Winegreaves. As I said, thr primary sources in the Maulsby family book just make his wife an Elizabeth.

[Will Johnson]

Just to give the tiniest smidge of chronology to this purported line

Both Alexander White and his wife Eleanor (Smythe) left wills, she having died a few years after

Their "youngest sons" Thomas, Roger, Edward were "not yet 13" at the time of her 1599 will
And these three were living at the time of Alexander's 1595 Will

[John Higgins]

I agree with you that there is no reason to conclude that Elizabeth, daughter of Simon Jessop was the wife of John Rhoads of Winegreaves - yet another flaw in the Wikitree pedigree of Elizabeth Jessop.

AKAIK the earliest mention we have of Elizabeth, daughter of Simon Jessop is in the early Burke's publications - Burke's Commoners and Burke's Extinct Baronetages. These two publications almost certainly came from the same source - a pedigree that was either solicited from or contributed by a family, probably without any supporting documentation. So we really have no evidence that Elizabeth Jessop and her father Simon actually existed. It seems likely that some [Rodes?] family member simply substituted the Jessop surname for the Jason [or Jasson] one.

I'm glad that this long thread has reached a satisfactory conclusion regarding the wife of John Rodes of Sturton - even if the identity of the wife of John Rhoads of Winegreaves is still unresolved.

[John Higgins]

"AKAIK" should be "AFAIK".