|
Post by gandolf on Dec 6, 2015 14:56:32 GMT -5
Thanks Trencom, Just wanted to check since although I can usually follow word based descriptions of relationships, I do find that when they are more complicated (like this one) with multiple people having similar names that then a pictorial type tree is more useful.
The Mary Borlase who married an unidentified Lanyon at the bottom of the tree also intrigued me and I decided to have a closer look.
Finding a marriage was easy enough - Mary Borlase married 27 Dec 1661 at Morvah to John Lanyon (per Phillamore's).
The bigger challenge is locating where the John Lanyon fits into the larger Lanyon tree, since it looks as though he is another otherwise undocumented member of the family.
I see the children of John Lanyon & Mary Borlase as including all of the following: Mary Lanyon, bapt. 01 Nov 1662 Morvah, dau of John. John Lanyon, bapt. 16 Oct 1664 Morvah, son of John. Tobias Lanyon, bapt. 16 Feb 1666 Morvah, son of John. Chesson Lanyon, bapt. 20 May 1670 Morvah, dau of John. William Lanyon, bapt. 13 Oct 1673 Morvah, son of John. Tobias Lanyon, bapt. 15 May 1675 Morvah, son of John. Jane Lanyon, bapt. 06 Jul 1678 Morvah, dau of John.
There is also another baptism that could also be theirs, but the the comment associated with it raises some doubts (not to mention the dates): Thomas, bapt. 27 Jun 1661 Sancreed, son of (Mr. John Lanyne?) & Mary. Notes - worn off. Thomas, youngest son of John Lanyne and Mary is mentioned in his father's will 1664 and Mary 1676. It is doubtful whether 1661 does not apply to the first as well as second entry after the restoration though the whole is headed 1660, and further there are no entries for 1662 Transcriber Notes - Src: Hoblyn's Transcripts. The father's name including the surname, the comment worn off, Mr. and the comment about the wills is written in a faded ink by the original transcriber. This is the second item referred to in the later part of the Register notes
Ignoring the Sancreed baptism for the moment, the remaining baptisms at Morvah suggest that the John Lanyon who married Mary Borlase is connected with the branch of the Lanyon family based at Gwinear - especially the use of the name Tobias.
I would suggest that there is a strong possibility that Mary Borlase's husband John Lanyon is probably an otherwise undocumented son of Tobias Lanyon (bapt. 1620 Gwinear) and his wife Joane Reynolds, which couple married 1646. Naming patterns suggest this possibility, but there is the slight question of the age of a child of that marriage, since even if the first born John would have only been 15 years of age at his own marriage in 1661.
A closer look at the children's names suggests an outside chance that Tobias Lanyon had a previous wife, but I think it more likely that Chesson is named after Mary Borlase's mother. This fits with a fairly standard variation of naming patterns: Mary Lanyon, named after her mother John Lanyon, named after his father (and maternal grandfather) Tobias Lanyon, named after presumed paternal grandfather Chesson Lanyon, named after presumed maternal grandmother William Lanyon, named after presumed paternal uncle
Tobias Lanyon, named after presumed paternal grandfather
Jane Lanyon, named after presumed paternal grandmother.
So if I am correct, that makes Mary Borlase a third cousin once removed to her husband John Lanyon - a not uncommon level of separation when cousins marry cousins (e.g. to keep property etc within the family)
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 6, 2015 23:00:11 GMT -5
There is yet another possibility that is perhaps much more likely than John Lanyon being a son of Tobias. I do agree however that it is likely the earlier links for this family might be found at Gwinear.
The CFHS Marriage Index as well as a typed transcript I have of early Morvah Marriages shows the following entry which no doubt will be found in the early Morvah Bishops Transcripts (Exeter):-
John Lanyon m. Ann Edwards 5th February 1625/6 Morvah
I would suggest this is more likely the parentage of the husband of Mary Borlase. The younger John may have been the eldest son and perhaps born around 1626-1630. Even if born later he would have been aged in the vicinity of 20-30 when he married in 1661.
I have made an enquiry about these early BTs which might also hopefully provide a baptism for John. As with other Parishes there will no doubt be gaps in these records and they may be none at all for the period 1635 to around 1664 but even if John's baptism cannot be found it is possible there may be records of other children.
CT
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Dec 7, 2015 7:36:50 GMT -5
Interesting possibility, since the marriage is in the right time frame to be the parents of the John who married Mary Borlase. The only problem is where to fit this John Lanyon?
I've done some further checking and confirmed that Mary Borlase (Burlace) was baptised 28 Jun 1638 at St. Just in Penwith as the daughter of John & Cheston Burlace (both named). This is consistent with other sources stating that John Burlase (son of Walter Burlase and Mary Lanyon) married Cheston Pawley, together with the marriage record (per IGI) stating that John Burlace married Cheston Pale in Sep 1637 at St. Just in Penwith
So if Mary Borlase/Burlace was around 23-24 years old in 1661 when she married John Lanyon, then it is highly likely that John was of a at least a reasonably similar age (probably over 20 years at least) and most unlikely to have been only 15 years old (although it has been known!).
There is a John Lanyon christened 1641 at Madron as the son of a John & Ann Lanyon, but I suspect it is unlikely to be related to the 1625 marriage you mention. Far more likely is a marriage in 1640 at Madron between John Lanyon and Ann Thomas. As he was christened in 1610 at Madron, a candidate for the husband of Ann Thomas could well be the John Lanyon (son of Richard Lanyon and Jane Mooring) who Vivian has marrying an unidentified Ann - the only problem is that according to Vivian the marriage occurred at Sancreed not Madron.
The other problem is that although the John Lanyon christened in 1641 is around the right age, if he is indeed from the lineage above he would seem to be the wrong John Lanyon (from the wrong branch) to be Mary Borlase's husband.
For a start, further checking seems to indicate that the earliest known evidence for a Tobias Lanyon is the man baptised in 1619, who married Joan Reynolds. And further more, that every single other Tobias Lanyon (other than the children of John & Mary) that I can currently find any evidence for all seem to be direct descendants of the first Tobias.
On that basis, it would seem to suggest that Mary Borlase's husband John Lanyon should be closely related to the first Tobias Lanyon, either as a brother, nephew or, probably the most likely, a son.
Two other remote possibilities suggest themselves, although there is no real evidence to support either of them. Firstly, perhaps there is an undocumented brother of the first Tobias called John, although he would have to have been born after 1620. Secondly, perhaps Tobias (chr. 1619) had an earlier marriage with the first wife dying young? He was certainly old enough to be marrying by around 1640 and having a son around the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 7, 2015 23:32:22 GMT -5
Once again I have spent more than an hour compiling a post and on hitting the 'Create Post' button have LOST THE WHOLE &^%$^%^ LOT!! I now have to start again and hope that I can remember everything I was trying to say. In repeating this information I will be posting periodically and will add a note (*** more to follow ***) each time until the post is finished. Okay - my first comment was that prior to compiling this message I had not read through the entire thread but instead have begun with a quote from a few days ago. On reading this I decided to have a look at a few of the many John Lanyons who have been in my database but not updated for many years. As a result I found the following marriage with the details quoted directly from the St Just Parish Register:- John Lanyon of Sancred and Mary the daughter of Charles Ellis of this Parish were marryed by License the 17th day of ffebry. 1639From this I then compiled the following list of children with entries quoted directly from the Sancreed Parish Register:- John son of John Lanyo and Mary his wife bp. 1st January 1641 (a John Lanyo(n) was also Churchwarden this year) Hugh son of John Lanyon and Mary his wife bp. 26th January 1644 Phillip daughter of John Lanyon and Mary his wife bp. 25th January 1645 William son of John Lanion and Marie his wife bp. 18th July 1647 Tobias son of John Lanion and Marey his wife bp. 24th November 1648 <========== ffrancis son of John Lanion and Mary his wife bp. 22nd February 1651 Joane ye daughter of John Lanion bp. 17th October 1653 Elizabeth daughter of John Leonyne bp. 14th March 1654 Rebackey daughter of Mr John Leonyne and Marie his wife bp. 20th February 1656 Charels sonne of Mr John Leonyne and Marie his wife was borne the 29 of August 1658 Phillip sonne to Mr John Leonine and Marie his wife was borne the 9 of October 1659 Thomas son of Mr John Lanyne and Mary his wife bp. 27th June 1661 (see OPC notes re legibility etc. for this record) The use of the name Tobias in this family once again raises the question about connections with Gwinear ..... but it also suggests the possibility that the first son might be the same John Lanyon who married Mary Borlase at Morvah in 1661/2. CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 8, 2015 1:05:36 GMT -5
From I have been able to find so far the earliest Tobias Lanyons are 1618 Gwinear son of William Lanyon Gent (and named in his PCC Will proved February 1657) and then Tobias son of John and Mary baptised at Sancreed in 1648.
Tobias son of William Lanyon of Gwinear appears to have married Susanna (MN not recorded) at Gwinear in 1646 and named sons Tobias in 1662 (d.1662) and then 1665. The next Tobias was the son of John and Mary at Morvah in 1667.
If there is any link between John Lanyon and Mary Ellis or John Lanyon and Mary Borlase to the Gwinear family then it is becoming more tenuous as William Lanyon of Gwinear did not have a son named John. His Will mentions wife Elizabeth, daughter Constance Veale, daughter Margaret Gluias, daughter Joan Trenwith and son Tobias.
CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 8, 2015 4:55:47 GMT -5
I have just spent some time reading through the 1676 Will of Mary Lanyon of St Levan and I am more convinced now that this is the family to which John Lanyon of Morvah belongs.
Mary mentions Mary and John son and daughter of son John Lanyon in her Will. St Levan and Sennen remain unknowns due to the lack of pre-1700 registers so there is certainly room for error here. However, the OPC records show only two families who might fit this scenario. The first is that of John Lanyon and Mary Borlase at Morvah with Mary and John being their first two children. The second family is that of a Johannes (John) Lanyon/Lenyne at Gulval for whom I am yet to find a marriage.
The first family is straightforward and also contains 'family' names such as Tobias whereas the Gulval family has sons Ralph and Isaac prior to the name John being used. This John was baptised in 1663 with another of the same name in 1664 and then daughter Mary in 1665/6. Unless there is a 'missing family' in the non-extant St Levan records then I suggest there can be little doubt about the link with Morvah.
Another very interesting piece of information from this Will is the naming of brother Paskow Ellis of St Just and brother-in-law William Lanyon of ILLOGAN as being responsible to see the children all receive their legacies!
This William Lanyon may be the man who left a PCC Will in 1688 in which he mentions property in St Illary. Much of his estate goes to Penberthey grandchildren and then to others of his own children and son John Lanyon is named residual legatee and executor. There is also mention of a 'kinsman' John Lanyon of St Ives.
CT
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Dec 8, 2015 6:43:29 GMT -5
CT,
The family of John Lanyon and Mary Ellis is most definately interesting, and their eldest son John certainly looks like a good candidate to be Mary Bolase's husband.
Have just had a look at the will of Mary Lanyon from 1679 - agree that this Mary Lanyon is almost certainly the same Mary Ellis from the above marriage given the mention of brother Paskow Ellis.
John Lanyon, husband of Mary Ellis died around the end of 1667 or early 1668 (modern calender) - his will was proved 19 Feb 1667/68. I've only skimmed over it so far since it is in Latin, and that is far from being a language I am fluent in. However the key points relative to this discussion are that John names his wife Mary as executrix and lists all his children (similar/same list to the one you had for this family).
Curiously, if I am reading the Latin correctly, John seems to call his wife "Maria Paskow als Lanyon" suggesting her family name may have been Paskow als Ellis?
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Dec 8, 2015 7:19:33 GMT -5
William Lanion of Gwinear (brother of Tobias) may not have had a son John, but a hell of a lot of researchers seem to think that the John who married Mary Ellis was born somewhere between 1610 and 1618 (most plumping for the latter) and that he was the son of a William and Jane Lanion/Lanyon.
While this may be nothing more than the usual unsubstantiated rot of everyone following each other round in circles with not one shred of proof, there is something of some consistency in it when you consider that many also place the father William as the son of Richard Lanyon and Margaret Treskillard.
While far from being willing to say the same with any confidence at all at this stage, it strikes me as worthy of consideration and further investigation. The William in question is the great uncle of the first known Tobias Lanyon and at least some of that William's immediate family were further north around Madron. Furthermore, based on the earlier discussion, this would seem to be the same William Lanyon of Tregaminion, buried at Morvah in 1619.
If the theory should eventually prove plausibly correct, this would make the relationship between John Lanyon and Mary Borlase 3rd cousins: William Lanyon => Richard Lanyon => William Lanyon (d.1619) => John Lanyon (d. 1664) => John Lanyon (bap. 1641) William Lanyon => William Lanyon => Mary Lanyon (m. Walter Borlase) => John Borlase => Mary Borlase (bap. 1638)
While it doesn't readily explain the use of Tobias in the children of John & Mary (Borlase) Lanyon, perhaps the use of the name is coincidence?
The other point is that even if not William son of William as the starting point, Richard and William had several other brothers some of which are largely undocumented (at least in Vivians) and could be potential starting points also.
|
|
|
Post by tenpoundpom on Dec 8, 2015 7:22:51 GMT -5
Once again I have spent more than an hour compiling a post and on hitting the 'Create Post' button have LOST THE WHOLE &^%$^%^ LOT!! CT Bugger! Not that I've done any long posts lately, but I'd create them in Word or similar and do a copy and paste. Simon
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Dec 8, 2015 7:27:57 GMT -5
Have to say I tend to do the same with long posts compiled over time.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 8, 2015 8:20:54 GMT -5
I tend to think that maybe this was a way of identifying his widow more accurately given there were more than one couple in West Penwith named John and Mary Lanyon! Perhaps the meaning was something like 'Mary daughter of Paskow (Ellis) now Lanyon'. IN other words his wife was Mary whose father was Paskow and she was now Lanyon by marriage. I have tried that in the past but with my tendency to have numerous open windows and to jump all over the place in the process of compiling a post this ended up being just one more window to have open. Instead I developed a practice of saving my work periodically by simply hitting the 'Create Post' button after adding something like *** more to follow ***. I found this latter option easier but unfortunately there are times, as in earlier today, when I simply forget to do it!! CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 8, 2015 10:05:39 GMT -5
One further point I need to stress regarding the possible identity of the John Lanyon who married Mary Ellis. Keep in mind that in her Will Mary Lanyon (nee Ellis) named her brother-in-law William Lanyon of Illogan as one of those, along with her brother Paskow, responsible for ensuring all the children received their legacies. There was a William Lanyon married Grace (surname not recorded) at Illogan 24th December 1636. His marriage being just a few years before John and Mary makes him contemporary and he may well be the named brother-in-law. It would be certainly worth pursuing the Illogan side of this equation when attempting to identify parents for John Lanyon. CT
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Dec 9, 2015 6:39:29 GMT -5
Before trying to sort out the John Lanion side further, an excursion to the Ellis side of the equation. I tend to think that maybe this was a way of identifying his widow more accurately given there were more than one couple in West Penwith named John and Mary Lanyon! Perhaps the meaning was something like 'Mary daughter of Paskow (Ellis) now Lanyon'. IN other words his wife was Mary whose father was Paskow and she was now Lanyon by marriage. The only problem with the above theory is... On reading this I decided to have a look at a few of the many John Lanyons who have been in my database but not updated for many years. As a result I found the following marriage with the details quoted directly from the St Just Parish Register:- John Lanyon of Sancred and Mary the daughter of Charles Ellis of this Parish were marryed by License the 17th day of ffebry. 1639I've since also found the same marriage details for John Lanyon and Mary Ellis. Further checking suggest that Mary's parents seem to be: Charles Ellis & Alse Penwarne who married on 25 Jan 1616 at St. Just in Penwith Charles Ellis seems to be the same person as the Charles Ellis, gent who dies in 1660 at St. Just in Penwith, leaving a will. Unfortunately I have so far been unable to locate a transcript or copy of the will. Supporting evidence for Mary having a brother Paskow (as well as other siblings) is: Marriage at St. Just in Penwith, 28 Dec 1655, Paskow s. of Charles Ellis, gent. & Jane d. of John Ustick, gent. Marriage at St. Just in Penwith, 19 Jun 1660 John Tyack & Elizabeth d. of Charles Ellis, gent. Children of Charles & Alse (almost certainly): John, bapt 1618 St. Just in Penwith Mary, bapt 1619 St. Just in Penwith Sara, bapt 1632 St. Just in Penwith Charles Ellis, gent, appears to have had an earlier marriage in 1607 at St. Ewe to Mary/Maria Tredenham children of the earlier marriage appear to include Hugh bapt (& buried) 1607/08 Madron Thomas bapt. 1611 Madron John, bapt. 1613 Madron George, bapt. 1614 St. Just in Penwith While I have no "direct proof" at this time, other researchers have indicated (and the will index does seems to confirm) that Charles was born at "Howle" (Holne) in Devon. These other researchers also suggest his father was another Pascow Ellis.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Dec 9, 2015 12:14:19 GMT -5
Hmm - seems I had one of those 'oops' moments where I had brother Paskow on my mind and completely forgot that Mary was the daughter of Charles Ellis. I also have Charles Ellis married to Alice Penwarne. I have never tried to find a full contingent of children but aside from Mary and Paskow there was a daughter Elizabeth who married John Tyack at St Just in 1660. I haven't actually checked the record recently but I believe she may also be recorded as 'daughter of Charles' in the marriage record. CT
|
|
|
Post by lipkatatar on Dec 9, 2015 20:36:26 GMT -5
Regarding the will of John Lanyon, gent., husband of Mary Ellis:
I have not seen the will, but in the "Sententia" available in the National Archives (Prob/11/325/25) the executrix of his estate is named as his wife, Mary Lanyon. His children are named as Mary Perrow al(ia)s Lanyon, Jane Lanyon, Joanna Lanyon, Robert Lanyon, William Lanyon, Tobias Lanyon, Francis Lanyon, Charles Lanyon, Phillip Lanyon, Thomas Lanyon and John Lanyon ("liberos dicti defuncti" - "children of the said deceased").
Mary Lanyon was baptised at Sancreed on 24 Dec 1643. On 19 July 1662 she married Mr.John Perrow at St Burian. We know that the Mary who married Mr.John Perrow was the daughter of John Lanyon, gent. as she is given the title "Mrs.Mary Lanyon" in the marriage register. John Perrow died in 1665 so I assume that Mary was referred to as "Perrow als Lanyon" as she was then a widow. In 1673 a Mrs.Mary Perrow was married to Mr.Richard Tresilian in St Burian - perhaps the same Mary.
There could be many reasons why there would be a "Sententia" or judgement over a will. In this case it was a judgement confirming the will - perhaps there had been some dispute over the will.
|
|