Could this be another case of a son who has been already 'looked after'.
I have seen other cases where a son has not been mentioned in his father's Will so it is 'still possible' that we are dealing with father and son.
I have too, but in each case I had independent primary source evidence proving that B was the son of A notwithstanding no mention of B in A's will. As we now have an alternative explanation for the parentage of Richard Davy junior the issue is thereby rendered superfluous in this case, however as a general principle I would not agree with presuming that someone was a child of another where the supposed parent's will is extant but there is no statement to that effect in it, and in addition no christening record or other such definite evidence has been found to link the one person with the other.
Last Edit: Jul 18, 2007 7:04:48 GMT -5 by trencrom
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jul 18, 2007 13:30:42 GMT -5
I do totally agree with your comments and must say that I never 'lock in' connections like this without comments about my misgivings.
As posted in one of our Threads, I had left people 'unassigned' for this very reason. I have had suspicions but, as in the Richard Davy case have decided to leave them as 'orphans' until sufficient evidence arrived to show otherwise.
But one further point - if it had not been for these recent discussions ............
At least I can probably put a father's name to the younger Richard.
James mentioned his sister Elizabeth RENODEN (var.) and her husband Thomas along with children.
He also mentions sister-in-law Sibella Thomas whom I had assumed to be the wife of brother Matthew but the way I now read this is suggestive of something different to my last findings.
John Thomas' will of 1698 names brother Matthew, & sister Elizabeth wife of Thomas Renoaden, amongst others.
Matthew Thomas' will c. 1705 does mention a brother William, and "my sister Thomas Renoaden's wife". There is also a mention of brother's daughter Grace Thomas, and brother's son Richard, and these appear to be William's children as Matthew's other siblings and the children of the other siblings are detailed further on in the will. Matthew's will not mention his wife, (perhaps suggesting that she had precedeased him) so it is quite possible that it was Sibella, and so when first looking at this family I tentatively placed her as his wife .but with a question mark.
I am working off the abstracts I have here as I am again in the cafe (they should give me special rates, I am in here so much ;D) and do not have the wills themselves to hand right now.
I therefore think you are right about William - if he is still alive c. 1705 then he is clearly not the William who died childless c. 1683. This other, childess William would appear to be of a totally different family.
Was there more than one family of THOMAS at TRITHWALL.
No. George's family was it at Zennor. Other early Thomases at Zennor would be unrelated ao far as I can see.
Secondly, all relevant Wills seem to be consistent with kin EXCEPT for the Will of James as I have now noticed.
In 1675 James mentions his brother WILLIAM with five children.
In the latter Wills for this family it appears that William was childless and possibly in need of looking after.
The will of James is not the problem -- it is the details on William that are.
I have not seen any Thomas will that says William was childless etc. However the William Thomas who died 1683 left a widow Orchard who in turn left everything to her own sister and the sister's children, suggesting that she and William had no surviving children of their own. Some have this William as James' brother but it is clear from the will of not only James but of Matthew that their brother William had children and was still living when Matthew's will was crawn up long aftre Orchard's death c. 1688. . The Matthew, John and James referred to here were all children of George Thomas, the same George Thomas who married Cheston Davy in fact. Can supply other details on George's family if you want them.
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jul 20, 2007 14:26:19 GMT -5
I would very much like to see those details on George Thomas' family, if I may.
I have tried over the years to piece the family together so would it would be helpful to see what you have for comparison.
And it may be easier to do things this way for the time being or else I can see one 'heckuva' mess happening.
Having now glanced through a couple of the relevant Wills I can see where I have had problems but, of course, they are not yet resolved.
Re-reading the 1675 Will of James Thomas makes it clear that William belonged here and that he had 'five children living at home'.
But I think it is the 1699 Will of Brother John that was my 'big' problem:-
Item My will is that my brother William Thomas shall have of my executors during his life tyme sufficient meat drink cloths washing and lodging in the house I now Live but if my sayd brother will not dwell with my executors then my will is that hee shalbee payd yearly during his life by my executors fower pounds Lawfull English mony by quarterly payment.
Hope that explains my dilemma and look forward to seeing how different (or similar) our conclusions have been.
Will think more on the William/Orchard Thomas thing later on.
I will have to recheck the Thomas wills for this one but the thought occurs to me.
Firstly, I think we are agreed that William son of George is not William husband of Orchard.
If Wiliam had children living in 1705 (i.e. Matt Thomas' will) then we need to look for an alternative explanation for the unusual description around the bequest to him in John's will. The first thought that comes to me is that he was no longer able-bodied, perhaps incapacitated through injury or disease. Then again, perhaps through old age, which would be no surpise as he would have been over 70 at the time. Perhaps even a combination of these.
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jul 21, 2007 13:06:32 GMT -5
A similar thought occurred to me sometime after I had completed the posting.
Be handy if we could identify some of those children of William's.
I wonder if we can.
The 1675 Will of his brother James mentions "Brother William Thomas five children that is at home £1-10s apiece."
HAVE JUST NOW FOUND A PROBLEM HERE.
Do you have a copy of the Will of JAMES THOMAS (1675)??
I now find that I have, apparently, TWO VERSIONS of this Will.
The first, as just quoted above, I would have to check on as it was sent to me (online I think) some years ago and I do not, for the moment, recall the source. It was sent as part of a batch of THOMAS Wills.
But I have just looked at my notes for his brother THOMAS THOMAS and I have included the following quote from the Will of brother JAMES:-
"Named in the Will of his brother James in 1675 - 'brother Thomas five children that is at home ...'"
A look at a complete (barring illegibilities) transcript of the 1666 Will of their father George Thomas might add some clues.
Son Hannibal died in 1638.
Margaret appears to have been deceased because bequests are made to "Arthur Berriman's children my grandchildren" (I have nominated her 'Margaret' because it is the name of the only known daughter - so that may be corrected).
Elizabeth (m. Thomas Renoden) has one son.
William, James and Elizabeth seem to have been 'disputing' with each other from the tone of this Will.
William does not appear to be married or have any children.
Thomas receives three bequests of which one is an amount 'promised in Marriage' and another 'so long as he does not claim.... etc.' And then later "unter every one of my son Thoms his children five shillings"
Matthew is named with two children and also as executor.
John has no mention of wife or children and is also executor.
My main concerns (apart from that just mentioned) are the following:-
. I give & bequeath unto Richard Henry Rachell Thomas Twelve pounds apeece.
Item I give unto Agnes & Wilmot Thomas Ten shillings apeece and unto Phillip Thomas two shillings and six pence.
Just who were they.
From this it would seem that William was childess in 1666 whereas brother Thomas had 'children'.
The Will of brother John suggests the possibility that William was unmarried and childless.
The Will of brother MATTHEW in 1705 is now the confusing item:-
Item I Give to William Thomas my Brother Twenty shillings a year During his Life. Item I Give to Grace Thomas my Brothers Daughter Twenty shillings. Item I Give to Nich: Thomas my Brothers son Three Pounds. Item I Give to ye to Sons of Nich: Thomas, John & Haniball ----- shillings each. Item I Give to my Brother Thomas Thomas Twenty shillings. Item I Giver to my Brothers Daughters Jon: Horas? & John Osorones wives twenty shillings Each of them.
On first read it looks like brother William has been mentioned and thereafter followed by some of his (William's) children. There follows brother Thomas with mention of his children.
But after another couple of items is a further bequest to a child of Thomas (George).
Then the Will of Thomas Thomas himself appears to clear this up and leaves William with no children mentioned. (In fact, Thomas does not seem to mention his siblings at all.)
SO - Until we have confirmed proof from an original copy of the 1675 Will of JAMES THOMAS all other information is suggesting that William Thomas was childless.
*** Throwing this oone back to you, Trencrom, for the time being ***
It is certain that the William who married Orchard was not of this immediate family as I have details from both his and Orchard's Wills which were much earlier.
Re: William and Orchard
The Admon for this William was granted 6th July 1683 and was granted to his wife Orchard. The Inventory showd an investment of GBP140 plus land in BOSWEDNACK and tenements in Treen and BOSPRENNIS.
Orchard's Will was proved in 1688 Cousins John and Martin MADDERNE Cousin Elizabeth wife of John BERRIMAN receives, among other bequests, a 'house and garden' and 'part of my tenement in BOSWEDNACK' John BERRIMAN'S two children Cousin Matthew MADDERNE and 'the rest of my tenement in BOSWEDNACK after the expiration of the 7 year covenant I have with TAMSEN MADDERNE, mother of said Matthew' Cousin Richard WALKEY of Penzance Poor of Parish of SANCREED Thomas NANCE son of John NANCE of St Ives
Sister TAMSEN MADDERNE was named executrix.
Witnesses: John NANCE and JOHN THOMAS
If we could trace down some of these mentioned in the Will it might help identify Orchard and then, possibly, William Thomas.
James Thomas' will talks about the five children of Thomas Thomas "that are at home with him". (I have the will right in front of me. )
I have changed my thinking re William's supposed children , as follows: Matthew's will I think implies that the children named the will after William were his, but does not explicitly state this. A Nicholas though is referred to as a "cosen" in John Thomas' will, so clearly was not John's son However Thomas Thomas in his own will mentions a son Nicholas and a daughter Grace, so unless William also had children of these names --possible but not to be presumed -- then I think we have to treat these names as referring to Thomas' children so named.
However, whether this means that William was probably childless I don't know that at this stage. The absence of any mention of William's children in George's will is inconclusive. (I can think of at least one case where a grandparent in Zennor named two grandchildren in her will when her son's will several years later shows that he had more than just the two kids that were named by his mother.) William may have had children who predeceased him, hence the wish of his siblings to support him financially in his old age. We would need to see a will for William to be certain.
I have Margaret as marrying Arthur Berriman, having five children and apparently being dead by 1666. (I think I drew the same conclusions as you did here. ) She had sons George, William, John and David, and a daughter Margaret, all were named as being children of Arthur Berriman in John Thomas' will.
Elizabeth wife of Thomas Renoaden had (at least) four children as well. (John, Thomas, George & Robert, all named in James's will)
I have no children against James' name. Looks like he had none.
Agnes, Wilmot and Philip are not identified in George's will. I do not know of anything that would suggest that they could be additional children of George's, hence would be tempted to see them as being grandchildren, but not sure as to who their father was. Definitely not Thomas or Matthew or John, as none of these names appear in their wills. could be children of William's or else more distant relations.
William T who married Orchard is definitely not the brother of George. (I have the will of George's father) The John and Mathew Thomas in the 1641 protestation are almost certainly the sons of George. Question for you: why does not William T appear in 1641 protestation for Zennor?
Not sure just who the earlier Thomases are that you mention but I think they are unrelated to George's family. Could be connections of William husband of Orchard, but that is just a guess. Thomas being such a common surname in Penwith does not help matters when it comes to trying to identify who is who.
Last Edit: Jul 22, 2007 23:20:44 GMT -5 by trencrom
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jul 23, 2007 11:33:59 GMT -5
Excellent - a point clarified.
Your points regarding William Thomas now echo my own and now that the wording of the Wills has been clarified we have no evidence that William ever married. (He may have but ....)
The evidence of more than one Will suggests to me that William was not married and that he 'needed looking after'.
Brother Matthew leaves William "Twenty shillings a year during his life"
Item My will is that my brother William Thomas shall have of my executors during his life tyme sufficient meat drink cloths washing and lodging in the house I now Live but if my sayd brother will not dwell with my executors then my will is that hee shalbee payd yearly during his life by my executors fower pounds Lawfull English mony by quarterly payment
We seem to agree on the next so will skip a couple of paragraphs.
Agnes and Wilmot Thomas are named together in the Will of George Thomas to receive '10 shillings apiece" and then Phillip Thomas is bequeathed "2 shillings and 6d."
Are these siblings or are we looking at children of two different families.
And WHAT ABOUT these from George Thomas' Will:-
". I give & bequeath unto Richard Henry Rachell Thomas Twelve pounds apeece. "
We may need to think a little here given the difference in bequests as compared to Agnes, Wilmot and Phillip.
** I will refrain from commenting further on these two 'minority groups' until you have had a chance to offer an opinion. (Besides - they have me lost at the moment. )
THE WILL OF GEORGE's FATHER
May I (either on open Forum or via PM) have a Transcript or an Abstract of this - PLEASE
You now mention that the John and Matthew Thomas who appear on the 1641 Protestation Return are almost certainly sons of George.
To have signed that document I believe they had to have been aged 18 years or more?
This would mean that both were born before 1623.
It might also indicate that James, William and Thomas were each born after 1623.
Do you know about HANIBALL
The Admon. of HANNIBAL THOMAS, 'yeoman of Trithwall' was granted to his father GEORGE THOMAS in 1638.
This suggests that George would have been married before 1620 and possibly as early as 1610 given the above discussion regarding John and Matthew.
Question for you: why does not William T appear in 1641 protestation for Zennor?
1. He was not yet 18 at the time 2. He was resident in another Parish and may have signed there 3. He 'missed out' or declined
I have similar queries about some others from different families whom I would have expected to find in these records.
As for the earlier Thomases - Okay, just thought I would throw them into the mix - especially as at least two are baptised as sons of John Thomas.
But it looks now as if George had to be born prior to 1590 so ...
Checked George's will - nothing to indicate therein who Richard Henry and Rachel are. They are not mentioned in Matthew's will, or in John's.
George had seven children born before 1629, so if we allow two years between them that takes us back to 1618. however there is evidence to show that he was married probably half a dozen or so years earlier. however other evidence indicates that he was unlikely to have been born much earlier than 1590, hence unlikely to have been married before 1608. Hannibal was probably the eldest son of George, since he was executor to his grandfather Richard Davy in 1629.
If the Matthew in the protestation record was George's son, which seems pretty likely on the face of it, then as you say Matthew was born before 1623. John was definitely born before then as was at least one of his other siblings.
Thomas was born 1629 but I cannot make out the month. It was early in the year though, as it is about the third or fourth entry for that year.
Have to fly -- will post further on this family shortly.
Last Edit: Jul 23, 2007 23:02:09 GMT -5 by trencrom
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 15, 2008 6:35:29 GMT -5
Trencrom - I have finally got myself back to taking a look at this Thomas family.
I don't have much to add other than comments and queries at this time but I have at least re-read everything we have discussed so far.
I will start with the Richard DAVY part of the discussion where it seems that I had a problem remembering that Richard jnr. could not have been the son of the 1629 Testator.
The elder Richard nominated Cheston as his ONLY daughter yet the younger Richard named a sister as Grace.
A couple of points from the Will of Richard DAVY 1629.
My reading is that Richard TREGENHORNE was the husbnd of Elizabeth and that Margery and Margaret were their daughters.
I also think that Luce HICKS (with daughter Elizabeth) was probably a daughter of Richard's daughter Luce MORRACKE.
As I see the struture of the Will we first have mention of son-in-law George Thomas and his wife Cheston, only daughter of the Testator. (In fact the Will reads as if Cheston may be his only child.)
We then have mention of Richard's two sisters and it then appears to be children of those sisters.
After this we have one extremely interesting bequest before his grandchildren are invlved.
PHILIP d/o THOMAS QUICK 6d.
What is so special about this daughter of Thomas Quick is the question I have to ask.
In 1640 Philippa was also mentioned in the Will of Philippa BISHOP who was the daughter of Matthew PHILLIPS of 1628.
And a couple of months later she married Israel MICHELL at Zennor. (Israel is reported to have died at the battle of Taunton in 1645. A letter, reputedly written in a form to suggest a Will, is deposited at the Cornwall Record Office. It is dated 1645 and names 'my loving wife Pilip at Zennor'.)
SO - is this girl perhaps the link somehow between these families And, if so, in what way.
Somehow I think we need to find out more about Philip QUICK.
The last bequests in Richard's Will are to what appear to be the children of George and Cheston Thomas.
BUT - are they all children of George and Cheston?
Nominally (i.e. names known from other sources to belong to children of George) Margaret, John Mathew, Elizabeth, Thomas and Haniball 'could' be Richard Davy's grandchildren.
But where does Peter fit in unless he as another son of George but pre-deceased his father??
If he were another son then it may be that one or other, or perhaps both, the two 'odd' groups of presumed children mentioned in George Thomas' Will might have belonged to him.
Let me presume that, apart from Haniball, Richard DAVY named the THOMAS children in order of birth:-
Haniball Margaret John Mathew Peter] received a Elizabeth] joint bequest Thomas
I am going to assume for now that Peter must be another son and that he died sometime before his father in 1667. (Does this perhaps explain why Thomas named a son Peter?)
With the children of George now in this order some things start to become a little clearer.
Some comments on each:-
Haniball - assumed to be the eldest because he was named executor of his grandfather's Will in 1629 but where did the name Haniball come from
Margaret - her name amongst the early children makes sense given she died before 1666 and had five children although her own daughter Margaret appears to have been unmarried and I think it was she who wa buried at Zennor in 1760. She was certaily still living in 1726 as per the Will of her 'cousin' Haniball Thomas.
John - remained unmarried and to be expected amongst the first children given I believe his grandfather was John Thomas. He signed the Protestation Return in 1641 so must have been born before 1623.
Matthew - also signed the Protestation Return and was married with two children by 1666.
Peter - the unknown but, as Thomas named a son Peter, it becomes logical that he does belong here.
Elizabeth - is probably my main concern. As she was named in her grandfather's Will she must have been born prior to it's writing. She married in 1666 and had four surviving children so I would place her birth no earlier than 1626.
Thomas - known to have been baptised in 1629 and was married with an unknown number of children by the time of his father's death in 1666 ("unto every one of my son Thomas his children" indicates (to me) three or more). And I just realised that the mention of his (Thomas) children in the Will of brother James in 1675 is not quite cut and dried. I have always assumed that the five children mentioned (but not named) by James were all the children of Thomas at that time and that the remaining two were born later. However "Thomas five children that is at home" now appears a little ambiguous to me. This may actually mean that two of the seven children of Thomas were no longer at home although of the six known marriages for his children the earliest was in 1694.
If all the above is correct (or at least near so) then the two remaining sons of George, James and William, must have been born after 1629.
Some final comments and requests.
Margaret - was this possibly the name of George's mother?
George named sons John and Matthew as executors of his Will and in that order which I think, apart from probably been named after George's father, indicates that John was the elder.
He also named his younger sons in the order of William and then James so I take it that James was the youngest and, in any case, only in his forties when he died.
In our last discussions (I notice now over twelve months ago you indicated you would send me a transcript of, or at least details from, the Will of George Thomas' father.
Could you please do that when you have a chance.
I would also like as much of th BT information as you can send me, primarily on anyone involved with the Thomas and Davy families in this discussion but also the Quick, Michell and Phillips families in particular.
Well, I think I have rambled on enough for now and it is time I looked at some other queries.
Post by cornishbluebird on Jun 16, 2008 11:46:43 GMT -5
Just gleaned this thread, unfortunately you all appear to have got further back than i could in a day at the Cornwall Record Office.
My friend Vikki is related to John Thomas born c1766 (died 1854) in Zennor married to Catherine Christopher, he was blacksmith on Boswednack Farm. Whilst at the CRO i looked up the deeds/leases for the farm held at the office 1816-1856, and although John is mentioned as yeoman and obviously a main name on the deeds, i couldn't work out who Matthew Thomas was named on the 1797 deed alongside John (this deed was mentioned in the 1816 deed).
Can anyone help me try to get this paticular branch of the Thomas family back further, the parish records were either unreadable or to damaged to find his baptism to give me further details.
I have his Will, or Vikki does now, which i can retrieve and post on here if anyone wishes.
Vikkis basic ancestry goes as such
John Thomas b c1766 d Jul 1854 -> Matthew Thomas b c1818 d Oct 1891 -> John Thomas 22/1/1864 -> Elizabeth Thomas b 7/7/1898 -> Henry Dennis Pellow -> Brian Pellow -> Vikki Fitzpatrick nee Pellow