|
Post by gandolf on May 3, 2008 2:39:19 GMT -5
Having discovered via this forum that my Frances Banfield (1723-1758) has both Hampton and Tyack ancestry, I am trying to sort out the Tyacks. Perhaps someone can confirm whether I am on the right track?
William Tyack, tinner of Lelant in his will dated 26 Dec 1668 names amongst others, his sisters Margaret and Jane, and his unnamed living mother.
The admon of Richard Paull of Gulval granted 14 OCt 1646, records a John Tyack of Ludgvan as posting bond and taking inventory. I suspect given the location and timing that this John Tyack may be the father of William Tyack and his sisters. Indirect confirmation is that the eldest born sibling was named John.
So the family as I believe it to be:
John Tyack (born circa 1595) married Unknown (died after 1668). Children: William Tyack born circa 1620 died 1669 Margaret Tyack Jane Tyack.
William Tyack (1620-1669) married Dwens Hampton (1626-1682) Children: John Tyack born circa 1646 Lelant William Tyack born circa 1647 Lelant James Tyack born circa 1650 Lelant died circa1733 Lelant Tiberia Tyack Charles Tyack born circa 1655 Lelant
Charles Tyack (c.1647 - ?) married Married Dwens Hampton and their children are as detailed in the thread "Dwens Hampton Tyack's children"
James Tyack (c.1650 - c.1733) married an unknown Mary Children: James Tyack Richard Tyack
In the next generation, Charles & Dwens Tyack's daughter Willmett (Wilmot) Tyack (chr. 4 Feb 1689 St. Ives) married 1 Jun 1719 at Lelant to Edward Banfield (chr. 16 Nov 1687 Lelant - died circa 1736 Lelant). Children: Ann Banfield chr 24 May 1720 Lelant Edward Banfield chr 4 Mar 1721 Lelant Frances Banfield chr 13 OCt 1723 Lelant Died 8 Jun 1758 Gulval Willmit Banfield chr 30 May 1726 Lelant
Frances Banfield (1723 - 1758) married 17 Nov 1741 Lelant to Richard Eddy (1717 - 1796)
From what I can see, most of the Tyacks in Cornwall seem to be further east of Lelant, based around Germoe and Breage. I guess that the Lelant branch was probably some sort of off-shoot at some point?
I also noticed from the various wills I can see (on what I think is Zenobia's Cornish Database) that the Hampton, Penberthy and Tyack families seem to have a close relationship since many of the wills for each of the family names feature either bequests or witnesses from the other two families.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on May 3, 2008 7:41:33 GMT -5
Having had another look at the will of William Tyack of 1669, it looks like there must have been a closer connection between the Tyacks of Germoe and Breage and William Tyack than I originally thought.
William bequests land at Rosuggan (Rosudgeon) & Trenalls, both places just over a mile to the west of Germoe.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on May 3, 2008 12:04:08 GMT -5
I have information suggesting this James died prior to 1682. It was the son of Charles who married 'an unknown Mary':- James TYACK m. Mary RICHARDS 17th June 1721 at Lelant Children Charles (1722), James (1724) and Richard (1726). AND Mary d/o Charles and Mary (bn. c. 1707) married James TREWHELA at Towednack 30th April 1728. She was mentioned in the Will of her mother Mary in 1746.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on May 10, 2008 9:04:55 GMT -5
Thanks CT, just goes to show that with similar names it is quite easy to mix up the generations!
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on May 10, 2008 14:16:42 GMT -5
Don't I know it! It is always good to have another set of eyes glance over things like this and you never know what you may find. How often has one simple mistake snowballed into a ton of wasted work.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Jun 12, 2008 5:45:55 GMT -5
Talking about another set of eyes.... Just realised in re-reading my original post that I said: Just to remove any confusion for other's following the Tyack family what I should have said was that William Tyack (c.1647 - ?) married Dwens Hampton.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Jun 12, 2008 6:27:46 GMT -5
I have been looking into and thinking a lot about my original thought that John Tyack of Ludgvan (who posted bond and took inventry in 1646 in relation to the will of Richard Paull) might be the father of William Tyack, husband of Dwens Hampton. There is no clear evidence that I can see to place any Tyack family in Lelant prior to the mid 17th century. Indeed there appears to be very few Tyacks in West Penwith (at least west of the line between Hayle and Ludgvan) prior to the latter part of the 17th century. While this is in doubt at least partly due to most of the PR not beginning until around the mid 17th century, I can't help wondering if it is also due to there simply not being many Tyacks in the area. There is plenty of evidence of Tyacks in places like Germoe and Breage and further north and east. Indeed the IGI gives the impression that Tyack verges on being the Cornish equivalent of the English Smith or Welsh Williams. ;D So what I see is what seems to be one or perhaps two (interelated?) families of Tyack in Ludgvan from the start of the 17th century. These families seem to disappear from Ludgvan by around 1660, by which time we are starting to see Tyacks in Lelant and later Towednack. There is a John Tyack who marries Jane Leagow on 30 July 1611 at Ludgvan. It seems probable that they are the parents of the following children whose only recorded parent is a father, John Tyack: Thomas Tyack christened 23 Feb 1616 at Ludgvan Willia[m] Tyack christened 19 Dec 1618 at Ludgvan Alce Tyack christened 1621 at Ludgvan A John Tyack is also the father of: Jane Tyack christened 5 Apr 1630 at Ludgvan John Tyack christened 28 Jul 1633 at Ludgvan Elizabeth Tyack christened 11 July 1635 at Ludgvan Thomas Tyack christened 25 Jan 1639 at Ludgvan At first glance this second group looks like it is a separate family to the first group given the apparent gap in the middle, but it is possible that the father of both groups is the same person, perhaps with two wives. Indeed it is not impossible that the mother of boths groups is also the same person (the original Jane), given a spread of 28 years from the 1611 marriage to last christening in 1639. The John Tyack above is almost certainly the John Tyack mentioned in the will of Richard Paull. The reason for my interest is that the William Tyack who married Dwens Hampton at Lelant would have been born about 1620 making him an almost perfect match for the William christened 1618 at Ludgvan. If (and I agree it is possibly a big if) we accept that the two groupings of families above are actually the same family, then that would also give William a sister Jane. There is also a gap between the two family groupings that would allow for one or more other siblings to be included, albeit not recorded as baptised. Remember that William, husband of Dwens, mentions his sisters Jane and Margaret in his will. His eldest born is a son John, which could imply that William's father was called John. So does anyone else have any thoughts on the possibility that this may be the family of Dwens Hampton's husband William? Is it plausible, and even if plausible, is it likely? Or am I just barking up the wrong tree entirely?
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 12, 2008 17:23:45 GMT -5
All was going well my friend and looking plausible with a couple of minor queries until ............................. John TYACK, of Ludgvan Will written 7th March 1646. Inventory dated 15th May 1647. Mentions:- wife - Jane daughter - Wilmot son - Thomas daughter -Jane daughter - Elizabeth son - John Also mentioned was 'James Mab's wife' I believe this was extracted for me back in the 90's by a cousin in Truro and my notes are no doubt buried in one of the piles of Wills and other assorted paperwork laying about this room. However, that is the gist of it. Guess it throws a bit of a spanner in the works and provides a lot more work to do. There was also a John Tyack married Elizabeth Ellis at St Just in Penwith 19th June 1660 that requires some investigation. The only other thing I can say about this one is that I believe his wife to have been a daughter of Charles Ellis, gent. and Alse (nee Penwarne) who married at St Just 25th January 1616. Throw everything you can at this one and I will try to investigate anything you have to offer. It is another family I have had on the 'want to look at' list for many years so I will be more than happy to do what I can. Ian
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 12, 2008 17:34:47 GMT -5
As a matter of interest here is what I have found in the 1641 Protestation Return for Ludgvan:-
James MABB John TYACK
And at Lelant
James TYACK Wm TYACK
That is all.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 12, 2008 17:36:53 GMT -5
Another thought while just pondering those names - could it be that William of Lelant was actually the son of the James Tyack who appeared in 1641. He did name a son James did he not??
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Jun 13, 2008 10:39:21 GMT -5
Ian, To me, if anything the will of John Tyack in 1647 strengthens the argument rather than weakening it.
Four of the five children mentioned in Johns 1647 will (Thomas, Jane, Elizabeth and John) are all names which show up in the baptisms for children of the John Tyack who married Jane Leagow. The only proviso for making them full siblings (rather than half siblings) is accepting the possibility that Jane was still having children during the gap between recorded children of 1621 and 1630 - plausible given the total date range as I mentioned previously.
As previously noted, William Tyack who married Dwens Hampton records in his will sisters Jane and Margaret.
Given that Margaret is not recorded as a baptised child of John and Jane, I had theorised that she may have been born during the gap between the two lots of children.
John's will now adds another daughter, with the most interesting name of Wilmot. Again no record of a baptism, so she too was probably in the 1621-1630 gap.
Now Wilmot is interesting since William and Dwens' son Charles who married Mary (possibly surnamed Rosewall?) had two children called Wilmot (Wellenett/Wilmett) - one dying in infancy and the next daughter given the same name.
Since Wilmot is the daughter of John and Jane Tyack, if the William that married Dwens is the same person as John and Jane's son William born 1618, then that would make John and Jane's daughter Wilmot an aunt to Charle - a good reason for Charles and Mary to use the name.
James Mabb is also intriguing. I haven't yet found anything on him, but in the process discovered a few things.
The name Mab almost certainly originates from the relationship qualifier used in in Welsh names - map/mab meaning "son of"
Used as a surname, while it is fairly common in other english counties closer to Wales, it is almost unheard of in Corwall. Looking in the IGI and Phillimores, I can only find six instances of the name under any likely variations in the period from the 16th to 19th centuries.
All are marriages: William Mab m. 3 Jul 1635 at Gerrans to Frances Hobbs, d/o Nicholas Grace Mabb m. 10 Jul 1657 at Ludgvan to Robert Davie William Mab of Marazion m. 6 Jan 1658 at St. Ives to Margery Trudgin Arthur Mabb of Marketjue m. 4 Jun 1667 at Gerrans to Anne, d/o John Kemp, Gent. Welmett(Wilmot) Mab m. 14 Jun 1667 at Ludgvan to Kullam Sampson Thamasin Mab m. 2 Nov 1682 at Ludgvan to John Kitt
Given the very low frequency of the name Mab, the fact that James Mab is named in John Tyak's will, and the existance of a female name Welmett Mab, it is improbable that the facts are unrelated.
I think that James Mab was almost certainly married to one of John Tyack's daughters (most likely one of Alice bap 1621, Wilmot or the theorised Margaret assuming that either of them were born in the early 1620's). This would provide a plausible explanation for the transferal of the name Wilmot into the Mab family. The Thomasin Mab who married 1682 could be a younger sister of Wilmot.
The only thing that might put a spanner in this theory is Grace Mab who married in 1657. This marriage date implies a birth no later than about 1640, making it extremly tight for her to be a grandchild of John Tyack - although not impossible if James Mab had married Alice Tyack. Then again Grace may have been a sister of James Mab, or a child from a previous marriage??
Alternatively, James Mab was married to some unknown sister of John Tyack, but it makes more sense for John to be bequeathing to a son-in-law rather than to a brother-in-law.
Finally the 1641 Protestation Returns. William baptised 1618, son of John Tyack, would have been old enought to be the William listed on the return at Lelant. Certainly the William who married Dwens Hampton was having children at Lelant by the mid 1640's, indicating that it is likely that Dwens' husband was the William on the return. It it plausible that the two Williams mentioned immediately above could be the same person.
John Tyack is fairly clearly the John Tyack who married Jane Leagow and died in 1647. James Mabb the same person discussed above.
The only question mark is the James Tyack. Possibly not a son of John Tyack during the "black hole" in his childrens' baptisms, as he would surely then have been too young to be recorded on the Protestation Return (unless born around 1622??). Perhaps a brother of John Tyack??
Yes it is possible that he may have been the father of William Tyack who married Dwens Hampton. However other than the Protestation Return, there seems to be a lack of evidence for his existance - perhaps someone with access to the PR could check for marriage or death?
Getting very late, so will leave it at that for the moment.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 13, 2008 14:54:48 GMT -5
Good come-back Peter and this is probably the best discussion I have ever entered into regarding the Tyack family. The fact there is only one John Tyack mentioned in 1641 certainly helps with the possibility that the two groups of children are, in fact, siblings and all children of the same John. But this is dependent on whether or not there was another John who pre-deceased the Protestation Return or who may have been elsewhere at the time. It may also be that, if there was another, he simply did not sign. But there are many 'ifs' here and the balance is certainly with the man who married Jane in 1611. James Tyack may also be a son of John rather than father of William. In fact it almost makes more sense that James and William were brothers now that I think about it. Will consider all of this when my head is a little clearer and see if there is anything more I can dig out of my little hordes of gathered information. Ian
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Jun 13, 2008 19:06:44 GMT -5
Ian, you are too kind... . Just trying to think through the problem logically. More seriously, writing very late in the evening, obviously my thoughts weren't as clear as they could be. You are right, it does make more sense for the James Tyack appearing on the 1641 Protestation Return to be a son of John and Jane, since that would mean only one family floating around the Ludgvan/Lelant area rather than the possibility of two. I had discounted the possibility that James could have been the son of John and Jane because of a potential problem with his age. To appear on the Return, James Tyack would have had to have been an adult (I assume). To be a son of John and Jane, James must have been born in the "black hole" in their recorded children, namely between 1621 and 1630. This would mean that at most he would have been around 19 in 1641. For some reason (mushy brain perhaps? : my thought process last night equated adult with 20 or 21 years of age. In reality of course adult was effectively much younger at that time period, more in the realm of 14-15 years of age, although I think that legal age of adulthood was still 18 years? That being said, if we accept that James was one of the first children in the "black hole", he would probably have just been old enough to appear on the Protestation Return. While exploring possibilities, there is also a Nicholas Tyack having children at Ludgvan in the 1650's. I had discounted him as being connected because of the lack of usage of the name Nicholas in John and Jane's family and in turn in William and Dwens Tyack's or Charles and Mary Tyack's respective families. However, chronologically, Nicholas MIGHT perhaps also have been a child of John and Jane. If so, that would neatly (perhaps too neatly? ) tie all the early Ludgvan Tyacks up in one package. The other reason I had discounted Nicholas Tyack was that he must surely be connected to the Tyack families around Germoe and Breage, as Nicholas is a common Tyack name in those areas. However if we consider the possibility that Nicholas is also a child of John and Jane, then that suggests a possible location for where John Tyack originated from - moved a few miles west from Germoe or Breage to Ludgvan.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jun 13, 2008 20:53:37 GMT -5
The Protestation Return 'can' be useful. When I looked through them back in the 80's at the State Library in Melbourne I made a note of part of the Introductory notes. Returns comprise a list of all male parishioners of the age of 18 and over. 4 Parishes missing Abour 30,000 names I would tend to argue with the term 'all male parishioners' as there is definite evidence (Wills etc) that mention names of males who are obviously of age to have signed the Protestation Return but they simply cannot be found - in any Parish. However, it does give us a guide when looking at events of the general era. Therefore we know that James and William were both, at the very least, 18 years of age in 1641. If we take the 1618 baptism of William as the man who married Duens we are left with James who could have been born no later than, probably, 1622. AHA! - you might say. But each time you mention the 'black hole' you talk about the gap from 1621 to 1630. You seem to be forgetting one, possibly very important, point. The marriage occurred in 1611 yet our first recorded bapism is not until 1616 - another GAP of 5 years! But the one thing that still nags at me is the lack of mention of William, in particular, along with James and possibly Nicholas. And don't forget Nowell who had a daughter baptised at Ludgvan in 1642! Still lots of thinking to do hear.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Jun 13, 2008 22:00:30 GMT -5
There are none so blind as those who cannot see... You're right, Ian. Got so fixated on the apparent gap in records that I overlooked the earlier 5 year gap. OK, your comments about age on the Protestation Return confirm my suspicions - you needed to be the legal age of adulthood, which you have also confirmed to be 18. So yes you are right, the James Tyack on the return at Lelant could indeed be an older brother of William, and again apparently unrecorded as baptised. The challenge is of course that we are on the outer edge of what is possible with the PRs given that many don't start until the mid or late 17th century and we are discussing the early 17th. If John and Jane Tyack lived a mile or so to the north of Ludgvan, the gaps in the Ludgvan PR could be caused by nothing more than some of children being baptised to the north in St. Erth or Lelant, where existing PR's only start in the mid 17th century. mmm, I suppose if we are going to try to package all the early Lelant/Ludgvan Tyacks into one parcel, I guess we need to consider shoehorning this Nowell Tyack into the package as well. The problem with Nowell Tyack and his daughter Susannah is similar to that with Nicholas Tyack. They are names which don't seem to be associated with the family of William and Dwens Tyack, or their son Charles Tyack. Of course this is not a conclusive arguement either for or against including them into the proposed family picture, but does give one pause to ponder.
|
|