Did this person exist? [10 November 2013]
The source for this person is a pedigree presented as part of a court case (in 1412), that shows the plaintiff, Richard Venables of Kynderton, claiming to be descended from Roger de Venables through William and then a succession of 4 generations of men named Hugh. Ormerod, on the other hand, gives a pedigree showing 3 generations of men named Hugh, the last of which did not have a son named Hugh, but had a son named Richard from his second marriage.
Either source could be incorrect, and initially I thought that perhaps Ormerod was wrong and the 3rd Hugh did not marry a second time (to Ellena de Brooke), but rather had a son named Hugh who married Ellena de Brooke - especially since her 2 sons were named the same as sons from his first marriage. It would not be an uncommon type of genealogical error. But in looking at the amount of information about the death of this 3rd Hugh (year he died and 3 separate inq. p. m.'s), I suspect that Ormerod had sufficient information to correctly ascribe the Ellena de Brooke marriage.
Another possibility is that Ormerod is missing a generation between the Hugh who married Ellena de Brooke and his ancestor William.
So I see three possibilities:
- Richard who presented the court case was wrong and there were only 3 generations of Hugh between him and William
- Ormerod misinterpreted his source material and the Hugh who married Ellena de Brooke was the son of the Hugh who married Margery Cotton
- Ormerod missed a generation earlier in the pedigree
Given how well-researched Ormerod is, and knowing how frequently people get their own genealogies mixed up, I would be tempted to go with Ormerod except for the fact that his sons from his second marriage are named the same as his sons from his first marriage - not impossible (especially if there was a significant age gap), but a bit odd. Also, I don't have access to Vol 3 of the 1882 edition of Ormerod, so I can't check to see if it has a correction to the 1819 edition.
One alternative is to show Richard with 2 sets of parents (not usually my preference) and appropriate notes. (But I'm still tempted to just follow Ormerod.)
Thought I would ask your opinion (Werebear), as you have worked quite a bit with Ormerod - and besides, its collaborative :)--DataAnalyst 22:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- I looked again at Ormerod (1819) (at the narrative 3:104 instead of just the pedigree), and see that Ormerod says that Hugh (husband of Ellena de Brooke) had his son and heir Richard and sons Thomas and William by his second marriage, implying that Ellena de Brooke was his first wife and that her sons died before their father. Since Hugh's son Richard was beheaded about 1403, he was not the man who brought the court case forward in 1412. This is leading me to believe that Ormerod misinterpreted his information, and that there was another son Hugh who had a son Richard (as indicated in the court case pedigree), not mentioned in Ormerod. Interesting. Let me know what you think.--DataAnalyst 22:45, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'll try and get my head back into this line. It has been a little while.... Your last suggestion is also my (not very confident) best guess: The Richard of the plea rolls was alive in 1412 and presumably was correct, at least, that his father was named Hugh. Being alive in 1412 seems to rule out that he was the Sir Richard Venables, Baron of Kinderton, who was beheaded after the battle of Shrewsbury in 1403. An appropriate Richard, son of Hugh, does not appear in Ormerod's pedigree during this period. (In either edition. I took a digital photo of the pedigree in the 2nd edition a few months ago -- unfortunately not the notes.) I figure the most parsimonious explanation is that the Hugh Kinderton that died 6 Richard 2 (corrected from 3 Richard 2 in the 1st edition) had a son named Hugh not mentioned by Ormerod, who was the father of the Richard of the plea rolls. As I said though, I am not very confident about this. I'm with you in that I usually go with Ormerod unless there is a clear reason not to, but the Venables pedigree given by Ormerod seems to me suspect in a couple of other places - for example "Anilla", wife of William Brereton, whom I moved later in accord with other sources. So I would not be very surprised if he had missed something else here. I'll spend a bit of time entering the rest of the 2nd edition Venables pedigree tonight and see how it looks. (I was planning to do it anyway. I'm somewhat related to them.)--Werebear 22:34, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
|
