Thanks OC. The section in the Visitation dealing with this particular bunch states that "the early part of the pedigree is involved in some confusion, which apparently has puzzled even such learned genealogists as Le Neve, Norris and Blomefeld; but the late Rev James Lee Warner, in his interesting and valuable account of this family published in Vol IX of Norfolk Archaeology, has cleared away many of these difficulties. The following descent is carried down to the present representative in the female line, to whom I am indebted for much information".
Of course, "cleared away many of these difficulties" may mean "made up the bits which didn't seem to make sense otherwise". I can verify as far back as 1770 or so from elsewhere, but for earlier than that the Visitation is the only source I have (I should probably mention that, since it isn't my own tree, I'm not intending to spend years checking it and certainly won't be trailing around ROs trying to piece things together from other sources - if I say that X and Y are 12C 3R and it turns out that some of the records which 'prove' that are wrong, tough luck, but at least it's better than the current widespread but totally false belief that they are uncle and nephew). As to vanity, the pedigree as stated in the Visitation doesn't have any royalty or nobility, but it does have a few toffs - some MPs, a sheriff and a Lord Mayor of London - from whom someone might well have wanted to show they were descended even if they weren't.
|