Discussion:
Update regarding New England settler Thomas Newberry and Richard Newbery and the medieval Newburgh family of England
(too old to reply)
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-15 16:21:51 UTC
Permalink
I know it's been quite a while since there has been any activity in this group about the ancestry of Thomas Newberry of Dorchester, MA, but things are quite different now!
After researching into the depths of this topic alongside the larger connecting and origins of the Devon Newberys I have concluded Thomas' ancestry and for the first time, the ancestry of Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645. Such research can be found detailed in a paper here; https://gum.co/Newbery. The paper tells of new research proving Thomas' ancestry to a further generation prior to William Newbery of Yarcombe who died in 1596.

Additionally, while researching the abovementioned topics I have obtained a greater understanding of just how many Newbery families there were in the East Devon/West Dorset area. Furthermore, I have recently published a paper detailing original research telling how the Devonian Newberys descend from the Newburgh line. Which can be found here; https://gum.co/Newburgh.
taf
2019-12-15 18:33:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
I know it's been quite a while since there has been any activity in this group about the ancestry of Thomas Newberry of Dorchester, MA, but things are quite different now!
After researching into the depths of this topic alongside the larger connecting and origins of the Devon Newberys I have concluded Thomas' ancestry and for the first time, the ancestry of Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645. Such research can be found detailed in a paper here; https://gum.co/Newbery. The paper tells of new research proving Thomas' ancestry to a further generation prior to William Newbery of Yarcombe who died in 1596.
Additionally, while researching the abovementioned topics I have obtained a greater understanding of just how many Newbery families there were in the East Devon/West Dorset area. Furthermore, I have recently published a paper detailing original research telling how the Devonian Newberys descend from the Newburgh line. Which can be found here; https://gum.co/Newburgh.
With all due respect, I am happy to discuss your findings, but I am not going to pay money for the right to do so. Self-published genealogies can fall anywhere on the spectrum from detailed, well-argued and well-evidenced research to abject nonsense and wishful thinking, and I lack the morbid curiosity to be a punter at those odds.

taf
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-15 20:49:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by taf
Post by Jacob Newbury
I know it's been quite a while since there has been any activity in this group about the ancestry of Thomas Newberry of Dorchester, MA, but things are quite different now!
After researching into the depths of this topic alongside the larger connecting and origins of the Devon Newberys I have concluded Thomas' ancestry and for the first time, the ancestry of Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645. Such research can be found detailed in a paper here; https://gum.co/Newbery. The paper tells of new research proving Thomas' ancestry to a further generation prior to William Newbery of Yarcombe who died in 1596.
Additionally, while researching the abovementioned topics I have obtained a greater understanding of just how many Newbery families there were in the East Devon/West Dorset area. Furthermore, I have recently published a paper detailing original research telling how the Devonian Newberys descend from the Newburgh line. Which can be found here; https://gum.co/Newburgh.
With all due respect, I am happy to discuss your findings, but I am not going to pay money for the right to do so. Self-published genealogies can fall anywhere on the spectrum from detailed, well-argued and well-evidenced research to abject nonsense and wishful thinking, and I lack the morbid curiosity to be a punter at those odds.
taf
Hi taf,
Apologies for your misunderstanding but I did not make this post to simply advertise the paper(s).
For way too long people have perpetuated the falsehoods told by Joseph Gardner Bartlett from his book Thomas' ancestry published in 1914. I have been working closely with the Newburgh Project - (https://www.worldwidenewburghproject.com/), an international genealogical project focusing on the Newburgh family and all descending branches which include finding Thomas and Richard's true ancestry and additionally how they may descend from the Newburgh family.
After publishing such papers I felt compelled to make a post here to let others know that new research has uncovered more information regarding the topic which is available for people to decide if they want to look into or not. Solely in the hope of preventing the further perpetuation of Bartlett's untrue findings.
Andrew Lancaster
2019-12-15 21:28:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by taf
Post by Jacob Newbury
I know it's been quite a while since there has been any activity in this group about the ancestry of Thomas Newberry of Dorchester, MA, but things are quite different now!
After researching into the depths of this topic alongside the larger connecting and origins of the Devon Newberys I have concluded Thomas' ancestry and for the first time, the ancestry of Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645. Such research can be found detailed in a paper here; https://gum.co/Newbery. The paper tells of new research proving Thomas' ancestry to a further generation prior to William Newbery of Yarcombe who died in 1596.
Additionally, while researching the abovementioned topics I have obtained a greater understanding of just how many Newbery families there were in the East Devon/West Dorset area. Furthermore, I have recently published a paper detailing original research telling how the Devonian Newberys descend from the Newburgh line. Which can be found here; https://gum.co/Newburgh.
With all due respect, I am happy to discuss your findings, but I am not going to pay money for the right to do so. Self-published genealogies can fall anywhere on the spectrum from detailed, well-argued and well-evidenced research to abject nonsense and wishful thinking, and I lack the morbid curiosity to be a punter at those odds.
taf
Hi taf,
Apologies for your misunderstanding but I did not make this post to simply advertise the paper(s).
For way too long people have perpetuated the falsehoods told by Joseph Gardner Bartlett from his book Thomas' ancestry published in 1914. I have been working closely with the Newburgh Project - (https://www.worldwidenewburghproject.com/), an international genealogical project focusing on the Newburgh family and all descending branches which include finding Thomas and Richard's true ancestry and additionally how they may descend from the Newburgh family.
After publishing such papers I felt compelled to make a post here to let others know that new research has uncovered more information regarding the topic which is available for people to decide if they want to look into or not. Solely in the hope of preventing the further perpetuation of Bartlett's untrue findings.
If you want to get information out on the internet, charging people to read it is the opposite of what you should want to do. Luckily, the cost of getting something out on the internet is low-to-zero, and so there is no reason to charge anyone.
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-15 22:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Andrew Lancaster
2019-12-16 11:23:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-16 12:03:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.

However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.

Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.

In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
Andrew Lancaster
2019-12-16 14:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.
However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.
Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.
In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
I suppose for many of us, the most important thing about the "key points" tend to be specific bits documentation, or other concrete evidence, which prove the criticized or new links you are arguing.

Reading between the lines the new links might be based on "circumstantial evidence", not direct "smoking gun" documentation?
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-16 15:09:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.
However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.
Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.
In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
I suppose for many of us, the most important thing about the "key points" tend to be specific bits documentation, or other concrete evidence, which prove the criticized or new links you are arguing.
Reading between the lines the new links might be based on "circumstantial evidence", not direct "smoking gun" documentation?
The points raised about both topics are proven in the papers citing many original documents.
Andrew Lancaster
2019-12-16 15:59:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.
However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.
Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.
In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
I suppose for many of us, the most important thing about the "key points" tend to be specific bits documentation, or other concrete evidence, which prove the criticized or new links you are arguing.
Reading between the lines the new links might be based on "circumstantial evidence", not direct "smoking gun" documentation?
The points raised about both topics are proven in the papers citing many original documents.
But I presume no one is going to read them if they have to pay 14 dollars or whatever the price was.
Jacob Newbury
2019-12-16 21:50:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.
However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.
Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.
In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
I suppose for many of us, the most important thing about the "key points" tend to be specific bits documentation, or other concrete evidence, which prove the criticized or new links you are arguing.
Reading between the lines the new links might be based on "circumstantial evidence", not direct "smoking gun" documentation?
The points raised about both topics are proven in the papers citing many original documents.
But I presume no one is going to read them if they have to pay 14 dollars or whatever the price was.
Andy, I've been thinking about what you said earlier and have concluded that the paper regarding Thomas and Richard's ancestry should be shared for everyone. However, due to the sheer amount of research, time and money I have invested in the Extraction paper that will continue to hold a fee.

The Thomas and Richard paper can be found here; https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VnNtGuJyevJT0gwwoDDzoSWMc9CGFTUu/view?usp=sharing
I may update the link if needed.
Jacob Newbury
2020-01-06 15:02:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Post by Andrew Lancaster
Post by Jacob Newbury
Hi Andrew,
Am I right in think you are the same Andrew Lancaster who has written about Baronial Baynard family?
Yes, but trying to stick to the subject, Foundations articles are not visible to most internet users. I presume what you want to do is clear up some misunderstandings and get the word out as widely as possible. When I wanted to sort out some common confusions about the 12th century Hastings families I made some simple webpages and posted a message here with a link. This forum is itself a place where smaller chunks of new evidence, clarifications, etc can be presented for free. Wikitree also gives the possibility for users to make information pages. Maybe you can at least post some of your key arguments here.
I apologise but it seems your presumption is a bit off. Sorry if I have not made this clear Andrew but the papers were not written to simply clarify and correct some misunderstandings from Bartlett at all, rather provide the fresh research and understanding about the said topics. I thought it best to mentioned Bartlett in the initial post seeing a discussion about his work regarding Newberry took place in this group back in 2011.
However, I'll be happy to share some of the key points here.
Thomas Newberry, early New England settler, was the fourth son of Richard and Grace Newberry (nee. Matthew), was born circa 1594 and baptised 10th Nov. the same year in Yarcombe, Devon. It has already been well established that Thomas' ancestry goes back to his grandfather, William Newbery of Yarcombe who died circa 1596 leaving a will dated the same year.
Upon diving into the large amount of Newberys in Devon during the 16th and 17th century I found a record which tells of how this William was the youngest of two sons of John Newbery 'the elder' of Membury and Agnes his wife. The older brother of William was also called John Newbery. The said record tells of an incident that occurred in 1551 wherein confusion was cast on which of the brothers were first in line to the farm's order of reversion. Years later William attempted to become/claim to have become the next in the order of reversion pertaining to the farm that the family leased from the manor of Membury named 'Osmore'.
Following a case put forward in the Star Chamber, it was found that John was rightly the first in the said order of reversion, not William.
Following this, William moved out of the Membury parish and settled first in Stockland before settling in Yarcombe with his son Richard on the 3rd Mar. 1580.
The other New England settler, Richard Newbery who became a freeman of MA in 1645 is found to be the grandson of said John Newbery (brother of said William). Richard's parents are found to have been Roger and Alice Newbery (nee. Pinney). Alice was a daughter of New England settler Humphrey Pinney.
In regards to how the Devonian Newberys descend from the noble Newburgh family - it should first be understood, (to those who have not researched this matter at all), that there is an extraordinarily large amount of Newberys found in Devon, specifically West Devon/East Dorset, from the 16th century onwards. Despite successfully being able to connect many of these families, not all can be connected via a paper trail. However, they are doubtlessly all related and descend from the same break-point from the Newburgh line.
I have found that the extraction from the Newburgh family occurred in the late 14th century via the (previously unknown) third brother of a main Newburgh heir John Newburgh II who married Margaret Poyntz. This has been found via researching on both angles of (A) where exactly in the Newburgh line was the most interaction with the same East Devon/West Dorset area, and (B) the furthest back record of any Newberys in said area.
I suppose for many of us, the most important thing about the "key points" tend to be specific bits documentation, or other concrete evidence, which prove the criticized or new links you are arguing.
Reading between the lines the new links might be based on "circumstantial evidence", not direct "smoking gun" documentation?
The points raised about both topics are proven in the papers citing many original documents.
But I presume no one is going to read them if they have to pay 14 dollars or whatever the price was.
Andy, I've been thinking about what you said earlier and have concluded that the paper regarding Thomas and Richard's ancestry should be shared for everyone. However, due to the sheer amount of research, time and money I have invested in the Extraction paper that will continue to hold a fee.
The Thomas and Richard paper can be found here; https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VnNtGuJyevJT0gwwoDDzoSWMc9CGFTUu/view?usp=sharing
I may update the link if needed.
Update:
The paper can now be found here instead; https://gum.co/Newbery

Loading...