G***@aol.com
2011-10-31 23:15:22 UTC
I apologize if this appears more than once. I believe Rootsweb was down
this afternoon for a few hours.
Gentlemen:
After being alerted by a fellow researcher to this discussion, I have read
the comments regarding Bartlett with interest. I believe the documentation
presented herein, is still insufficient to make proper conclusions, let
alone accusations against Bartlett. From experience, I know certain editors
will not allow such accusations to stand. Therefore, documentation must be
authentic, credible, and above all erudite.
I am in possession of all the said letters (Bartlett vs. Butler) and will
share them with anyone who is interested via individual email. I will not,
however, post to the list. My transcriptions are from typed originals
received from the archivist of the R. Stanton Avery Collections located at
NEHGS. I also have the will of William Newberry 1596, an original PDF file
from the TNA, and will gladly share with anyone who asks. However, those
persons will certainly want to make their own translation. As you are probably
aware, Medieval Latin has its pitfalls, therefore, a professional
translation is essential. Could this be the whole crux of the problems discussed
herein?
Two years ago, a professional English historian and genealogist went (on
my behalf) to the College of Arms in London to investigate this whole
Bartlett v. Butler mess. Unfortunately, the College was not much help in
discovering further information. Citations were apparently not present on the
pedigree she was allowed to view. Neither are the heralds generally
cooperative in sharing with outside genealogists, any but a small part of a pedigree
in question. The single mission and existence of the College, is to prove
the legitimacy of families to bear arms. Applicants are required to
submit their pedigree to the College for examination and assessment.
As a sidebar, in viewing various online Newberry pedigrees with arms
illustrations; the illustrations I have seen are seldom accurate. Each family’s
arms were based on the original ancient blazoning, altered slightly with
their own unique differences. Legitimate illustrations for the Newburgh
family arms are not available to the Internet public at large. (Those that
can be purchased online are not accurate, so don't waste your money.)
However, blazonings can be found in Burke’s Peerage and Gentry. Interpretation can
be accomplished with assistance of books on heraldry, i.e. Heraldry for
Local Historians and Genealogists by Stephen Friar : Grange Books (Sutton
Publishing) 1997. (ISBN 1-84013-002-4). There are up to nine different arms for
the various lines of the Medieval Newburgh family, and not all are in
Burke's.
I have been interested in the NEWBERRY family since publishing The Quiet
Patriarch in 2006, detailing my ancestor James A. Newberry.
_http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hannahslife/quiet_patriarch.htm_
(http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hannahslife/quiet_patriarch.htm) .
Since that time, I have attempted to ascertain if his English progenitor
RICHARD NEWBURY was related to THOMAS NEWBERRY, whom Joseph Gardner Bartlett
details in his work The Newberry Genealogy.
Even with two experienced English genealogists working beside me, I have
unfortunately hit countless brick walls with regard to finding Richard’s
root family in England, Consequently, to further the research, in 2009, I
began the World Wide Newberry/Newburgh DNA surname project, for which I am the
administrator. Partnering with DNA Consultants, of Phoenix, Arizona, the
primary goal of the project was to discover if Thomas Newberry and my
ancestor Richard Newberry were related. Both were immigrant “planters” in New
England between 1630-34 and 1643.
Another person involved in the New England experiment (listed as one of
the “Dorchester Adventurers”) was Rector Walter Newburgh, of Symondsbury,
who died in 1631. His involvement with the Rector of Dorchester, John White,
may have been the reason, historians and genealogists assumed a
relationship between the armigerous Newburgh families and the Newberry families
located on the Dorset/Devon border, who immigrated to New England in the 1630’s.
For years, historians (Savage, Flagg and others) have assumed the families
to be related in some way.
In 2003, the first DNA test for RICHARD NEWBERRY was accomplished. Using
this as a base test, the next test came in 2009, when another subject from
Richard’s line reasonably confirmed the two modern subjects and their
progenitors were related.
Finally, after waiting two more years, a subject stepped up to test for
the THOMAS NEWBERRY line. The comparison was done quite recently. By
comparing the results, it has been confirmed,
Richard Newbury and Thomas Newberry of NEW ENGLAND - WERE NOT related.
As a caveat, participant eligibility for this project is based solely on
research submitted by each participant. As administrator, I have checked (to
the best of my ability) familial connections for veracity in order to
maintain the credibility of the study. You can read about the study at
_http://dnaconsultants.com/Newberry/index.htm_
(http://dnaconsultants.com/Newberry/index.htm) . There are also newsletters detailing some of the other tests
that were done. [ If you would like to be included on the DNA mailing list,
submit your name and email.]
Now that the first goal has been addressed, the second goal of the
project will be to determine if either of the New England Colonial NEWBERRY’s,
truly have a connection to the ARMIGEROUS NEWBURGH surname. For that, it is
imperative to find test subjects who can trace themselves back to the
armigerous DORSET FAMILY. Preferably, the subject would be from Great Britain,
and have no interest in Bartlett's work. Curiously, I have not found a
definitive modern text, (outside of Hutchins' and Collinson) written by a 20th
century English descendant of the Newburgh family.
SURNAME DEFINITION
Permutations of the ancient Neuburgh v. Neubury surnames may have led
historians astray. For instance, in studying the Feet of Fines of 1358, the
Neubury name shows up without any apparent relationship to the Newburgh
family of Dorset. Generally, the Dorset Newburgh family name, (in late medieval/
early modern texts) is generally spelled Neuburgh or Neuborough, though
other variations do exist. It is currently impossible to determine if the
NEWBERRY surname (prevalent in 17th century Devon) is actually a
derivation of the armigerous Newburgh surname.
In recent studies, I have found what appears to be a similar and possibly
unrelated surname spelled "Neubury" appearing as early as the later 13th
century. (I have recently started taking serious note of it.) The notation
shows a John de Newbery mentioned as “keeper of the great wardrobe.” The
date of this entry would exclude known Dorset members of the Newburgh
family from this honorable position. In the same Feet of Fines volume there
are also individuals from the Dorset family mentioned, recorded with what I
consider to be the traditional armigerous spelling (i.e. Neuburgh,
Neuborough, Newborowe).
In conclusion, I can only imagine the potential impact on American
Newberry descendants who are concerned with the authenticity and correctness of
their lines. Later Newburgh and related surnames seem to be rather
understudied by English genealogists and historians.
S. Simonich
In a message dated 10/30/2011 8:03:05 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
***@whidbey.com writes:
Douglas Richardson charges that Bartlett's Newberry Genealogy was
fraudulent,
that Bartlett altered the list of the children of Richard Newberry of
Yarcombe,
and that Bartlett "carefully omitted" a transcript of the 1696 will of
William
Newberry of Yarcombe.
Joseph (not John) Gardner Bartlett was a reputable professional
genealogist of
the early 1900s. Like all genealogist and other mortals he undoubtedly
made
mistakes in his work. I am unaware he ever evinced any intention to
defraud, and
I would like to ask Mr. Richardson the basis for such a serious accusation.
To summarize the point at issue in a very few words: in his 1914 Newberry
Genealogy, Bartlett wrote that Thomas the emigrant was a grandson of
Richard
Newberry of Othe Francis, Netherbury, Dorset and Yarcombe, Devon. The
College of
Arms claimed he was a grandson of William Newberry of Yarcombe. Richard of
Netherbury was a younger son of a long line of Newburghs extending back
for many
generations.
The R. Stanton Avery Special Collections at the NEHGS contain a 1925
exchange of
letters between Bartlett and A. T. Butler of the College of Arms.
Butler wrote to call Bartlett's attention to some recent findings of the
College of Arms while investigating the pedigree of the emigrant Thomas
Newberry, with a view to registration in the College. In an objective and-
-I
think the word is 'collegial'--tone, Butler pointed out evidence found
which
supported the contention that Thomas' grandfather was William of Yarcombe.
Butler closed with, "...though we have disproved your pedigree I feel sure
from
the searches which have been made that all these Newberrys in Dorsetshire
at
this period were descended from the original stock."
In his reply to this letter from the College of Arms, Bartlett wrote, "I
have
done no professional work on Newberry for over a dozen years, but have
occasionally come across by accident some additional evidences not
included in
my book, which I have been interested to note and which confirm my
previous
conclusions." He went on to say, "After careful study of the chart and
data you
sent, and comparison with my own data, I do not agree with all your
conclusions.
Although Richard Newberry as 'son' was one of the administrators of the
estate
of Ellen Newberry of Yarcomb in 1609, as you state, he was not of Yarcombe
then
and never was of that parish as far as I can find; he was really a
step-son and
not own son of Ellen and was a resident of Membury then and for over a
score of
years preceeding [sic]. Among several evidences I have of his long
residence in
Membury is a suit in 1591 of Richard Newberry of Membury, Co. Devon,
against
William Shegge, regarding "the estate in Yarcombe, Co. Devon held by
William
Haydon (footnote: '...later mentioned in the will of Richard Newberry in
1618,
then of Shute') and occupied by William Newberry father of complainant."
Bartlett went on to defend his previous research with additional
information. In
doing so mentions a deposition and a deed which term Richard as of
Leavinhey,
Devon; that Richard's son Robert Newberry (b. 1592) succeeded to Leavinhey
in
Yarcomb and that Robert settled it on his son Samuel Newberry (b. 1631)
who
about the time of his marriage rebuilt the house on the estate, and that
the
chimney in 1910 still bore his initials "S. N." and the date 1653.
Bartlett then wrote, "I agree with your conclusion that all the
Newboroughs,
Newberrys, etc., of the 17th century of Yarcombe, Membury, Colyton,
Dallwood,
Stockland, etc., doubtless derived from the ancient Newburghs of
Winfrith, Co.
Dorset, seated there from the time of Henry I. I therefore assume they had
a
hereditary right to the old Newburg arms, although its use by them
probably long
lay dormant. I infer the college is satisfied that the emigrant
Thomas...was the
man born at Yarcomb in 1594...If the college is satisfied to register the
old
Newburgh arms to any descendant of this Thomas Newberry (regardless of his
line
or name) I do not see that the right [underlined] is strengthened any by
showing
that Thomas' father Richard was son of William (even if this claim were
true) as
William was merely of yeoman rank as was his father before him. I should
say
that these Memburys, Dallwood, Stockland, etc. Newberrys must have
branched off
the main line at Winfrith prior to 1400." He concluded by expressing his
desire
to publish his additional data to clarify this matter. However, Bartlett
died
the next year.
A. T. Butler of the College of Arms answered Bartlett with:
"...Your pedigree is a wonderful and creditable piece of work, and I
should be
only too pleased (as would my client) if it could be established to the
satisfaction of the official examiners, and thus enable the College to
allow the
right of the emigrants' descendants to bear the arms, which cannot be done
as
matters stand at present." Butler then made a few more points supporting
his
position, including the exceptionally well kept Yarcombe parish register,
in
which the only Newberry burials between 1606 and 1639 are:
12 May 1606 William Newberry, s. of Richard.
6 Aug 1606 Dorothy Newberry, d. of Richard.
26 Jun 1609 Ellen Newberry, widow
18 Dec 1632 Grace Newberry, wife of Richard.
20 Aug 1639 Richard Newberry.
Anyone researching this family in east Devon and Dorset in the 1500s and
1600s
will soon find themselves drowning in a sea of Newberrys--Up Ottery,
Yarcombe,
Membury, Dalwood, Stockland, Shute, Axminster, Widworthy, Honiton, Totnes,
Symondsbury, etc. Many of these places are only a few miles apart, and all
have
some connection with the Newberrys, including a good supply of Richards,
Williams, and Johns. Bartlett's book shows he did a careful investigation
of
these Newberrys in his search for Thomas' ancestry. Several Newberry wills
bear
on the issue. One will is central: that of William Newbery of Yarcombe,
who died
1596. A typed transcript of this will is included in the Newberry folder
in the
Avery Special Collections of NEHGS, and may have been the same one
available to
Bartlett. Here it is, in full:
"William Newbery, of Yornscombe, co. Devon.
Dated:- 26 May, 1596.
Wife:- Ellen.
Tristram Smith & his wife, & their children (under age).
William Smith, & his children (under age).
John Smith, & his boy (under age).
Richard Newbery's children, (under age).
Res. leg. & exor:- son Richard.
Wits:- Thomas Mayor, vicar, William Hamlyn & Hugh Billings.
Proved:- 6 Dec., 1596, by Fr'cs. Clerk, pub-not., proctor to Richard
Newberye,
exor.
(P.C.C. 90 Drake.)"
It would be helpful to have the full text of the original will, if someone
has
access to the wills in the Drake folio as proved before the Prerog. Court
of
Canterbury. However, if the order of the legatees is as in the original
text, it
suggests that the Smith family was more important to William Newbery than
were
Richard Newbery's children. Also, it seems curious that William refers to
"Richard Newbery's children," but not "my grandchildren", somehow
distancing his
own son (step-son?) Richard from those children.
Finally, a note on the manor of Leavinhey, Devon. This is a critical point
for
Bartlett's argument, because it moves Richard of Netherbury 24 km west to
Yarcombe, where he can be the father of Thomas. Mr. Richardson has found a
place
called Livingshayes near Silverton, some 8 miles west of Yarcombe. Both
places
survive today on the Ordnance Survey maps, with Livenhayes Farm 1 km SW of
Yarcombe and Livingshayes 1 km NE of Silverton. Mr. Richardson says that
Silverton is "more likely the place intended", but he provides no evidence
for
his assertion. Recall that Bartlett was kind enough to provide more
information
on the subsequent Newberrys of Leavinhey, even down to those 1653 chimney
initials for Samuel Newberry. I could find nothing in A2A (Access to
Archives)
for Leavinhey or some variants, but for Yarcombe Parish, the Devon Record
Office reference 1150A is a list of the feoffees and disposition of
Longcraft
Meadow, and has this:
"Including:
PF 9 "A list of the names of those persons that contributed to the Charity
for
the poor of Yarcombe... The abovesaid summes are parte of the purchase
money
paid to William Dollin for Long-craft meadow in Yarcombe." 1692
PF11, 12 Lease and Release 1692
1 Wm Dolling 2 Jn Matthews, Henry Newberry, Sam Newberry jun., Robt
Vincent, Sam
Cosens, Ric Steevens, Nich's Knight, Jas Vincent sen., Wm Vincent jun., Jn
Domett sen., as Feoffees.
PF13 Feoffees deed of trust. 1692...",
which, while hardly definitive, does give us a Samuel Newberry of Yarcombe
who
was contemporary with Bartlett's Samuel of Leavinhey.
In summary, this matter is not settled. Bartlett did not hide or conceal
the
information that a William of Yarcombe had a son Richard, but equated him
with
Richard of Shute. As things stand now, both assertions depend on such
subtleties
as the wording in wills, the abbreviations used in parish records, and the
recurrence of the same given names. Serious researchers can obtain the
letters
and other Newberry materials from the Avery Special Collections at NEHGS.
Robert Forrest
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject
and the body of the message
this afternoon for a few hours.
Gentlemen:
After being alerted by a fellow researcher to this discussion, I have read
the comments regarding Bartlett with interest. I believe the documentation
presented herein, is still insufficient to make proper conclusions, let
alone accusations against Bartlett. From experience, I know certain editors
will not allow such accusations to stand. Therefore, documentation must be
authentic, credible, and above all erudite.
I am in possession of all the said letters (Bartlett vs. Butler) and will
share them with anyone who is interested via individual email. I will not,
however, post to the list. My transcriptions are from typed originals
received from the archivist of the R. Stanton Avery Collections located at
NEHGS. I also have the will of William Newberry 1596, an original PDF file
from the TNA, and will gladly share with anyone who asks. However, those
persons will certainly want to make their own translation. As you are probably
aware, Medieval Latin has its pitfalls, therefore, a professional
translation is essential. Could this be the whole crux of the problems discussed
herein?
Two years ago, a professional English historian and genealogist went (on
my behalf) to the College of Arms in London to investigate this whole
Bartlett v. Butler mess. Unfortunately, the College was not much help in
discovering further information. Citations were apparently not present on the
pedigree she was allowed to view. Neither are the heralds generally
cooperative in sharing with outside genealogists, any but a small part of a pedigree
in question. The single mission and existence of the College, is to prove
the legitimacy of families to bear arms. Applicants are required to
submit their pedigree to the College for examination and assessment.
As a sidebar, in viewing various online Newberry pedigrees with arms
illustrations; the illustrations I have seen are seldom accurate. Each family’s
arms were based on the original ancient blazoning, altered slightly with
their own unique differences. Legitimate illustrations for the Newburgh
family arms are not available to the Internet public at large. (Those that
can be purchased online are not accurate, so don't waste your money.)
However, blazonings can be found in Burke’s Peerage and Gentry. Interpretation can
be accomplished with assistance of books on heraldry, i.e. Heraldry for
Local Historians and Genealogists by Stephen Friar : Grange Books (Sutton
Publishing) 1997. (ISBN 1-84013-002-4). There are up to nine different arms for
the various lines of the Medieval Newburgh family, and not all are in
Burke's.
I have been interested in the NEWBERRY family since publishing The Quiet
Patriarch in 2006, detailing my ancestor James A. Newberry.
_http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hannahslife/quiet_patriarch.htm_
(http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hannahslife/quiet_patriarch.htm) .
Since that time, I have attempted to ascertain if his English progenitor
RICHARD NEWBURY was related to THOMAS NEWBERRY, whom Joseph Gardner Bartlett
details in his work The Newberry Genealogy.
Even with two experienced English genealogists working beside me, I have
unfortunately hit countless brick walls with regard to finding Richard’s
root family in England, Consequently, to further the research, in 2009, I
began the World Wide Newberry/Newburgh DNA surname project, for which I am the
administrator. Partnering with DNA Consultants, of Phoenix, Arizona, the
primary goal of the project was to discover if Thomas Newberry and my
ancestor Richard Newberry were related. Both were immigrant “planters” in New
England between 1630-34 and 1643.
Another person involved in the New England experiment (listed as one of
the “Dorchester Adventurers”) was Rector Walter Newburgh, of Symondsbury,
who died in 1631. His involvement with the Rector of Dorchester, John White,
may have been the reason, historians and genealogists assumed a
relationship between the armigerous Newburgh families and the Newberry families
located on the Dorset/Devon border, who immigrated to New England in the 1630’s.
For years, historians (Savage, Flagg and others) have assumed the families
to be related in some way.
In 2003, the first DNA test for RICHARD NEWBERRY was accomplished. Using
this as a base test, the next test came in 2009, when another subject from
Richard’s line reasonably confirmed the two modern subjects and their
progenitors were related.
Finally, after waiting two more years, a subject stepped up to test for
the THOMAS NEWBERRY line. The comparison was done quite recently. By
comparing the results, it has been confirmed,
Richard Newbury and Thomas Newberry of NEW ENGLAND - WERE NOT related.
As a caveat, participant eligibility for this project is based solely on
research submitted by each participant. As administrator, I have checked (to
the best of my ability) familial connections for veracity in order to
maintain the credibility of the study. You can read about the study at
_http://dnaconsultants.com/Newberry/index.htm_
(http://dnaconsultants.com/Newberry/index.htm) . There are also newsletters detailing some of the other tests
that were done. [ If you would like to be included on the DNA mailing list,
submit your name and email.]
Now that the first goal has been addressed, the second goal of the
project will be to determine if either of the New England Colonial NEWBERRY’s,
truly have a connection to the ARMIGEROUS NEWBURGH surname. For that, it is
imperative to find test subjects who can trace themselves back to the
armigerous DORSET FAMILY. Preferably, the subject would be from Great Britain,
and have no interest in Bartlett's work. Curiously, I have not found a
definitive modern text, (outside of Hutchins' and Collinson) written by a 20th
century English descendant of the Newburgh family.
SURNAME DEFINITION
Permutations of the ancient Neuburgh v. Neubury surnames may have led
historians astray. For instance, in studying the Feet of Fines of 1358, the
Neubury name shows up without any apparent relationship to the Newburgh
family of Dorset. Generally, the Dorset Newburgh family name, (in late medieval/
early modern texts) is generally spelled Neuburgh or Neuborough, though
other variations do exist. It is currently impossible to determine if the
NEWBERRY surname (prevalent in 17th century Devon) is actually a
derivation of the armigerous Newburgh surname.
In recent studies, I have found what appears to be a similar and possibly
unrelated surname spelled "Neubury" appearing as early as the later 13th
century. (I have recently started taking serious note of it.) The notation
shows a John de Newbery mentioned as “keeper of the great wardrobe.” The
date of this entry would exclude known Dorset members of the Newburgh
family from this honorable position. In the same Feet of Fines volume there
are also individuals from the Dorset family mentioned, recorded with what I
consider to be the traditional armigerous spelling (i.e. Neuburgh,
Neuborough, Newborowe).
In conclusion, I can only imagine the potential impact on American
Newberry descendants who are concerned with the authenticity and correctness of
their lines. Later Newburgh and related surnames seem to be rather
understudied by English genealogists and historians.
S. Simonich
In a message dated 10/30/2011 8:03:05 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
***@whidbey.com writes:
Douglas Richardson charges that Bartlett's Newberry Genealogy was
fraudulent,
that Bartlett altered the list of the children of Richard Newberry of
Yarcombe,
and that Bartlett "carefully omitted" a transcript of the 1696 will of
William
Newberry of Yarcombe.
Joseph (not John) Gardner Bartlett was a reputable professional
genealogist of
the early 1900s. Like all genealogist and other mortals he undoubtedly
made
mistakes in his work. I am unaware he ever evinced any intention to
defraud, and
I would like to ask Mr. Richardson the basis for such a serious accusation.
To summarize the point at issue in a very few words: in his 1914 Newberry
Genealogy, Bartlett wrote that Thomas the emigrant was a grandson of
Richard
Newberry of Othe Francis, Netherbury, Dorset and Yarcombe, Devon. The
College of
Arms claimed he was a grandson of William Newberry of Yarcombe. Richard of
Netherbury was a younger son of a long line of Newburghs extending back
for many
generations.
The R. Stanton Avery Special Collections at the NEHGS contain a 1925
exchange of
letters between Bartlett and A. T. Butler of the College of Arms.
Butler wrote to call Bartlett's attention to some recent findings of the
College of Arms while investigating the pedigree of the emigrant Thomas
Newberry, with a view to registration in the College. In an objective and-
-I
think the word is 'collegial'--tone, Butler pointed out evidence found
which
supported the contention that Thomas' grandfather was William of Yarcombe.
Butler closed with, "...though we have disproved your pedigree I feel sure
from
the searches which have been made that all these Newberrys in Dorsetshire
at
this period were descended from the original stock."
In his reply to this letter from the College of Arms, Bartlett wrote, "I
have
done no professional work on Newberry for over a dozen years, but have
occasionally come across by accident some additional evidences not
included in
my book, which I have been interested to note and which confirm my
previous
conclusions." He went on to say, "After careful study of the chart and
data you
sent, and comparison with my own data, I do not agree with all your
conclusions.
Although Richard Newberry as 'son' was one of the administrators of the
estate
of Ellen Newberry of Yarcomb in 1609, as you state, he was not of Yarcombe
then
and never was of that parish as far as I can find; he was really a
step-son and
not own son of Ellen and was a resident of Membury then and for over a
score of
years preceeding [sic]. Among several evidences I have of his long
residence in
Membury is a suit in 1591 of Richard Newberry of Membury, Co. Devon,
against
William Shegge, regarding "the estate in Yarcombe, Co. Devon held by
William
Haydon (footnote: '...later mentioned in the will of Richard Newberry in
1618,
then of Shute') and occupied by William Newberry father of complainant."
Bartlett went on to defend his previous research with additional
information. In
doing so mentions a deposition and a deed which term Richard as of
Leavinhey,
Devon; that Richard's son Robert Newberry (b. 1592) succeeded to Leavinhey
in
Yarcomb and that Robert settled it on his son Samuel Newberry (b. 1631)
who
about the time of his marriage rebuilt the house on the estate, and that
the
chimney in 1910 still bore his initials "S. N." and the date 1653.
Bartlett then wrote, "I agree with your conclusion that all the
Newboroughs,
Newberrys, etc., of the 17th century of Yarcombe, Membury, Colyton,
Dallwood,
Stockland, etc., doubtless derived from the ancient Newburghs of
Winfrith, Co.
Dorset, seated there from the time of Henry I. I therefore assume they had
a
hereditary right to the old Newburg arms, although its use by them
probably long
lay dormant. I infer the college is satisfied that the emigrant
Thomas...was the
man born at Yarcomb in 1594...If the college is satisfied to register the
old
Newburgh arms to any descendant of this Thomas Newberry (regardless of his
line
or name) I do not see that the right [underlined] is strengthened any by
showing
that Thomas' father Richard was son of William (even if this claim were
true) as
William was merely of yeoman rank as was his father before him. I should
say
that these Memburys, Dallwood, Stockland, etc. Newberrys must have
branched off
the main line at Winfrith prior to 1400." He concluded by expressing his
desire
to publish his additional data to clarify this matter. However, Bartlett
died
the next year.
A. T. Butler of the College of Arms answered Bartlett with:
"...Your pedigree is a wonderful and creditable piece of work, and I
should be
only too pleased (as would my client) if it could be established to the
satisfaction of the official examiners, and thus enable the College to
allow the
right of the emigrants' descendants to bear the arms, which cannot be done
as
matters stand at present." Butler then made a few more points supporting
his
position, including the exceptionally well kept Yarcombe parish register,
in
which the only Newberry burials between 1606 and 1639 are:
12 May 1606 William Newberry, s. of Richard.
6 Aug 1606 Dorothy Newberry, d. of Richard.
26 Jun 1609 Ellen Newberry, widow
18 Dec 1632 Grace Newberry, wife of Richard.
20 Aug 1639 Richard Newberry.
Anyone researching this family in east Devon and Dorset in the 1500s and
1600s
will soon find themselves drowning in a sea of Newberrys--Up Ottery,
Yarcombe,
Membury, Dalwood, Stockland, Shute, Axminster, Widworthy, Honiton, Totnes,
Symondsbury, etc. Many of these places are only a few miles apart, and all
have
some connection with the Newberrys, including a good supply of Richards,
Williams, and Johns. Bartlett's book shows he did a careful investigation
of
these Newberrys in his search for Thomas' ancestry. Several Newberry wills
bear
on the issue. One will is central: that of William Newbery of Yarcombe,
who died
1596. A typed transcript of this will is included in the Newberry folder
in the
Avery Special Collections of NEHGS, and may have been the same one
available to
Bartlett. Here it is, in full:
"William Newbery, of Yornscombe, co. Devon.
Dated:- 26 May, 1596.
Wife:- Ellen.
Tristram Smith & his wife, & their children (under age).
William Smith, & his children (under age).
John Smith, & his boy (under age).
Richard Newbery's children, (under age).
Res. leg. & exor:- son Richard.
Wits:- Thomas Mayor, vicar, William Hamlyn & Hugh Billings.
Proved:- 6 Dec., 1596, by Fr'cs. Clerk, pub-not., proctor to Richard
Newberye,
exor.
(P.C.C. 90 Drake.)"
It would be helpful to have the full text of the original will, if someone
has
access to the wills in the Drake folio as proved before the Prerog. Court
of
Canterbury. However, if the order of the legatees is as in the original
text, it
suggests that the Smith family was more important to William Newbery than
were
Richard Newbery's children. Also, it seems curious that William refers to
"Richard Newbery's children," but not "my grandchildren", somehow
distancing his
own son (step-son?) Richard from those children.
Finally, a note on the manor of Leavinhey, Devon. This is a critical point
for
Bartlett's argument, because it moves Richard of Netherbury 24 km west to
Yarcombe, where he can be the father of Thomas. Mr. Richardson has found a
place
called Livingshayes near Silverton, some 8 miles west of Yarcombe. Both
places
survive today on the Ordnance Survey maps, with Livenhayes Farm 1 km SW of
Yarcombe and Livingshayes 1 km NE of Silverton. Mr. Richardson says that
Silverton is "more likely the place intended", but he provides no evidence
for
his assertion. Recall that Bartlett was kind enough to provide more
information
on the subsequent Newberrys of Leavinhey, even down to those 1653 chimney
initials for Samuel Newberry. I could find nothing in A2A (Access to
Archives)
for Leavinhey or some variants, but for Yarcombe Parish, the Devon Record
Office reference 1150A is a list of the feoffees and disposition of
Longcraft
Meadow, and has this:
"Including:
PF 9 "A list of the names of those persons that contributed to the Charity
for
the poor of Yarcombe... The abovesaid summes are parte of the purchase
money
paid to William Dollin for Long-craft meadow in Yarcombe." 1692
PF11, 12 Lease and Release 1692
1 Wm Dolling 2 Jn Matthews, Henry Newberry, Sam Newberry jun., Robt
Vincent, Sam
Cosens, Ric Steevens, Nich's Knight, Jas Vincent sen., Wm Vincent jun., Jn
Domett sen., as Feoffees.
PF13 Feoffees deed of trust. 1692...",
which, while hardly definitive, does give us a Samuel Newberry of Yarcombe
who
was contemporary with Bartlett's Samuel of Leavinhey.
In summary, this matter is not settled. Bartlett did not hide or conceal
the
information that a William of Yarcombe had a son Richard, but equated him
with
Richard of Shute. As things stand now, both assertions depend on such
subtleties
as the wording in wills, the abbreviations used in parish records, and the
recurrence of the same given names. Serious researchers can obtain the
letters
and other Newberry materials from the Avery Special Collections at NEHGS.
Robert Forrest
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject
and the body of the message