j***@yahoo.com
2008-09-27 00:28:36 UTC
Back in Dec. 2006 and Jan. 2007 there was a long thread in this group
on John Harrington of Doncaster which touched, inter alia, on Sir
Richard Copley of Batley and the parentage of his son Roger. The
discussion was triggered by the fact that the 1st and 2nd editions of
Faris' "Plantagenet Ancestry" made Roger a son of Sir Richard by his
2nd wife Elizabeth, dau. of John Harrington of Doncaster, while
Richardson's more recent "Plantagenet Ancestry", while based on Faris,
changed this to say that Roger was son by the 1st wide Margaret, dau.
of Sir Richard Denton. I won't go into the arguments for either
alternative here (which are discussed at length in the earlier
thread), except to say that most of the pedigrees of the Copley family
either agree with Faris or report the Denton parentage with an
editor's note saying that the pedigree is wrong in this regard.
It turns out that there may be another alternative: perhaps Sir
Richard Copley had only one wife, and Margaret Denton was his
grandmother, not his wife. This hypothesis was suggested in 1924 by
the noted Yorkshire antiquarian and genealogist W. Pailey Baildon,
published (posthumously) in 1928 in vol. 28 of the Publications of the
Thoresby Society.
Baildon says in part:
"The visitation of 1584-5 starts with Richard Copley (died 1434) and
states that he was twice married, first to Margaret, daughter of Sir
Richard Denton, knt., and secondly to Elizabeth, dau. of Sir John
Harrington. I am unable to find any evidence as to Richard's alleged
first wife; I may be mistaken, but I believe that Margaret Denton was,
in fact, his grandmother. The clue is furnished by the history of the
manor of Sutton." [end of quote]
I won't transcribe here the rather long narrative which follows,
regarding the connections of the families of Boyville, Denton, and
Copley to the manor of Sutton, except to say that Baildon provides
evidence that Margaret, dau. of Sir Richard Denton, married Adam
Copley of Batley, the grandfather of Richard. Accordng to Baildon,
older Copley pedigrees, which say this Adam's wife was Margery
Oxenthope, confuse this Adam with his uncle also named Adam.
Incidentally this earlier Denton/Copley marriage would also explain
how the name Richard came to be used in the Copley family.
Baildon ends his discussion of this point with this statement:
"Whether Richard Copley, Adam's grandson, also married a Margaret,
daughter of another Sir Richard Denton, I cannot say; it is possible,
but it seems to me unlikely." [end quote]
AFAIK, the purported marriage of Richard Copley and Margaret Denton is
based solely on visitation pedigrees, or pedigrees derived from them.
Baildon's notes, which are part of a very detailed two-part article on
the early ancestry of the Copley family, seem to at least cast
significant doubt on this particular aspect of the "accepted" pedigree
of the family. And, by eliminating the 1st marriage, the question of
the maternity of Richard's son Roger is also neatly resolved.
on John Harrington of Doncaster which touched, inter alia, on Sir
Richard Copley of Batley and the parentage of his son Roger. The
discussion was triggered by the fact that the 1st and 2nd editions of
Faris' "Plantagenet Ancestry" made Roger a son of Sir Richard by his
2nd wife Elizabeth, dau. of John Harrington of Doncaster, while
Richardson's more recent "Plantagenet Ancestry", while based on Faris,
changed this to say that Roger was son by the 1st wide Margaret, dau.
of Sir Richard Denton. I won't go into the arguments for either
alternative here (which are discussed at length in the earlier
thread), except to say that most of the pedigrees of the Copley family
either agree with Faris or report the Denton parentage with an
editor's note saying that the pedigree is wrong in this regard.
It turns out that there may be another alternative: perhaps Sir
Richard Copley had only one wife, and Margaret Denton was his
grandmother, not his wife. This hypothesis was suggested in 1924 by
the noted Yorkshire antiquarian and genealogist W. Pailey Baildon,
published (posthumously) in 1928 in vol. 28 of the Publications of the
Thoresby Society.
Baildon says in part:
"The visitation of 1584-5 starts with Richard Copley (died 1434) and
states that he was twice married, first to Margaret, daughter of Sir
Richard Denton, knt., and secondly to Elizabeth, dau. of Sir John
Harrington. I am unable to find any evidence as to Richard's alleged
first wife; I may be mistaken, but I believe that Margaret Denton was,
in fact, his grandmother. The clue is furnished by the history of the
manor of Sutton." [end of quote]
I won't transcribe here the rather long narrative which follows,
regarding the connections of the families of Boyville, Denton, and
Copley to the manor of Sutton, except to say that Baildon provides
evidence that Margaret, dau. of Sir Richard Denton, married Adam
Copley of Batley, the grandfather of Richard. Accordng to Baildon,
older Copley pedigrees, which say this Adam's wife was Margery
Oxenthope, confuse this Adam with his uncle also named Adam.
Incidentally this earlier Denton/Copley marriage would also explain
how the name Richard came to be used in the Copley family.
Baildon ends his discussion of this point with this statement:
"Whether Richard Copley, Adam's grandson, also married a Margaret,
daughter of another Sir Richard Denton, I cannot say; it is possible,
but it seems to me unlikely." [end quote]
AFAIK, the purported marriage of Richard Copley and Margaret Denton is
based solely on visitation pedigrees, or pedigrees derived from them.
Baildon's notes, which are part of a very detailed two-part article on
the early ancestry of the Copley family, seem to at least cast
significant doubt on this particular aspect of the "accepted" pedigree
of the family. And, by eliminating the 1st marriage, the question of
the maternity of Richard's son Roger is also neatly resolved.