Saturday, 11 October 2008

Genealogy Records

Thanks to the need for more details in the records section, I found myself needing to collect a set of genealogy for part of the family - I chose the Viscounts Gormanston and Barons Drumhaire - to use as an example for adding records. Like most in House Preston, that means dredging through centuries of history to find details, even though I desperately want them to be incomplete.

I don't intend to deal with work in the past fortnight to collect it: not yet. If it turns out people would like to know how I collected it I can, but only if people post questions to the Journal so I know what they are interested in. After all, I 've been collecting over eight hundred years worth of data! Instead, I'll look at what I found and how I recorded it - and apologise for forgetting to post the second September entry because I got too involved in research.

Finding historical records

Before I show off by saying how well I did finding old records, I'll be honest and admit a lot came from The Honorable Jenico Francis Tara Preston, 18th Viscount Gormanston and family during my last visit. I ought to have got back in touch to check and perhaps add more information, but its now some 20 years since we last met, at the Dublin Millenium Celebrations in 1988, and its more than possible he has died since. Should he still be kicking around, I'd be delighted if he got in touch - perhaps through the Journal - but won't pester a busy family with my attentions... even though I remember those wonderful dogs so well and would love to know if the family still keep wolfhounds.

That said, I did track down the earliest information myself and that's what I want to look at; not least because I'm still collecting and getting ready to store details on the Family Records. I really want to look at just the information for Roger Preston born sometime after 1290 AD and who died some time before 1377 AD, but it will be useful to mention Adam Preston, who died some time after 1290 AD.

The information about Adam comes from Court records of King Edward I. Before finding it, all we knew was his son was called Roger, as was his father. The sources provide a means to discover information not included in them - but implied - that may be useful to researchers into our rich and varied family history.

Adam Preston

His father, Roger Preston, doesn't have a recorded date of birth or death I've been able to find. Similarly, Adam doesn't have dates recorded. However, a stroke of luck turned up a manuscript from the British Library while compiling the records that can provide more detail than it actually gave.

In the year 1290, Adam Preston appeared before the Court of King's Pleas to seek release from betrothal to Margaret de Stainton, which was granted. There's little more in the manuscript, but it provides useful details.

First, Margaret was the widow of John de Stainton and as a widow, would have had to spend a year of mourning before the betrothal. It's unlikely that release would have been sought in the first year and, in addition, the court dealt with the care and wardship of Margaret's children by John - of which there were five. Now, it would be rare for a girl of 14 to marry and bear children but by age 16 is possible. It's unlikely a girl of means and position to have appeared before this Court, would remain unmarried at age 18 so we can presume she married John at roughly 16.

Similarly, we know biologically it is rare for a woman to have one child each year, though possible for there to be one every 18 months. While it would be rare for all children to have survived birth, we can't assume they didn't, so have the reasonable estimate she was married to John for about 8 years, making her age 24 by the time of John's death and 25 before a betrothal would be reasonable. Allowing a year of betrothal to pass before the case came to court, and under the assumption a man of means would not be engaged to a woman of means and station if she was much younger than him, we can say Adam Preston must have been 26 or older by 1290, making his date of birth some time around 1260 to 1265.

At some time after the case, Adam did have a child - his first and his heir - who he named Roger, after his father. It would be unusual for a man of position to immediately marry after a case such as this and most likely that there was a further betrothal for a year before marriage. Since we know it is rare- though not impossible - to survive beyond age 50 and have his first children, we can presume he was not older than 48 at the trial.

From this brief reference, we can say Adam Preston must have been born between 1242 and 1265, but more likely at the later end. We know his father was Roger Preston and grandfather Phillip Preston, who was born around 1220. Thanks to simple biology, we know that Roger must have been born no earlier than 1235 to 1240 and even that means Adam can't have been born until 1250 to 1260 - which fits perfectly with the information we have from the Court.

This means an initial guess at the genealogy which presumed an unknown generation before Roger is wrong, and he must have been the son of Phillip rather than grandson - there simply isn't time for the extra generation! From a tiny item, we can pin down the details of this early part of the family!

There are even two final brief parts of the records which cast further light on matters at the time - Adam was awarded "rights of wardship and marriage" for John de Stainton, meaning he had to look after him, so he must have been young in 1290, and Adam would collect the dowry for his marriage. We also know Margaret eventually provided land and rents for young John, rather than the normal case of this being provided from the dowry, so we can be sure Adam kept it. The family must have been relatively impoverished - or very mean - at the time.

Further details

With all this, I've not managed to get to Adam's son Roger, which is what I wanted, so I'll leave him for later and post another page. I'd like to deal with it here, but he was involved in too much politics - and the fact he was involved with King Edward III means the machinations of his father and sneaky keeping of the dowry for John de Stainton's wife made the family more wealthy and powerful by the time young Roger came along.

As a last note for anyone who still thinks this case was honest and completely above board, it is worth noting that the court was recorded and headed by someone whose name is given as Simon de Preston Atha. So if you don't smell a rat by now, there must be soemthing wrong with your nose!

No comments: