Aldgyth de Northumberland, 1038-1088

[audbr]

Hi davidft and landj,

Many thanks to both of you for your replies any my apologies for the delay in replying.
William Dugdale's book Monasticon Anglicanum is  'The History of Ancient Abbeys and Monastaries' and therefore I do not believe  it will be of any help but I will check. I believe the more relevant document is ' The Baronage of England' by Sir William Dugdale and published in 1675. I have transcribed the three parts of his book that I believe are relevant to the Audley Surname and these can be viewed on my website at http://www.audleyfamilyhistory.com/published-information/baronage-of-england  None of these sections go back to the time we are discussing here.
At this stage I should point out that Dugdale refers to the family as 'Aldithley (vulgarly called Audley)' and the earliest date it refers to is 16 Hen 3 (I.e  1232)

To landj when you have looked at the references on MyHeritage what family name are they refering to I wonder if  Dugdale has something under the section on the Lumley family?

Davidft's links have muddied the water further If you follow the link
http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p299.htm#i8980
It shows that a Lulelph married Aldgyth and they had three children namely
Osbert de Lumley
Adam (no surname stated)
Willian de Lumley born about 1175

If you select the Adam link it takes you to http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p300.htm#i8994

This page states that Adams child was Lilulph de Aldithley (I.e a different link to the Audley Family) and it also stated that Adam was born at Aldithley, Normandy, France.  The citation is quoted as Burke Peerage 1938.

So what these two references seem to be showing is that Lelelph married Aldgyth and they had three children
Osbert de Lumley
Adam who is later refered to as de Aldithley and is reported to have been born in Normandy
and William de Lumley

The above does not stack up as logical to me. Does it seem logical to you?

I am convinced that the Audley surname originates from the village of Audley in Staffordshire which is recorded as 'Aldidlege' in the Doomsday book. Audley in Staffordshire being a fair distance away from Limley Castle in County Durham.

Do my comments and logic make any sense?
Regards
Brian

[audbr]

Having done some research on this subject. I thought it appropriate to make an update to this message,

davidft suggested a link to a website namely
http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p299.htm#i8980

This website suggests that Lulelph married Aldgyth and had 3 children; Osbert de Lumley; Adam and William de Lumley. The citation given is Burke's Peerage 1938 page 2194.
I now have a copy of this citation and have attached two images from that document namely part of page 2193 and part of page2194 of Burke's  peerage. If you look at these two files you will see that the website contains two significant errors, namely the website completely omits Liulph's son Uchtred and it was this Uctred who was the father of William de Lumley. Equally the citation makes no reference to Liulph or Uchtred having a son called Adam.

If one selects the link to the son Adam, this gives a citation for Adam as Burke's Peerage 1938 page 784. This citation refers to the Earl of Derby . A copy of this citation is attached. The citation suggests no link between the Lumley family and the Earl of Derby. It would seem that the website has concluded that a Liulph of the Lumley Family is the same person as Lydulph in the Earl of Derby's family. Also if one looks at the 1999 issue of Burke's peerage you will see thay all the information about Lulelph, Aldgyth and Uctred has been removed from the Lumley, Earl of Scarborough family. The citation being Burke's Peerage edition 106 year 1999 page 2559.

My conclusion is that the website
http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p299.htm#i8980 cannot be considered reliable.

Regards
Brian

[davidft]

My conclusion is that the website
http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p299.htm#i8980 cannot be considered reliable.

Any large database runs the risk of errors for a variety of reasons. Fortunately the compiler of that site has their contact details on the home page so you could let them know what you found if you wish.

Also taking references from one source should always be avoided if possible as I am sure you would agree. Sorry my suggestions weren't more helpful

[audbr]

Hi davidft,
Please do not take my comments the wrong way, the information, and the links you have given me have been very helpful as I now believe I have sufficent information to demonstrate that the information I received by e-mail is incorrect.

Also I feel strongly that people who place information on websites should take some responsibility for ensuring that the information is correct. It should not be too hard to check that what is on their website is consistant with the citations they quote.

Sorry for the rant. In the last month I have received two e-mails telling me new information about the Audley family any when I ask for proof I get 'It is on a website (can't remember which one) so it must be correct'. In both cases I proved them wrong!!
Regards
Brian

[DavidG02]

Hi

Came across this book and remembered this thread.

Its on archive.org and can be found searching Norman Names or etc. ''The Norman People and their existing descendants blah blah''

In it the author asserts in the chapter '' Criticism of Family History'' page 54  That the above assertion is incorrect. He suggests , as has already noted, that the name arises from Staffordshire.
He further asserts that '' 2 people were given one history'' . Another comment states that a Henry de Stonley - is a maternal ancestor of this family. Yet though his genealogy suggests he was alive at the time of the Domesday Book- he is not found in there. The name of Stanley ( as he asserts) came into use in approx. 1130ad

No author named but printed by Henry King and Co in 1874

This post doesn't mean that the book is as correct as the previous information but gives another point of view