IGI question regarding 12th century Clapham/Beamsley entry

[stain3565]

On FamilySearch.org, I have been tracking back info regarding my brother-in-laws ancestry and managed to get on to the Clapham family. This led me to what I think must be a very hopeful early ancestor, Adam Clapham born in 1180 (see for yourself by just searching on this name) via the IGI.

It appears that the route back to Adam is based on each generation being given an approximate birth date in 20 year cycles (Adams son is born in 1200, his son in 1220, etc) and the associated marriage being a year before (eg 1199, 1219).

The family appear to be from the Clapham/Beamsley area throughout these generations. Anyone got any idea what this info may be based on and thus, how accurate this could be (I realise the dates are clearly an approximation but I wonder if the actual generations names could be accurate?)?
 
Cheers

Mark
 

[behindthefrogs]

Very often these postings in the IGI are based on the evidence given at a Herald's Visitation.  Does the family claim a coat of arms?  Where these visitations are published by the Harlian (sp?) Society they often do not contain reliable dates.

Many of the early postings in the IGI are extracted from Victorian Publications which can be found in main reference libraries.

David

[Little Nell]

I've just had a brief look at this and some of the entries are in Ancestral File.  It gives the name and address of the submitter.  It may be worth contacting that person and asking where they got the information from.

There are 22 entries from a single batch number (9001285).  All figure entries like this tend to be patron submitted and should be thoroughly checked against orginal sources.  Problem arises when the dates pre-date parish registers.  You would have to resort to Inquisitions post mortem (where they exist), manorial records, wills (again where they exist).  Unless you can find a pedigree compiled by a reputable genealogist where the sources have already been checked, this could be a life-time's work.  Unless you can connect the earliest known (and proven) ancestor that you have reached by going backwards in time with someone who is in the right place at the right time in the 16th century and who might be connected, then it is really only so much conjecture.

That sounds very negative, but going back before the 1500s is very difficult indeed.  How's your Latin? 

Nell

[stain3565]

Mediocris!

I'll certainly contact the submitter first (have done this twice before, once with some success).

I'm not sure I want to start investigating this all myself as I really haven't the time, so I'll stick with getting an explanation from the submitter. I certainly am interested in the sources involved. However, I have noticed even in this batch that the submitter may have made mistakes elsewhere (George Clapham b1503 married Katherine Thwaites b1439.... hmmm doubt it, Katherine Thwaites born 1510 maybe!)   

I'm unsure about an official coat of arms. I'll make an enquiry to the Colleg of Arms to see if they hold Clapham info.

Cheers

Mark