William Wickstead of Puddington and Wrenbury

[Andrew RM Hayes]

I am trying to track down the baptism or marriage of my 9x great grandfather William Wickstead.
It is certain that his parents were William and Alice Wickstead, both of which were buried at Wrenbury
There is a baptism at Wrenbury, 19/10/1593, but this may be a namesake.
He died at Puddington 4/2/1628/9 and was buried the following day at its parish church, Burford.
PR entry was written in larger script than most, does this imply status? Naming him as clr? (clerk?) to Sir William Massie, knight.
PR also records the baptism of five children at Burford, the first, Catherine, on 14th February 1621/2. His will names his wife as Elizabeth.

[Jayson]

The book 'Wrenbury Wills and Inventories 1542-1661' concludes that William Wickstead baptised in 1593 was the son of William and Alice Wickstead.  They appear to have been the only family of that name residing in Wrenbury - a small village then and now - at that time

There is no such place as Burford here in Cheshire.  I think you mean Burton which is an ancient parish serving Burton and Puddington.

The larger script you mentioned does indeed imply status.  I've seen this in several parish registers that I've looked over the years.

Jay

[Andrew RM Hayes]

Thanks for pointing out my error. I'm a West Countryman, my knowledge of Cheshire geography to date is rather limited. So I'd no idea Wrenbury was such a small place. I must have reverted to a more familiar place name, but will amend my files forthwith.
I was not sure whether the 1593 baptism was my man, as no parents were mentioned.
What do you think the "clr" means? I guessed "clerk", as there was an earlier entry in the Burton PR for the burial in 18th November 1618 of a clerk to Mr John, Mr George and Sir William Massie.
My William would have been about the right age to be his successor.
regards
Andrew

[Jayson]

From what you have said it seems that the entry does indeed say clerk, although this might not necessarily mean a clerk in holy orders but rather someone working in an administrative capacity.

Jay

[Andrew RM Hayes]

I'm a novice when it comes to palaeography, but the three letters seemed to me to be capital C, ie the Circle with a cross in it, l and r. There is no evidence that he was ever in holy orders, as he does not appear in the Clergy of the Church of England database, or the Oxbridge alumni records. (Unlike his grandson and great grandsons, one of whom was Archdeacon of Wells and is buried in the chancel of its cathedral.) So I had assumed he was employed in some administrative role in the household. I had wondered whether he might be some sort of poor relation of the Massies, or married to one, as I understand that distant relatives were often employed as higher servants in early modern gentry  households. But I can find no evidence for this wishful thinking. I wonder how he came to work for them, as Puddington seems to be some distance from Wrenbury on the map.

[Jayson]

I think your reasoning re a Wickstead/Massey family connection is most plausible.  Samuel Pepys I believe was engaged as a general dogsbody by his cousin, Sir Edward Montagu.  Then as now people traveled far and wide in search of new opportunities.  There are a few bits and pieces online re Sir Wm Massey which you may have seen.  He was obviously a large landowner and had interests in Flintshire as well as Cheshire.

Jay

[Andrew RM Hayes]

I think a little further research on the Massies is called for.
William III's father-in-law, John Daxson/Daxon also had links to Flintshire. His will states that he was of Marbury, but the inventory makes it clear that he was living at Hanmer, Flintshire, at the time of his decease, its parish register records his burial (1674/5), and that of his wife (1683), but I haven't been able to find out anything concrete about his origins.