Author Topic: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor  (Read 599 times)

Online Maiden Stone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,754
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #18 on: Tuesday 05 January 21 22:20 GMT (UK) »
According to this, Queen Mary granted Haughley manor to John Sulyard in 1554 as a reward for loyalty in supporting her claim to the throne against that of Lady Jane Grey.
Who held the manor before John Sulyard? Was it Thomas Bladgett and did he lose it by backing the wrong side in the dynastic struggle for the crown?


 that's such a good question and that's something I would love to find out.

I suggest you research the history of Haughley and Haughley Hall and the surrounding area. There may be a local history society and books about the place.
There were several dynastic, political and religious upheavals immediately prior to and during the lifetime of Thomas Blodgett/Bladget/Blowgate. A man's fortunes could change suddenly, he might gain, or he might lose everything, including his life.
 The decades long dynastic struggle for the English Crown between the Houses of Lancaster and York (popularly known as the Wars of the Roses) ended at the Battle of Bosworth 1485 which brought Henry Tudor, the first monarch of the Tudor dynasty to the throne. 
Henry Tudor's son, also Henry, kick-started the English Reformation which changed the state religion of England from Catholic to Church of England. Land and properties belonging to monasteries were confiscated early in the Reformation and sold to lay people, proceeds going to the king's treasury, or the king gifted the lands to his supporters. Some monastic lands included manors.
King Edward continued the Reformation began in his father's reign. However, when Edward's sister, Queen Mary, succeeded him she tried to reverse the Reformation and turn England Catholic again as she was a devout Catholic. The next monarch, her sister, Elizabeth (reigned 1558-1603) continued the establishment of the Church of England.
There were several unsuccessful rebellions during Thomas Blodgett's life and many executions. 
  People gained or lost property, money, influence, status, depending on which side they backed in a particular struggle or whether the branch of Christianity they belonged to was the current official one. Some changed sides more than once. A man could rise from humble origins to a position of influence and then lose again when a monarch or a policy changed or if he offended a powerful person.
Just because a person was lord of a manor it didn't mean he had the title "Lord".
The only line of mine which I've been able to trace back to 1500's would have been tenants of the abbot of the local priory until 1539 when priory property was confiscated at the Dissolution of the Monasteries. Queen Mary granted that manor to someone in 1554. (She seems to have been rewarding her supporters by giving them property in 1554, the year after she became queen.) The manor was bought by the head of a local family a few decades later and owned by them for the next 400 years. Although lords of the manor, none of them had the title "Lord"; 2 were "Sir", the rest were "Mr.".
I hope this explains what was happening in England during Thomas Blodgett's life.
Apart from all the above going on, England went to war a few times, against France and Scotland. 
Cowban

Online Maiden Stone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,754
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #19 on: Tuesday 05 January 21 22:27 GMT (UK) »

I don't believe ANY tree as 100% correct ...I only posted for it to be read - exactly what you have posted I seen

I agree with you 100%.
My reply was really to draw Kirsty's attention to errors in it.
Cowban

Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 35,744
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #20 on: Wednesday 06 January 21 17:31 GMT (UK) »
There are more than 1000 trees on Ancestry with Lady Rose on them.  The first 2 that I looked at had William Foreman as her second husband, and no children from their union.  How does that show up with dna?

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline confusion

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • I was born poor - and still have all of it
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #21 on: Wednesday 06 January 21 18:06 GMT (UK) »

The mathematics just don't add up.

Quote
kirsty.foreman:
Lady Rose was my 12th grandmother.

So,

2021 minus 1544 (the year in question) = 477yr timespan.

The general concensus is that a generation is 25yrs (average)

Divide 477 by 25 = 19.08 generations.

Surely, your 19th generation equals your 17x Great Grand Parents
and not your 12th as was stated.

Individual DNA from your 12th grandparent would be less than 6/1000ths of a percent
considering that you descend from 16,384 individual 12x Grandparents.

Looks a lot like wishful thinking.

Willey, Berry, Cox, Haddock, Hutton, Griffiths/Griffin, Tanner - Worcestershire
Cox, Dudley, Harris, Moore, Neville, Payne - Warwickshire
Chambers, Douds, Dryden, Given, Hamilton, Hassan, McPherson, McWhirter, Simpson, Taggart, Vauls, Whiteside - Ireland/Scotland, Northumberland
Challis, Halls, Heady, Grove, Lawrence - Essex
Foxwell, Imm, Ward - Gloucesteshire
Heady, Collis, Griffin - Hertfordshire
Hurling - Middlesex
Willey, Imm - Monmouthshire
Imm, Hamilton, Hedge, Majury, Sollis - Canada/USA

Offline DonM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,301
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #22 on: Wednesday 06 January 21 18:55 GMT (UK) »

Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,431
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Re: Lord Thomas bladgett of Haughley manor
« Reply #23 on: Wednesday 06 January 21 21:48 GMT (UK) »
This message is to the OP (as all longstanding serious researchers and FH aficionados know all this already)

Any person serious about researching their family history will look for all possible resources to test what they see on Ancestry trees.

You need to work back meticulously, generation by generation, using as many resources as possible (NOT other peoples' trees - they are only as good as the research that each person has done and many don't research, they just copy and assume). Start with the most recent events (ie your own birth!) and work back over the years. Each generational find needs to be proved by written evidence, preferably written at the time of the event, preferably more than one item of evidence.

I'm afraid that simply getting some matches on Ancestry proves nothing. The chances of sharing a meaningful amount of DNA dating back 400 - 500 years are minimal. AFAIIK Ancestry don't even give matches for anything that looks to be more than 8 generations ago.

If you're using Thrulines, they are based entirely on other people's suggestions, not on proven facts.

I've read nothing from what you've written to make me think that you've followed this process. I may be wrong, you may have done exactly this - but you haven't explained so.

Maybe you're related to this man, maybe not. But if you're serious about finding out for sure, it is going to take a lot of hard work and time. Rootschat is a brilliant place to help you with this. But you need to approach this rationally and at each point, if you need help, you need to explain to us just what evidence you have so far, so that we can try to help you to move to the next step.

Good luck with your searching.
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)