The Thomas Chandlers of Bishops Stortford

Question

I posted this comment regarding both the attached wife and father of Thomas Chandler (Sr.) of Bishops Stortford.

I see no evidence that Thomas, Sr., married a Lady Mary Agnes Tate. She has quite the pedigree (source unknown), back to Robert II Stewart. She may have married a Thomas Chandler, I don't know, but there is no evidence that it was Thomas of Bishops Stortford.

I also just don't see Thomas, of Bishops Stortford, being simultaneously of Alcannyngs in 1524. There is simply nothing yet that connects him to the Chandlers of Oare. (I lack the pre-1500 certification necessary to change any of this.)

(Another... let's call it a... curiosity: This appears to... purport to be... a portrait of Lady Mary Agnes Tate???)

Another issue is Thomas, Jr.'s wife, Agnes. There is no evidence of her surname being Hull, as discussed here. No response to PM(s) of "Agnes Hull's" profile, apparently, or at least no action taken. (I suppose she could be detached easily enough from Thomas and their children, and one created for Agnes UNKNOWN Chandler, with an explanatory note on Agnes Hull's profile, in which case she would be attached to nobody.)

Comments

You might contact the Chandler Family Association DNA (Y-chromosome) Project about any connection between the Chandlers of Bishops Stortford and Chandlers of Oare. Just the little bit of sleuthing I did indicates living or recent Bishops Stortford descendants are placed in Chandler Genetic Family 9 of the DNA project and living or recent Oare descendants are placed in Chandler Genetic Family 7B of the project. My test results have been placed in Group 7A of that project (Y-chromosome at 111 markers a control match for Group 7A). There is a current idea that eventually all of the sub-group letter designations (7A, 7B, 7C, 7D) will be removed if a determination is made of a known common ancestor in England. As of yet that person has not been found. My direct lineage has been determined by the CFA as having a Non-Paternal Event (NPE), the exact details of which I have not discovered to date. I asked them if my doing a Y 700 test would help in any way and they replied that it probably would not. Would it help here if I did the test? I am the Administrator of the Jernigan DNA Project at Family Tree DNA. I do NOT match any other participants there except for my father. Completely different haplogroups. I'm not a geneticist. For some reason a lot of it confuses me. I probably need to go Geneticist Elementary School and have colorful little puzzles and games for it to actually sink in. ;-)

---

I upgraded from 111 to the Big Y yesterday. Also watched first two videos on You Tube with very good explanations of Genetic Distance and SNPs and STRs. I understand that MUCH better than I did before. Some other guys match me at 111 with a GD of 1 (only dad has a GD of 0). Some of those guys already have the Big Y, so, I guess I'll see what transpires. For the record I have two co-administrators in the Jernigan DNA Project. They are much more adept at creating charts and more detailed explanations of the DNA. I am there primarily to do genealogical research for any that request it. They suggested I upgrade to the Big Y in fact.

Answer 1

The portrait is of Mrs. Thomas Chandler painted by American Artist Joshua Johnson (1763-1824) clearly this is not the portrait of a 15th century English woman and should be removed from the profile. As the wife of Thomas Chandler is unknown and the line laid in in a 1998 TAG article, I have removed Agnes as his wife. I will also remove the parents.

Comments

Thank you, Jeanie!

---

I have removed the portrait.

The profile of Thomas Chander II is now under the management of the England Project.  The wife of Thomas Chandler II is definitely Agnes, but her LNAB needs to be changed to Unknown. This change has been awaiting the action from unresponsive profile managers.

---

Oops! Sorry! Thank you, Lois!

---

Thank Jeanie for IDing the portrait as wrong!

Answer 2

The information given for Tate-1545 should be regarded as dubious, at best.  The death date of 1514, for example, is for the wife of Thomas Chandler.

If she married a Chandler, it wasn't the Thomas Chandler of Bishops Stortford, as he was the first of his name in the neighborhood.  This makes me conclude the birth and death places for Tate-1545 are probably spurious as well, deriving only from the false connection to Thomas Chandler, and should be removed.  Which leaves nothing but the imaginary pedigree.

Comments

I am concerned that there seem to be at least 4 persons simultaneously working on the Chandler and related profiles, which constitute a HUGE mess that needs to be straightened out.  But I think it would be best to discuss changes here where everyone can see them and weigh in, rather than have edit conflicts all over the place.

As I am pre-1500 certified, I can remove the unsourced birth and death places for Tate-1545 and write a Research Note explaining the changes, if no one objects.

Answer 3

The profile of Tate-1545 has been revised.

Answer 4

It would be useful if someone could locate a source* for Sir Robert Tate, Lord Mayor of London 1488, and see how many daughters he had and their names, other than Bridget, who is documented.

* NOT an online family tree or genealogy site, they are all corrupted.

Comments

Found one, no Mary Agnes there