Edits to Hungerfords of Down Ampney and Farleigh Hungerford

+14 votes
The lines of Hungerford in the 15th and 16th century are a mess.  Many of the commonly used sources are inaccurate and/or incomplete.  Many of the bio's, with poor or inappropriate sourcing, on wikitree make intent difficult to understand   There is a small study team reviewing the original material and cleaning the profiles which is being run out of the UK project and coordinated with Euroaristo.  The review is being coordinated by Monica Edmunds.

The family lines commonly used the same name, even within the same family, and it is easy to get confused.  Can we all please refrain from making significant amendments to the Profiles currently on wikitree, particularly merges, until the review is complete.

If you feel that you have original source material that would contribute to the review please drop a note to Monica of myself.
WikiTree profile: Anthony Hungerford
in Genealogy Help by Doug Straiton G2G6 Mach 2 (23.2k points)

While in the vicinity, William Moleyns-16 looks to be married to his mother's sister.  That can't be right.


There's a fair bit of info in http://tinyurl.com/h5mdqcu pp 47+, but I don't see Eleanor's maternal grandparents mentioned.



Thanks; I'll have a look.

I came across and updated the bio for Hungerford-696 - she's the granddaughter of Hungerford-340 (who is probably a dup of Hungerford-70, who needs some work) through a son Edward who I can't find in WT. He was famous for spending almost the entire Hungerford fortune including selling the Farleigh Hungerford Castle to pay his debts.

Also, I just noticed this pedigree which is worth a look. Thanks!

2 Answers

+4 votes
Hungerford-340 and Hungerford-70 are different Anthonys. 340 married Rachel (Joanes?), 696 is probably named for her. He is son of 339, though am not sure if it is clear by which wife.

"Here lyeth the body of Anthony Hungerford of Black Bourton in the County

of Oxon, Knight and Rachel his wife, by whom he had 12 children, 3 sons

and 9 daughters. He departed this life the 8th day of May and was here

interred the 15th day of September following, A.D. 1657."

70 appears to be the son of Anthony and Bridget Shelley, though should be checked. As for the wife, I've never come across this Chrysogen surname. Can it be verified?

The pedigree is from Down Ampney House, obviously modern but may be based on arms/stained glass/documents available to its creators.
by Monica Kanellis G2G6 Mach 3 (38.9k points)
I think we all at roughly the same place in the lineage.  I raised a new Anthony (Hungerford-814) as that was easier than breaking apart the lines.  So the main line of Thomas (Down Ampney) (Hungerford-329) is complete for now.  I just finished John (Hungerford-547).  I had started Sir Anthony (Hungerford-65) prior and so will try to rationalise the children in coming couple of days.  I'll go back and sort the merges that haven't happened yet as well.

Thanks, Doug! Of interest, the wife of Anthony-814 was the sister of his cousin Joan Halle's husband, Sir Thomas Wriothesley, Garter Principal King of Arms. 

Sir Thomas (329) also had a daughter Elizabeth* who married Morris/Maurice Blount, younger son of Sir Edmund (sometimes transcribed as Edward, but daughter's will, his own & father's ipms, and multiple leases all have Edmund) Blount of Mangotsfield and his wife Margaret Seymour. The pedigree below supports that John's wife, Margaret Blount, was also daughter of Edmund and Margaret Seymour, as suggested by her will, the description of John's arms in Cirencester church, and the 1521 quitclaim of her husband and son to some of Isabel Williams Seymour's property in the old city of Bristol near St. John's Gate. So we have the not unusual case of two siblings marrying two siblings.


*Confusingly she is called Elizabeth Higford, widow of Thomas Higford  in Christiana's will 1504. Did she marry twice or were they different daughters?

Anne Hungerford who married a Langley is said in History of Parliament (p525) to be Sir John's sister rather than daughter. Is there a source for her being daughter to John? 



A work in progress;  I noticed the relationships with the Blount of Mangotsfield (Mangersfield and others), Glos.  Likely originally Mangod's Feld and thus the spelling difference.  Visitations; 1623 (https://archive.org/stream/visitationofcoun00inchit#page/22/mode/2up).  The Blounts seems to have been based there, now Bristol, since c. 1350 ish.  Rodway Hill House, built c. 1350 by William (or maybe Walter) Blount, still stands.

On Elizabeth; Not sure.  Noticed the Will and assumed it correct. Visitations suggests she had three sons with Maurice noticed as the second son (Symond being the first).  Visitations not always accurate so element of doubt.  I noticed an Isabel that married a Thomas Hugford, with child, and Elizabeth suggested as widow of Thomas Higford.  Certainly some uncertainty; I mention them in the bio of Thomas but I haven't raised the page yet so if you find something please drop me a note.

Anne? (Hungerford-532)?  I share the same concern; she seems to be sister of John?  I'm certainly leaning to sister and I mention her on the profile of Thomas (Hungerford-329).  Visitations agrees. I noticed Kirk dropped a note to her profile.  I'll change it over, the current profile has nothing on it at the moment.
+3 votes
I noticed this response from several years ago and it appears that some of the Hungerford relationships and family lines continue to be mixed up. Having just visited Farleigh Hungerford Castle a few months ago, I was able to view their onsite extensive family tree.  If possible someone should communicate with them directly at Farleigh Hungerford in order to get the English based part of the tree correct.  When I mentioned that I traced my lineage back to Hungerfords that settled Connecticut in the early 1600s to the guide/supervisor of Farleigh Hungerford, I was told that "if you have Hungerford in your background, you are related in many ways to the English Royal Family".  Once again I would recommend communicating with Farleigh Hungerford.
by David Achzet G2G3 (3.1k points)
Did you happen to get a photo of their tree? The only royal ancestry I can think of would go through the first wife of Sir Anthony (+1558) though they certainly had many familial connections with the Tudor court through the Seymours and Blounts.

It's unclear to me how the Connecticut Hungerfords tie in; has that puzzle been solved?

Related questions

+5 votes
3 answers
303 views asked Apr 11, 2019 in Genealogy Help by Monica Kanellis G2G6 Mach 3 (38.9k points)
+5 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
2 answers
549 views asked Mar 28, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Kirk Hess G2G6 Mach 7 (72.7k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
+4 votes
0 answers
+2 votes
3 answers
+10 votes
1 answer
272 views asked Jun 9, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Kirk Hess G2G6 Mach 7 (72.7k points)
+7 votes
2 answers
184 views asked Apr 29, 2023 in Genealogy Help by Ashley Jones G2G6 Mach 2 (20.9k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright