de Pert is not in accordance with EuroAristo naming guidelines - is it an exception? [closed]

+8 votes
169 views

Hi! I'm working through profiles that are protected but are not (yet) managed by a project. Magna Carta Project can manage this profile if it needs project management, but first I wanted to figure out if it needed to be protected (which requires project management).

Usually the reason for PPP is to ensure the parents cannot be arbitrarily changed or to protect the LNAB (Last Name at Birth). However, there's nothing in the bio about a problem concerning her parents & the LNAB does not follow EuroAristo naming guidelines. So beyond not needing PPP, it appears this profile is inappropriately PPP (at least with de Pert as LNAB).

So is de Pert an exception and correctly protected? If not, what should her LNAB be?

Thanks!

WikiTree profile: Margaret Edlington
closed with the note: changed LNAB to Pert
in Genealogy Help by Liz Shifflett G2G6 Pilot (622k points)
closed by Liz Shifflett

Hopton book

https://books.google.com/books?id=Y0hkh_WD01oC

The story goes that the Swillingtons of Swillington (near Leeds) descended to an under-age heir, whose Wicked Uncle became his guardian.  The clever lawyers were called in, and the estate then stayed with the descendants of WU and never got back to the rightful owners.  (This is why so many lawyers got so rich in that era.)

And if the legitimate descendants ran out, as happened, the estate was to go to the illegitimate branch.  WU had a bastard son Thomas by Joan Hopton of Armley.  She never married the father and was never called Swillington.

The Hoptons of Armley (in Leeds) weren't related to the Hopton Castle bunch in Shropshire.  There's a pedigree, but Joan got airbrushed out and replaced by a bogus improvement.

WU's legit son Sir Roger married Joan Scrope, and Sir Roger's bastard half-brother Thomas married Joan's daughter, Margaret Pert.

William Pert is a mystery.  He's supposed to be of Terrington, but the VCH page on Terrington parish knows nothing about any Perts.  No idea where the name comes from or whether it ever had a "de", but "de" was going out of fashion by then anyway.

Thomas was sometimes called Swillington before he settled on Hopton.  He wasn't called Westwood and presumably wasn't born there.  It was part of the Swillington estate, but Thomas didn't live long enough to come into it.

No idea why it says he was married at Nettlestead - it was his grandson who married a Wentworth.

Margaret wasn't called Westwood and wasn't a Lady.

Their son John was never knighted and never called anything but Hopton.  He did come into the estate, when the legit line fizzled out, and took up residence at Westwood.

Royal Ancestry vol 3 p. 313.  Descendants include Peyton, Isham, Mauleverer, Saltonstall.

We have two WUs.  I've proposed a merge.
Thanks so much RJ!

Related questions

+9 votes
4 answers
+17 votes
4 answers
+15 votes
1 answer

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...