Who were Thomas Parry's parents?

+1 vote
101 views
Just adopted this waif and added a load of secondary sources which all say his father was Sir Harry Vaughan and it sounds convincing. There's an unsourced note on the profile that says his parents are unknown. Another source cited is Richardson but nothing to indicate what he has to say on the subject. Trouble with citing Richardson is that he is practically unavailable in the UK. There is not a copy to be had through the excellent inter-library service. Was also told not available through the international service either (didn't know there was one) as it is too expensive! Is it Richardson who says that Thomas Parry's parents are not known?
WikiTree profile: Thomas Parry
asked in Genealogy Help by C. Mackinnon G2G6 Pilot (127k points)

I agree that the secondary evidence is compelling that includes the visitation of Berks which is within 100 years of his death. Westminster Abbey has a brass which they suggest is from his tomb with  arms of Vaughan, Reade and Morgan.https://www.westminster-abbey.org/abbey-commemorations/commemorations/sir-thomas-vaughan-parry/  The 1606 Camden book cited is on Google books but only mentions the inscription 

The HOP mentions a Court of Common pleas case from  where he is referred to as Thomas Parry alias Vaughan but these are not indexed on TNA . 

But look also at Magna Carta ancestry p56 on Google books

Richardson  states son and heir of Henry Vaughan esq (same name but no title)

It's all confused.  It says there were two Thomases, father and son.  The son (505) married Anne Reade, was treasurer etc.  The parents of the father (666) are unknown.

But it was actually the father who married Anne Reade etc.  Born about 1515.  There was no Thomas Parry born about 1480 in the picture.
Thanks for all that, Helen. Seems fine. RJ I'll get it written up right.

I agree that the birthdate of 1480 is  incorrect for Thomas 666,  who I take to be http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/parry-sir-thomas-1510-60

He married Ann Reade and according to the vistation  had  several children some of who are linked as children  including Thomas (505)  who is http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/parry-thomas-1544-1616

At its  earliest incarnation the profile read 

"Sir Thomas Parry was the 3rd husband of Anne Reade, daughter of Sir William Reade. Anne Reade's 2nd husband was Sir Adrian Fortescue.

         + Sir Giles Greville was the 1st husband of Anne Reade." so clearly its supposed to be the husband of Anne Reade. At that time the profile had a birthdate of 1505 .

 The dates were changed much later (Oct 1616   oops 2016) and at this point the muddled text was added. 

2 Answers

0 votes

Richardson gives the father as "Henry Vaughan of Tretower", which looks like it should be this guy

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Vychan-21

But this profile's father has a scary do-not-confuse box.

Now I'm lost, because the source cited in the box

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Vaughan,_Thomas_%28d.1483%29_%28DNB00%29

is about the Thomas who married Eleanor Arundel.  But it doesn't call him Thomas Vaughan of Tretower - that was the heir (Vaughan-190), this is one of the bastards.

Allegedly, but DWB gives him a different origin entirely (while rejecting a third theory)

https://biography.wales/article/s-VAUG-THO-1483

DWB and DNB agree that this other Thomas also had a son Henry, and say it was this other Henry, not Henry Vaughan of Tretower, who was the father of Sir Thomas Parry.  Hist Parl concurs.

https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/parry-%28ap-harry%29-thomas-1515-60

So two Henrys.  And Richardson seems to be at odds with DWB/DNB/Hist Parl over which one was the father of Sir Thomas Parry.  And if they're right, Parry gets all that lovely Fitzalan ancestry instead of the Welsh stuff.

Not convinced though.  This Henry, if he existed, doesn't seem Welsh enough for his son to go all ap-Harry.

answered by RJ Horace G2G6 Pilot (433k points)
Though having said that, Hist Parl (after calling him Henry Vaughan of Tretower) does give him a very Welsh wife, Gwenllian, whereas Dwnn's Henry Vaughan of Tretower seems to have married a Throckmorton.

Is anybody not confused?

There's another Hist Parl article in a different volume

https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/parry-sir-thomas-1510-60

which just says Henry Vaughan of Brec. and clarifies that he belonged to an illegitimate branch.  The other article seems to have thought the Sir Thomas who was executed was the same person as Sir Thomas the heir.

This article also adds 3 daughters to the 2 sons.

Stirnet has

Sir Roger Vaughan of Tretower, m (1) Denise

1. Sir Thomas Vaughan of Tretower, m (1) Cissil verch Morgan

1.A. Henry Vaughan of Tretower, 3rd son, m Anne Throckmorton

1.A.ii. Sir Thomas Parry (ygr brother of Christopher)

The excuse is Wikipedia, but this isn't what Wikipedia says.  Wikipedia makes Parry's grandmother to be Eleanor Arundel, not Cicely verch Morgan.

But it still could be right by accident.  Eleanor Arundel was technically an heiress, so it's worrying that the Parry coat of arms in Vis Berks has 6 quarters and none of them is Arundel, Warenne or Maltravers.

But I want to know where Hist Parl got Gwenllian from.
Haven't found any source except Dwnn for the Throckmorton marriage, and all he says is the mother of Christopher Vaughan was the daughter of John Ffrogmorton (which we change to Christopher).

Perhaps Dwnn got it wrong and Henry of Tretower married Gwenllian really.  Or perhaps he had two wives.

But if there was only one Henry, a lot of people are getting his parents wrong.
I reckon there were two Harrys, sons of different Thomases. Going with DWB to see where it leads. DWB disputes with HOP over Thomas Vaughan's parentage which might account for some of the confusion.
Slightly flummoxed there as well.  Did people from Monmouthshire need to receive denizenship?  Abergavenny was always an English barony.

There is an extremely confusing thread on variou possible  Thomas Vaughans .Henry and Thomas Parry  get a passing mention with Richardson saying that Henry cannot be the son of Thomas Vaughan and Eleanor Arundel as their daughter Ann inherited.

https://soc.genealogy.medieval.narkive.com/jd1J2w4y/sir-thomas-vaughan-d-1483

Thanks.  So the offending document doesn't actually say that Robert and Margaret Vaughan were "of Monmouth".
0 votes
Finding the whole thing very difficult to digest. Seems Thomas Parry was son of Harry, whose name could well have been Harry Vaughan. Harry Vaughan could have been son of a Thomas Vaughan, legitimate or otherwise. Thomas Vaughan is unlikely to have been that Thomas Vaughan who was executed in 1483 because his daughter, Anne, inherited. There is no agreement as to who the parents of Thomas Vaughan were and none either as to how many Thomas Vaughans were active at the time. It is possible that Thomas Parry's mother was called Gwenllian. So glad he didn't marry Kat Astley since no one knows who her parents were, either. Good news is Wikitree should be an excellent tool for sorting it out. Only one profile per person, lots of room to explain sources, write a sourced bio, add research notes and keep the discussion in one place, providing links to everyone involved. I am ever the optimist.
answered by C. Mackinnon G2G6 Pilot (127k points)
I think it was right in the first place - Sir Thomas Parry's parents are unknown.

Vis Berks says Henry Vaughan esq, and everybody else might be relying on that.  Partial corroboration is Burghley's comment about his great-grandfather marrying into the family.

Which is an odd way of putting it, as if his connection was only by marriage.  In fact Burghley was the great-great-grandson of Sir Roger Vaughan of Tretower and his 1st wife Denise.

Richardson is being mischievous when he places Parry's father as Henry Vaughan of Tretower.  Burghley is the only justification for that.

But Burghley might just have been assuming that all the Vaughans were one big family.

In fact that clan only goes back to Sir Roger's father.  There were other unrelated Vaughan clans.

If Richardson is right, Parry and Burghley were 2nd cousins 1x removed.  But the 2nd Hist Parl writer doesn't think so.  He reckons the connection was distant and obscure, like it must have been only the name that caught Burghley's attention.

But he's woffling, because he can't have traced the distant and obscure connection.  In fact he says earlier that Parry came from an illegitimate branch of Tretower, which wouldn't be any more distant than if he came from the lords of the manor.  They don't go far enough back to have distant connections.  I think he's just reluctant to rule out the notion that Parry's grandfather was the Thomas Vaughan executed in 1483.
Hope you don't mind if I use that on the profile. Shame to waste it. In all this I read somewhere that it was Parry who introduced Cecil to Court, have to find that again.

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
250 views asked Jul 10, 2015 in Genealogy Help by anonymous
+2 votes
2 answers
+6 votes
0 answers
55 views asked Aug 8, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Tim Perry G2G6 Mach 2 (27.5k points)
+3 votes
1 answer
110 views asked Jan 29, 2013 in Genealogy Help by anonymous

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...