Are there any valid sourced for this paternity?

+8 votes
266 views
Usual situation. History records no children. Family trees claim distinguished parentage.
WikiTree profile: Francis Bryan
asked in Genealogy Help by C. Mackinnon G2G6 Pilot (135k points)
How odd.  Bryan-171 was born 1st June, and his wife was born and died on 1st June.  And now this one.  Perhaps it was hereditary.

I doubt if there's a source for Francis Bryan junior's existence.

Basically a bunch of Bryans turned up in North Carolina after 1700 and have been supplied with a descent from Sir Francis Bryan which is pure romantic fantasy.

Which isn't to say there isn't the occasional passing resemblance to a real Bryan.  Random unconnected records get worked in to "support" the story.
And if you can document who it was who created the inventions, you've got another candidate for the frauds and fabrications categories!
I think this one mostly just growed.  The first steps can be traced, but those people weren't responsible for later developments.

6 Answers

+3 votes
Just spotted something that suggests that these Irish Bryans were originally O'Briens.
answered by C. Mackinnon G2G6 Pilot (135k points)
That could be a major coup, and finally dispel the mythology. Meanwhile, what's left is a painful profile that reeks of more than tradition.
+2 votes
This parentage was removed in July last year and added back last month. Source apparantly [https://www.geni.com/people/Francis-Bryan/6000000000532938366 Geni]. Another 1 June birthdate and father of Whanganoche Bryan born 1590 Clare County. Would like to remove link and get it protected but by whom? Euroaristo?
answered by C. Mackinnon G2G6 Pilot (135k points)
+2 votes

Apparently we're looking for a whole bunch of books written about 2007-9 by David C McMurtry and published by Mil-Mac Publishers, who don't have a website.

https://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AMcMurtry%2C+David+C.&qt=hot_author

Now I'm wondering if Jim White has an alias.

answered by RJ Horace G2G6 Pilot (442k points)
+2 votes

I have to believe that had there been a Sir Francis Bryan who lived in Ireland from 1549 to 1640 there would be at least one piece of documentary evidence. Where is it and why can no one produce anything to prove this person actually lived? 

answered by Jeanie Roberts G2G6 Pilot (120k points)
+2 votes

Went ahead and did a whole lot of clean up on the profile, in a effort to be a responsible descendant. I see no sources. I am not satisfied with it, as it feels, when you read it, that someone is desperately saying, but oh, look here, look here, we have descendants and many people are saying. . .

The more that I have spent time and effort on WikiTree, the more I have come to accept that sometimes an unknown relationship is much better than what can look like shameless speculation.

On the posited relationship to the (father) Vicar of Hell... 

Larry Bryan:Family Tree DNA Y-DNA Test 111 markers, haplogroup R-FGC54211, FTDNA kit #528892

is linked

On the posited son, "Francis II:"

Larry Bryan:Family Tree DNA Y-DNA Test 111 markers, haplogroup R-FGC54211, FTDNA kit #528892

So I do not know what that means in the absence of any triangulation (which may or may not exist), but before we would disconnect the good Vicar, how can we be sure that the DNA doesn't mean anything for that generational connection?

answered by Fann Fann G2G6 Mach 2 (25.9k points)
Triangulation is for autosomal DNA, which you can't use for people born 500+ years ago.  As to Y-DNA, the remains of Sir Frances "Vicar of Hell" Bryan would have to have been located, exhumed, Y-DNA tested and matched some Bryan descendants with strong paper trails. . .  I've removed the Vicar of Hell as his father and PPP'd the profile thru the British Isles EuroAristo project, with a note that he's been detached on the profile of Bryan-73.

Thanks for that. Good timing.

The Shearer-Akers family, does make some small mention that WSB descended from: "Sir Francis Bryan, a prominent man in Ireland, about the middle of the sixteenth century, and probably President of Munster, (who) is believed to have been the ancestor of the following Bryan line:"

Gen. I, Bryan No. 1 is William Smith Bryan.

So now we'll be on the lookout for an O'Brien or Bryan, forename Francis, knight and "President" of Munster. It's an intriguing line, even though the Vicar connection appears to be wholly mythologized. 

I remain hopeful that we will find this Francis' father, as well as the verifiable existence of this Francis, who clearly had descendants and a pattern of statements about him that strongly indicate that he was a rebel and Irish advocate who was quite possibly exiled.

And, just to be thorough, I boned up on my history of the President of Munster appointments. Yes, an O'Brien was in that role, but the timing and name (and I checked all near relatives - not a Francis in sight) just doesn't fit. All we are left with is the remote (but in this case, most probable) possible history, that someone added as a comment on the profile.

History of Parliament online: BRYAN, Sir Francis (by 1492-1550), of the Blackfriars, London and Ampthill and Woburn, Beds. suggests that his father had no children by either wife. An illegitimate nameless son is mentioned. (Emphasis added.)

0 votes

I just spent a long time organizing and sorting out the "stuff" on his son, William Smith Bryan's profile, and I did work some also on the next generation Francis (presently numbered III).

Sometimes progeny can help inform immediate ancestors, but also these references might have more than I had the patience to review:

"William Smith Bryan, transported to (Virginia), as a rebellious subject, settled in Gloucester County; Francis (d 1694) returned to Ireland in attempt to recover hereditary titles and estates, sought refuge in Denmark, where he m Sally Brinker;" citing Abridged Compendium of American Genealogy [ note that this Francis is the son of "WSB," the source was already on WSBs profile, just lost in the chaff]

One source that was used was sort of jumbled in its presentation, and I hope that that is cleared up now: Colonial Families of the United States of America. (Still, it feels like these profiles are "defensive" as opposed to objective. As if inundating the same statements over and over is going to make them come true. Some things that were stated were supported by the sources, but it was not apparent because of all the chatter.)

Lastly, for this Francis' son "WSB," another independent confirmation of his arrival in 1650 was found:
Apparent match on a migration record: US and Canada, Passenger and Immigration Lists Index, 1500s-1900s: William Smith Bryan, Arrival: Virginia 1650 Ancestry Record 7486 #3967835.

On Francis III's page, I found a source that is among the "early" ones (definitiely not the earliest, and nowhere "near event"): The Shearer-Akers family, which does make some small mention that WSB descended from: "Sir Francis Bryan, a prominent man in Ireland, about the middle of the sixteenth century, and probably President of Munster, (who) is believed to have been the ancestor of the following Bryan line:"

Gen. I, Bryan No. 1 is William Smith Bryan.

 That's all I've got, right now.


 

answered by Fann Fann G2G6 Mach 2 (25.9k points)
The snippet about Francis seeking refuge implies he wasn't successful in reclaiming titles. Might he have still styled himself Sir Francis, because he thought he had a good claim, and people in other countries assumed he really was?

   Tim

Related questions

+5 votes
8 answers
+2 votes
0 answers
+5 votes
3 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
122 views asked Jan 28, 2013 in Genealogy Help by anonymous
+13 votes
7 answers
+2 votes
4 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...