Roger Forster of Hunsdon
Contents |
Roger is the patriarch of Fosters in Hunsdon, Hertfordshire. He is said be the second eldest of nineteen sons by Thomas Forster and the heiress of Etherstone. Around the age of seventeen (17), he fled Northumberland after a family feud with some members of the Carr family.[1]
Considering the dating of his eldest son's birth,[2] the time it must have taken to arrange a marriage under such circumstances, as well as being about 17-years-old when he left his family's seat ... Roger was most likely born before 1490.
Roger married a woman from Sussex with the last name Hussey, but her given name is unknown and her parents are uncertain. By 1511, she bore their eldest son John of Bramfield (d. 14 Nov 1558), escheater for Essex and Hertforshire.[2]
According to Collins (1720), Thomas Forster and a woman from the family of Featherstonhaugh of Stanhope had a younger son, Roger. Bateson's (1893) pedigree concurs and names her, "Elizabeth."
While Bateson (1893), notes that one of Roger's sons was a gentleman-usher to Queen Mary, Collins (1720), skips over any direct parent/child relationship and states that Roger was the ancestor of Sir Thomas Forster (b. c. 1549 - 1612), justice of the common pleas:
Pedigrees published in Metcalfe (1866), Berry (1830), Foster (1871) and Weis, Shepphard & Beal (1999), are more elborate and show relationships for his immediate family. All of them assert that Roger is the father of Margaret Browning's husband, Thomas (1528-1571).
However, vital dates for Roger are elusive and make it difficult to assertain the time of his birth. Dating seems to begin with two of his sons.
Parliament focused on his "eldest son" John of Bramfield (b. by 1511 - d. 1558), escheator for Essex and Herts; and Richard (d. 1553), who was in the service of Queen Mary I.[7] The rest of the children named in pedigrees, were not associated with dates. So Roger's placement in the pedigree of the Forsters of Adderstone relies on a primary account, dated 17 April 1591, written by Sir John Forster of Bamburgh (b. by 1520 - d. 1602).
Sir John Forster of Bamburgh was the son of Thomas Forster (b. c. 1466 - d. 1527) and Dorothy Ogle (b. abt. 1488 - d. aft. 1550). According to most pedigrees (printed after his account), he is the great-grandson of Forster and Featherstonhaugh. But in his letter to Roger's grandson Thomas Forster of Hundson (b. 1548 - d. 1612), dated 17 April 1591, he seems to say that his great-great-grandparents were FORSTER (living 1415) and Featherstonhaugh, and implies there is a missing generation. He states:
If we take John at his word ... then it's unlikely that Roger, son of Forster (living 1415) and Featherstonhaugh is born anywhere near 1500, since it makes him a contemporary of Hilton and her husband and actually pushes dates even further away from Margaret Browning's husband.
It follows then that there is a problem with the dating for the descendants of Roger of Hunsdon, that either points to a missing generation in between Roger and his descendants ... OR ... his parentage is incorrect, which would call Sir John's account into question and possibly indicate that Roger belongs to the next generation (Forster/Hilton). [Note that Roger CANNOT belong to the generation after (Forster/Ogle), because it would erroneously make him a brother of Sir John Forster of Bamburgh!].
The following chart is a construction of the most widley accepted pedigree for the Forsters of Adderstone.[8] But it also makes a point of illustrating what Sir John Forster of Bamburgh wrote about and departs from the norm by highlighting the possibility of a missing generation. The dating has been compiled from data across the Forsters of Adderstone and its allied families of Northumberland. Note that dates given by Lewis (2001) are later, but they are also uncited,[6] whereas the dating here is sourced.
Also, a note of caution here: Pierce embellished the Forster pedigree in an attempt to tie the family to Baldwin of Flanders., (see Category: Frederick Clifton Pierce Fraud. It's also the case that prominent researchers no longer accept ties to Magna Carta baronial lines through Joan Elmedon,which makes the origins of Etherstone's husband -- as seen in Foster (1871), and Weis, Shepphard & Beall (1999) -- problematic, given that researchers have not been able to identify the Thomas Forster that she married.[7]
Given the above pedigree chart, it should be apparent that Sir John Forster of Bamburgh inserted a generation in between Featherstonhaugh and Hilton. But by doing so, it makes Featherstonhaugh and her husband, even older than suggested by this widely accepted construction. It also weakens Pierce's (1899), belief that Featherstonhaugh's husband was born in 1397 and lends weight to Foster's (1871) assertion that he died during the reign of Henry V (30 Sep 1399 - 20 Mar 1413).
Intriguingly, Cavanagh (2014), published a chart that is nearly unrecognizable and in conflict with known pedigrees across the allied families in Northumberland, especially after the generation of FORSTER/ETHERSTONE. (The upper portion which claims descent from Joan Elmedon is moot).[11]CAUTION: This chart is uncited and in conflict with known pedigrees.
It's also in conflict with Parliament's documentation and the account by Sir John Forster of Bamburg, particularly because it asserts that Roger was the eldest son, instead of the second, and essentially makes him a brother of his son John of Bramfield. Cavanagh's (2014) pedigree goes like this:[11]
I. THOS. FORSTER / ETHERSTONE
While the reasons behind Cavanagh's (2014) construction are unclear, the author does *NOT* vouch for veracity of the chart in its entirety.[11] He's also not alone when it comes to the belief that Roger's wife was a daughter of Lord Sleaford named, Joan. Wikipedia, citing Angerville (1959), makes the same assertion,[12] but Cavanagh (2014), does state there is no proof to back up this claim.
Weis, Shepphard & Beal (1999), also call Roger's wife "Joan," but they do not make any attempt to change the Hussey branch she's traditionally associated with. Instead, they dub her, "Joan Hussey of Sussex."
That said ... it looks like those who share Angerville (1959) and Cavanagh's (2014) train of thought, are trying to connect the Forsters of Adderstone, Northumberland to the allied Hilton/Pigot families of Yorkshire and Durham.
Perhaps this was done by associating Roger's wife, Ms. Hussey from Sussex, with Jane Pigot's (b. abt. 1501 Clotherholme, Yorkshire - d. 1597 Leeds, Yorkshire) first husband, Sir Gyles Hussey of Caylethorpe, Lincolshire (b. c. 1495/1505 - d. bef. 1535) , who is thought to be a son of Sir John Hussey, Lord Sleaford of Lincolnshire.
However, the Hilton/Pigot alliance dates to a later period. It was Jane Pigot's niece, Margaret Metcalfe (b. bef. 1516 Nappa, Yorkshire - d. aft. 04 Jun 1566 North Biddick, Durham) who married Wlliam Hilton, esq. of Biddick, Durham (b. abt. 1508 - d. 1562), briefly de jure Baron Hilton from March 1559 to 1562.
Another glaring problem with Cavanagh's (2014) construction is that there is no FitzHugh in the senior line of the Forsters of Adderstone. We can be certain that no Thomas Forster of Etherstone, born shortly after 1502, married a FitzHugh.
From the time period of Ogle's husband, who left a will on 26 March 1526, the senior Forster line in Northumberland is well-documented. His eldest son Thomas Forster, esq. of Etherstone (b. bef. 1519 - d. aft. 04 Apr 1589), married Frances, sister of Lord Wharton (b. c. 1495 Wharton, Kirkby Stephen, Westmorland - d. 1568) and widow of Sir Thomas Curwen of Workington (c. 1494 - ante 08 Nov 1543). He also had four sons out-of-wedlock, who were named in his will, dated 04 April 1589.
Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.
Roger is 24 degrees from Herbert Adair, 19 degrees from Richard Adams, 21 degrees from Mel Blanc, 21 degrees from Dick Bruna, 20 degrees from Bunny DeBarge, 31 degrees from Peter Dinklage, 19 degrees from Sam Edwards, 18 degrees from Ginnifer Goodwin, 22 degrees from Marty Krofft, 18 degrees from Junius Matthews, 17 degrees from Rachel Mellon and 21 degrees from Harold Warstler on our single family tree. Login to find your connection.