GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-04 > 1019682469


From: (Reedpcgen)
Subject: Re: Walter Aston of Virginia and his Ancestry
Date: 24 Apr 2002 21:07:49 GMT
References: <5cf47a19.0204240800.5bfcd15b@posting.google.com>


[Doug wrote:]
>The late Dr. David Faris did not support Paul Reed's contention that
>the Virginia immigrant is from a different family than previously
>alleged.

That statement is false. David Faris wrote me specifically about the Aston
family shortly before he died.

If Douglas thinks there is a specific problem with the evidence or
interpretation, rather than attempting to hide behind the cloak of someone who
cannot answer for himself, he should either present what he claims were the
doubts, or are his own doubts. His message contains suppositions, but not
documentary evidence.

The probate record stated more than once that Walter Aston (not the Virginia
man), who was at that time the ONLY surviving son of his father (though his
brothers left issue), died before he could perform the administration on the
estate. This is a legal document.

To assume that it was not convenient for the Walter Aston of Virginia who could
easily have appointed an attorney to administer his affairs there is folly and
a naive invention.

To make a claim that a brother-in-law would dispossess Walter Aston of
Virginia, or usurp his interests, in spite of nephews surviving in England and
Ireland, and have no one bring a law suit concerning this, well.... (Walter
Aston of Virginia survived for another decade.)

If Dr. Faris had initially expressed those questions earlier when Doug refused
to believe I had evidence (at that time not yet made public) against a line
they had intended to put in Plantagenet Ancestry, but at the last minute
dropped without comment, Dr. Faris decided the evidence was compelling enough
to accept by the time he corresponded with me before his death.

>It's not that Mr. Reed hasn't proved his case. This matter
>simply needs more study before it can be concluded that the Virginia
>immigrant belongs in another place in the Aston family tree.

? It's not that I haven't proved my case, it just needs more study? If the
case is proved, it does not need more study. There are many Aston families in
England at that period, and I examined the Aston family of Tixal in great
detail. I would have liked nothing better than to present a correct origin.
As he is so experienced and such an expert in finding unknown origins of
Colonial Virginia immigrants, I'm certain Doug knows the difficulty of what he
proposes.

Perhaps rather than stating that I should prove Doug's suppositions for him, he
might present specific evidence why the documentation should not stand as it
is.

For Doug to say he will not accept the disproof until the correct origin of the
Virginia Walter Aston is found, or a death record for a man who was not living
at his parish of birth is asinine. Births and christenings have been collected
for years in places like the IGI, but burials have been left mainly untouched.
As the 4th son, Walter Aston of England would likely have gone to London or the
West Indies. It is very possible no burial record survives to be what Doug
envisions would be 'final' disproof.

Paul C. Reed


This thread: