GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2008-12 > 1228408883


From: Alex Maxwell Findlater <>
Subject: Re: Visitation Question
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:41:23 -0800 (PST)
References: <mailman.2138.1228405651.2545.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>


There is an interesting paper in the Proceedings of the St Andrews
Genealogical and Heraldic Congress 2006 by Dr Adrian Ailes. He shows
how the level of critical scrutiny of pedigrees increased over the
visitation period.

In particular reference to your question, I have looked at the
pedigrees of the Phelips of Montacute family in both the Dorset and
Somerset visitations. The senior branch of the family was in Dorset
was not included in the Somerset Visitations and vice versa, so I
think what you have experienced is probably not uncommon. The
existence of a relative, even in both these cases a brother, in
another county, seems not to have been relevant to the visitation of
the County of THE visitation id question. It is easy to see why.
Heralds of course differed in the amount of extraneous detail they
recorded, but the most recent generations are unlikely to be wrong,
generally speaking. The veracity of earlier generations will difer,
based on the diligence of the herald and on the accuracy of the
family's own records.

That may not help much, but you should be able to prove the entries
from wills and parish registers, etc at least to some extent.

This thread: