GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2009-09 > 1252451983


From: "Merilyn Pedrick" <>
Subject: Re: SOURCES
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 08:49:43 +0930 (Cen. Australia Standard Time)
References: <ee302ef3-b979-48c9-ad50-5fae57180fa1@y42g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>


Here are some notes I have regarding Mary Machell being the wife of Rev.
Ralph Cudworth and Rev. John Stoughton, the mother of James Cudworth and the
sister of John Machell. The sources all seem to confirm who she was.

Merilyn

MARY MACHELL, nurse to Prince Henry, eldest son of King James I of England.
She married (1st) before 1612 [rev.] RALPH CUDWORTH, D.D., Fellow of
Emmanuel College, Cambridge. They had three sons, [Major] James, Gent.,
Ralph, D.D. [Fellow of Emmanuel College, Master of Clare College, Master of
Christ’s College], and John, and three daughters, Elizabeth, Mary, and Jane.
He was born in 1572. He matriculated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, Lent,
1588–9, where he obtained the following degrees: B.A., 1592–3, M.A., 1596, B
D., 1603, and D. D., 1619. He served as Curate of Westley Waterless,
Cambridgeshire c.1600, and was also a minister of St. Andrew’s, Cambridge.
He was instituted Vicar of Coggeshall, Essex in 1604. He was appointed
Rector of Aller, Somerset in 1609. [REV.] RALPH CUDWORTH, D.D. Was buried at
Aller, Somerset 30 Aug. 1624. He left a will dated 17 Aug. 1624, proved 29
Oct. 1624 (P.C.C. 116 Byrde). His widow, Mary, married (2nd) [rev.] JOHN
STOUGHTON, D.D., fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, younger son of [Rev
] Thomas Stoughton, of Naughton, Suffolk and Coggeshall, Essex, by his 1st
wife, Katherine. He was baptized at Naughton, Suffolk 23 Jan. 1592/3. He was
admitted sizar of Emmanuel College, Cambridge in 1607, where he obtained the
following degrees: B.A., 1610–11, M.A., 1614, B.D., 1621, and D.D., 1626. He
was appointed Rector of Aller, Somerset 24 Aug. 1624. In 1632 he was
appointed curate of St. Mary, Aldermanbury, London. His wife, Mary, was
living in December 1634. He married (2nd) in 1635 JANE BROWNE, widow of [Rev
]Walter Newburgh (died 1632), of Symondsbury, Dorset, and daughter of John
Browne, Esq., of Frampton, Dorset. They had two daughters, Jane and Mary. He
was prosecuted in the high commission at the instigation of Archbishop Laud.
[REV.] JOHN STOUGHTON died 4 May 1639, and was buried 9 May 1639. He left a
will dated 4 May 1639, proved 20 May 1639 (P.C.C. 69 Harvey).

NEHGR 14 (1860): 101–104 (letter of James Cudworth dated 1634 addressed to
his “very Louinge & Kinde ffather Dr. Stoughton at his howse in
Aldermanbury”); 21 (1867): 249–250; 30 (1876): 464; 40 (1886): 306–307 (will
of John Stoughton, D.D.); 64 (1910): 85–86. Brook Lives of the Puritans 3
(1813): 527 (“Dr. John Stoughton, D.D. Was fellow of Emmanuel college,
Cambridge … He is classed among the learned writers and fellows of that
college, and is denominated a pious and learned divine.”). Chalmers General
Biographical Dictionary 11 (1813): 104–111 (biog. Of Ralph Cudworth: “[He]
was son of Dr. Ralph Cudworth, and born 1617, at Aller, Somerset, of which
place his father was rector. His mother was of the family of Machell, and
had been nurse to prince Henry, eldest son of James I. His father dying when
he was only seven years of age, and his mother marrying again, his education
was superintended by his father-in-law, Dr Stoughton”). Chauncy Hist. Antiqs
Of Hertfordshire 1 (1826): 77–78. Green Diary of John Rous (Camden Soc. 66)
(1856): 79–80 (sub 1635: “In October, Doctor Stoughton, of Aldermanbury, in
London, who married Cudworth’s widow, of Emm[anuel] and had the same living
given by the colledge in the West country, from when a carrier bringing some
monyes for his wives children’s portions, he was traduced (as it seemeth) to
be a favourer of New England, and a collector of contributions for those
ministers there, &c.”). Notes & Queries 2nd Ser. 7 (1859): 230. Notes &
Queries for Somerset & Dorset 7 (1901): 143–144. D.N.B. 5 (1908): 271–272
(biog. Of Ralph Cudworth). Weaver Somerset Incumbents (1889): 4. Holman
Scott Gen. (1919): 259–262. Venn & Venn Alumni Cantabrigiensis to 1751 1
(1922): 431 (sub Ralph Cudworth); 4(1) (1927): 171 (sub John Stoughton).
Calder & Cudworth Recs. Of the Cudworth Fam. (1974). Emerson Letters from
New England (1976): 138–139, 142–143. Spear Search for the Passengers of the
Mary & John 1630 18 (1992): 39–43; 26 (1997): 101–104 (sub Stoughton).
Parish Regs. Of Aller, Somerset [FHL 1517680]. Registered will of John
Machell, Gent., of Wonersh, Surrey dated 17 Oct. 1646, codicil dated 14 Jan.
1646/7, proved 16 July 1647, Prerogative Court of Canterbury, 163 Fines [FHL
Microfilm 92165]—brother of Mary Machell, wife of Ralph Cudworth; testator
bequeaths his cousin/kinswoman [i.e., niece], Jane Cudworth, £125 at her
marriage.



-------Original Message-------



From: binky

Date: 8/09/2009 11:30:16 PM

To:

Subject: SOURCES



Reference has been made in this newsgroup concerning Gary Boyd

Roberts' "The Royal Descents Of 600 Immigrants." Readers should

Understand that this book IS NOT acceptable evidence on ANY lineage

Society application form.



Why?



Because Roberts lumps all of his sources at the end of the line, and

Doesn't give verbatim quotes from the sources so the reader can judge

For themeslves if the sources justify Roberts' assertions.



Here's an example:



On p. 337, Roberts gives a line from Edward I to James Cudworth, an

Early settler of MA. The royal line passes through Mary Machell,

Alleged to be Cudworth's mother. The current editions of Richardson's

Books and AR8 don't have this line.



A number of sources are listed, and Roberts appends notes about these

Sources. No lineage society will accept that. They will want to see

A quote from a source that proves Cudworth's mother was Mary Machell

And that her mother was Mary Lewknor.



There's another problem here: Roberts says that a forthcoming article

By Paul C. Reed will confirm, amplify, and document the descent. This

Gives readers the impression that Paul C. Reed has endorsed the line.



But the Reed article has never appeared. I don't know what the

Proposed article contains, or whether Reed actually succeeded in

Proving this line.



That's not the point. The point is that "evidence" has been cited

Which doesn't exist, and which neither the reader or an approving

Genealogist of a lineage society can read for themselves.



Apparently Roberts and Richardson feel they've become the 'de facto'

Arbiters of the validity of royal lines--I think Tony Hoskins also

Thinks he is. Even though ALLl bastard descents which have not been

Proven by scientific paternity testing questionable, even though it's

An absolute fact that men don't always know if a bastard child is

Theirs, and the mothers don't always know who the father is, both of

These writers nonetheless list bastard lines in their books with no

Caveat.



There's a world outside of"soc.genealogy.medieval," and these guys are

Really the arbiters of nothing.



As a member of a well-respected lineage society myself, I can assure

The readers of this newsgroup that the approving genealogists of the

Respective societies decide which candidates to admit. They haven't

Turned over their duties to any of these people, so don't be

Intimidated.



-------------------------------

To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

.




This thread: