ANCESTOR-UNITED

ANCESTOR UNITED

Genealogical services

Biographical research

Family of Blacket or Blackett of County Durham

A sad tale of misinformation

Lessons to Note

Do not accept unsubstantiated links to parentage

Remember the natural child bearing age stops at around 45 years

Do not fall back on the argument that a register entry must be missing without good reason

Check original sources – transcriptions can confuse baptisms and burials

Pursuit of accuracy is a better basis for research than the pursuit of glory

Some research on Blacket ancestry had been carried out in the 1920’s by professional genealogists, who had reached a dead end with a James Blacket of Hamsterley, born about 1690. They had hypothesised that he was son to a family of Woodcroft, County Durham, although there were no baptism records to support this. An extended line following this link back was published in a book by an Australian genealogist in the 1980’s, although this did carry a warning of doubtful authenticity.

Being unhappy with mere hypothesis, I investigated the records, building a database including all IGI records and any available transcription records for Blacket, Blackett and variants. This required a considerable amount of work, but I was rewarded by the discovery of a real line of descent. By checking the original parish registers at Durham Record Office I was able to confirm this line.

I thought the Australian professional genealogist would be glad to have the mystery solved. However he was in the process of publishing and selling a pedigree chart showing a line of the Blacket family back to Alfred the Great. The resulting misinformation has unfortunately therefore become more widely disseminated.

The problem arose because no birth record for James existed in the parish of Hamsterley where he was expected, although it was known that his parents were William and Ann. Our hypothesisers found two children of William and Ann born after 1694 and two children of the same parents who died after 1694. There was another couple William and Ann who had children in a neighbouring parish between 1674 and 1684. Obvious but mistaken conclusion – there were intervening children whose baptisms were not recorded! There is a definite gap in the registers for a short period before 1635, but none for the time in question. The extraordinary point is that this falsely hypothesised line depends on a woman giving birth at the age of 55!

For the benefit of those who have been misinformed, a chart is shown below which gives the correct line. James was born at Easington, where his father William had moved as a child with his real father George from Hamsterley. This is not unusual as George’s half brother William went to Jarrow and fathered the line of Baronets. On George’s death, William and his family returned to Hamsterley. Below is given the family linkage in a manner which is hopefully convincing. Entries from the Hamsterley register are shown in Bold; Easington entries are shown in red. Names mentioned in Edward’s will are in green, and those in George’s will in blue. It is a pity that William was not mentioned in his father’s will, but this seems to have been deliberate.

Richard Blacket

1512-1587

Christopher Edward Elizabeth George

-1621 1556-1628 1563- 1566-1627

= 1 1582 Jane Kirkhouse

= 2 Ann Lilburne

Margaret William Richard Eleanor Henry John Jane George

- 1587 1603 1604 1606 1608-1664 1610-1691

= 1609 = ?? = 1631 =1627 =

Peter Isabel Ann Richard Margaret

Maddison Crook Pilkington Wood

Ann Christopher Jane William Robert

-1702 1635 1638-1719 1644-1669

=1655 =1) 1670

Matthew Gibbon Elizabeth Lyster

= 2 1678

Ann Liddell

George Robert Margaret William John Edward James Eleanor Jane George Ann Elizabeth

1671-1671 1672-1741 -1681 1682-1700 1683-1686 1684-1733 1686-1732 1688 1690-1694 1692-1695 1694- 1695-

= 1698 = 1713 =1709 = 1719

Elizabeth Elizabeth William John

Chapman Wheatley Gibbon Brown

Ann Mary Margaret William Elizabeth John Thomas

1699-1699 1702- 1703-1730 1714-1791 1716-1786 1719- 1722-1806

= 1725 = 1 1737 = 1739 = 1744

Ralph Jane Hall Robert Mary

Hodgson = 2 1763 Angle Hodgson

Hannah Huitson

Genealogical services – by Tim Tomlinson

Please contact me by e-mail address to discuss your needs.

mailto:ttsearch@ancestor-united.co.uk

The following is a list of families for which I have extensive details or which I continue to investigate. The county given in brackets indicates their area of activity at the end of the 18^th century.

Allan family (Ayrshire)

Borthwick family (Midlothian)

Bowie family (Ayrshire)

Cockayne family (Derbyshire)

Cogan family (England)

Comyn family (England)

Davies families (Shropshire)

Gibson family (Peebleshire)

Girdwood family (Lanarkshire)

Hartshorn family (Yorkshire)

Haslewood family (Shropshire)

Haworth family (Yorkshire)

Heylyn family (England)

Hickin family (Staffordshire)

Hoskins family (Staffordshire)

Landor family (Staffordshire)

Lowe family (Cheshire)

Luccock family (Yorkshire)

Manley family (Cheshire)

Morris family (England)

Paget family (Shropshire)

Parsonson family (Yorkshre)

Pigou family (England)

Poulton family (Staffordshire)

Ralph family (England)

Robison family (Staffordshire)

Sherratt family (Staffordshire)

Smithson family (Yorkshire)

Stephens family (England)

Sykes family (Yorkshire and Cheshire)

Tay family (England)

Thomson family (Lanarkshire)

Tomlinson family (Derbyshire)

Townend family (Yorkshire)

Tweedie family (Peebleshire)

Wade family (Yorkshire)

Weston family (Staffordshire)

Wilks family (Yorkshire)

Last Updated October 2007