The Problem of Richard Baldwin (1565)

Before I go any further, I must settle a problem. It's...
 

The Problem of Richard Baldwin (1576 or 1565)

This is going to be a really boring post for some.

To start: Richard (1576) has a birth year given as 1576 in nearly every internet link that I can find. However, I can find no reliable reason for this. He is said by Seversmith (as I will discuss below) to have been born in 1565 based on his research. Since I can not find any reliable source for the date of 1576, I will be using 1565 instead for this blog until I have better information.

When investigating the parents of Richard Baldwin (1565), one can run into a problem. Many sites and sources list his parents as being Richard (1540) and Isabel Chase. Richard (1540) is given as the son of Richard (1503) in these cases, and this seems well enough...



But upon inspection, there is no reliable source I can find for the existence of an Isabel Chase in Baldwin records, let alone one marrying Richard of 1540. Complicating things, Richard (1565) married a woman named Isabella Harding, and some are of the opinion that Isabel was mistakenly entered somewhere as his mother, instead of his wife, and the Chase surname was added later due to a connection to royal families.

Suspicious!

Charles Candee Baldwin's main genealogical volume gives little information on a Richard born somewhere between 1531 and 1540. This first volume states that Richard (1565) of Cholesbury may have been related to Richard of 1503 and says it seems "not unlikely" that he could be his son. But this is based on speculation with no records to back it up.

Charles' later supplement sheds a little more light on a son of Richard (1503) who is named Richard also, seemingly after his father. Charles states that this new Richard "was not 23 years old by 1553 and by his father's will had the tenements, lands in Cholesbury Bucks (joining Aston Clinton). He may probably have been the father of Richard of Cholesbury, who made his will in 1630. As the last was an important line, I will preserve the place by marking him as certainly the son of the former".

Which Rich is Which?

So Charles' Genealogy seems certain that Richard of 1540 is the son of Richard of 1503, but makes an assumption also that he is the father of Richard of 1565. At this point I could find no proof and this is just more speculation.

Oh noes!

Further into my investigations I found mention of another pair of Baldwins attributed as mother and father of Richard (1565). These are Thomas Baldwin, son of John-of-the-Hale Baldwin, and Jane Tyndall (though her surname is in doubt I will use it, for want of a better source, but I want to make note of this here). The will of Thomas Baldwin confirms Jane Tyndall(?) as his wife, and Henry Baldwin of Dundridge as being a cousin to Thomas. This Henry Baldwin is the same one from whom we are descended on the Robert-Richard-Henry-Sylvester-Sylvester (immigrant) line.

This is interesting because this Henry's father is established as Richard (1503). Richard (1503) and John of the Hale have been listed as brothers, and the Chesham Manor court rolls discovered in the 1970s corroborates this; these two along with one Thomas of Wendover are given as three sons of Robert Baldwin (1468). Some sources give a fourth son Robert (Jr) who may have died young.

I searched further. Finally I found reference to the following book, "Descendants of Richard Baldwin of Dundridge, Buckinghamshire". This was written by Herbert Furman Seversmith and I found some scans online of its pages and so far it has been very informative. Page 248 describes Richard (1540) as the son of Richard (1503) and inheriting lands from his father's will, but his mother Ellen's will in 1566 does not mention him. Therefore it is probable that Richard (1540) died unmarried and without children. This is even underlined in the book. Mention is made to over 50 years of speculation so it seems I am not the first to try to solve the riddle of Richard (1565) parentage. Even Charles Candee Baldwin's book is noted to have been speculative in this regard, in Seversmith's text.

Page 249 gives sources used as Evelyn B. Baldwin's collection of notes and wills and this is held in the Library of Congress at Washington D.C. Reference numbers are provided. Pages 259-60 give Thomas marrying Jane Tyndall and having son Richard, who married Isabella. Page 263 of this book gives Richard (1565)'s parents as Thomas and Jane, seemingly giving me the answer I have been looking for!

There is a margin note here which redirected me to examine pages 995 and on. I read those pages and in these, the author gives further reasoning how the Richard-Richard-Richard proponents are working from assumptions and he notes some errors made in the past by source "Buckinghamshire Marriages" p. 996. Pages 997 and 998 reference further the work of Evelyn Briggs Baldwin which the author has studied extensively, reiterating that these were used by Seversmith to draw his conclusions.

Closing thoughts: On one side of the debate, Charles Candee Baldwin has admittedly made an assumption, which can not be backed by any extant records, and which seems to have been picked up and run away with by people on the internet (blindly copying without research is not good). Nobody on any genealogical forum I have come across can offer evidence on record for the marriage of Richard Baldwin to Isabel Chase, nor any of Richard (1540)'s children, let alone one specified as Richard (1565).

Seversmith has presented his case and offered many records which can be examined though I admit I have not yet. He presents his conclusion as cumulative evidence arising from examination and correlation of multiple abstracts of wills and files given by Evelyn B. Baldwin, and has given reasons why the opposing argument is based on conjecture due to geographical evidence. His argument as presented is clearly the stronger of the two.

It is therefore my opinion and for the purposes of this blog that Richard (1565) was the son of Thomas Baldwin, son of John Baldwin, son of Robert Baldwin (1468). I suppose there is no way to be 100 percent sure, but it's better in my opinion than taking a wild leap with a non-existant(?) Isabel Chase Baldwin. Until I learn more this is the side I'm going to take, based on the evidence above.


What a dry post!

Here's "I'm my own Grandpa" on Youtube to make up for it. The song will become relevant in my next post. That's when things get really fun as distant relations Asahel and Esther get married, two lines of my great-great-grandparents are discovered to both come from the same Robert Baldwin, and I become my own cousin.

I'm My Own Grandpa!!