Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
While I mean no offense, especially to Kayla since she is simply repeating stories and theories put forward by others over the years, there is absolutely no documentary proof whatsover -- either primary or secondary -- of a link between Ralph Houghton and the Hoghtons of Hoghton Tower, Lancashire.
This connection was first postulated in the mid-1800's, when the current fad among genealogists was to try to link- despite a lack of evidence or even evidence to the contrary-- an immigrant line here with a noble or gentried line in England.
First, "Houghton" and "Hoghton" are not simply the same name, people adding or dropping the "u" at their whim. While stemming from the same surname, the two are separate branches, or septs, of an earlier surname. Houghton and Hoghton families existed quite separate and distinct from each in Lancashire.
Second, no contemporaneous record has been found in England regarding Ralph. To attempt to counter this, some have put forward the theory that Ralph was a name adopted to hide his true identity when he came to the colonies -- yet again with no proof and, in fact, contrary to the practices of the day; in the 1630s-1640s there was no need for someone "escaping" from England to change their name -- the sparse population and lack of communication with England made such a move unnecessary.
Third, there is no record of Ralph on any extant ship's manifest from this period. He did not, as noted in Kayla's posting, arrive on the Abigail; only John Houghton's name appears on that passenger list.
Fourth, the theory about the Hoghton/Houghton link depends on the theory that Ralph's family was ardently Catholic, were involved in the Roundhead vs. Cavalier conflicts of the Civil War, and fled as a result of both. But would so ardent a Catholic flee to ANOTHER Protestant stronghold, the Massachusetts Bay Colony -- as opossed to, say, the Continent -- and once there immediately beccome an upstanding member of a Puritan church?
Fifth, most of the threads of this theory depend for their substantiation solely on documents which once existed and while subsequently "lost in fire or flood or other natural disaster" are reported on second or third hand at some point and so are accepted at face value. In the law, we call this "hearsay;" it is inherently untrustworthy.
In any event, the basic problem with the Ralph theory boils down to one thing: not a shred of documentary evidence. And documentation is the foundation of good genealogy, not guesswork and supposition.
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/houghton/messages/1365.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|