Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Catherine --
Despite several early and persistent attempts to link him to the English Baronets de Hoghton, the identity of his parents remains unproven.
It has been theorized by many of the early Houghton genealogists -- based almost entirely on later family tradition, and frankly in my view wishful thinking -- that Ralph was actually Ratcliffe de Hoghton, son of Sir Richard Hoghton, 1st Baronet de Hoghton, of Hoghton Tower, Preston, Lancashire. See Peter Townend, ed., Burke's Peerage, Baronetage, & Knightage 750-51 (London 1970). Sir Richard was born in September 1570, and knighted in January, 1589/90. Id. In 1599, he was created Sheriff of co. Lancaster, and was created a baronet on 22 May 1611. Id. He represented Lancaster in Parliament for several years, and entertained King James I at the ancestral seat -- Hoghton Tower -- for several days on the latter's return from Scotland in 1617. Id. He married Katherine, daughter of Sir Gilbert Gerard, Kt., of Gerard's Bromley, Staffordshire, Master of the Rolls. Id. Sir Richard and Katherine had five sons and eight daughters. Id. Katherine died on 17 November 1617, and Sir Richard died on 12 November 1630. Id. For an overview of the descent of Sir Richard from Adam de Hoghton, who held lands at Hoghton in 1203, which is beyond the scope of this work, refer to Burke's. It should be noted that the variance between "Hoghton" and "Houghton" is not at all marked; many contemporary records refer to the Hoghtons by the latter spelling. See, e.g., George C. Miller, Hoghton Tower in History & Romance 39, 40, 49, 53 (Preston 1954).
While there is some very circumstantial evidence which might support such a theory, I remain unconvinced by it for several reasons. First, there is no documentary evidence supporting such a claim. In the absence of documentation, I am inclined to believe that the theory rests primarily on a combination of tenuous circumstantial evidence and pure conjecture, and a late-19th early 20th Century tendency to claim noble lineage.
Second, there are contemporaneous reports that Ratcliffe was killed in the Civil War. A history of Hoghton Tower notes that Sir Richard's son Redcliffe was "killed during the capture of Preston by Sir John Seaton" on 7 February 1642/3. See G. Miller, supra, at 48. Miller quotes the contemporaneous Discourse of the Warr in Lancashire:
"Ratcliffe Hoghton brother to Sir Gilbert [the son and heir of Sir Richard] being in the street with Doctor Westby a phisitian and twoo buchers of the towne one of them called Mitton making resistance were all sleyne."
G. Miller, supra, at 49 (quoting Discourse, supra, at 23). In 1862, Francis W. Houghton, a family historian, noted that a Houghton Association report stated "that Ratcliffe . . . was killed at the taking of Preston on 9th February, 1642-43 . . . ." Houghton, J.W., at 60. He then off-handedly dismisses that fact by stating that "Sir Henry Bold Houghton [the 8th Baronet], on the contrary, informs us that "the records do not so state it." Id. Miller clearly contradicts this latter assertion.
Third, as J.W. Houghton points out, the dates for Ralph and Ratcliffe do not match. The records indicate that Ralph was eighty-two when he died; that makes the year of his birth around 1623. See Houghton, J.W., at 65. Ratcliffe, however, was around 1608 -- a significant difference of several years. English records give the date of Ratcliffe's mother's death as 1617, six years earlier than the 1623 birth date. There is no record of Sir Richard having married a second time, and his biographers note that he fathered fourteen children, all of whom are accounted for by name in the list of Katherine's children. See Houghton, J.W., at 65
Fourth, I note that the names of Ralph's children do not include Richard (Ratcliffe's father), Katherine (his mother), Gilbert (his maternal grandfather), Alexander or Thomas (the name of several of Ratcliffe's ancestors) or any other name which would support the Ralph-Ratcliffe theory.
Thus, I agree with J.W. Houghton, who concludes that while Ralph may have descended from the principle Hoghton line -- Sir Richard was probably an uncle or grandfather -- he was not the son of Sir Richard. Unfortunately, I also agree with him that we will probably never know for sure.
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/houghton/messages/1438.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|