Tuesday, August 29, 2023

The Franke family in the Protestation returns and the Lay Subsidy in 1641 and 1642

A lookup in the Protestation Returns of 1641 for the Francke family was helpful.

 Hundred     Parish     Forename     Surname     Notes                             

Carhampton     Carhampton     John     Francke     
Carhampton     Timberscombe     Alexander     Francke     
Carhampton     Porlock     Robert     Francke     sen
Carhampton     Porlock     Robert     Francke     jun
Carhampton     Porlock     Roger     Francke     
Carhampton     Porlock     Walter     Francke     
Carhampton     Porlock     Walter     Francke     
Carhampton     Porlock     Thomas     Francke     
Carhampton     Porlock     John     Francke     sen

A similar lookup in the Lay Subsidy for 1642 was also helpful  

Hundred    Parish     Forename     Surname     Other     L or G     Amount    Page     Notes

Cannington     Timberscombe     Alex     Franck     gent         20 s     195     
Cannington     Porlocke     John     Franke     sen        1 s 2 d     198     listed as sub collector     
Cannington     Porlocke     Rob     Franke     jun       1 s 2 d     198     Robert Francke sen listed Cannington     Bossington in Porlocke     Walter     Franke     2 s 3 d     196     
    
Looking for proof of presence for the Franke family at East Linch in 1641. East Linch does not appear as an entity in either of these two returns. However it is interesting that the Protestation Return and the Lay Subsidy Robert Siderfin sen and jun are at Timberscombe along with Alexander Franck and Alexander Franck is mentioned in the Answer to the complaint given by Robert and Ursula Siderfin and their son John and their deceased daughter Wilmot is mentioned as well. We know that Robert at Timberscombe is also associated with East Linch so it would appear that both families are present near or at East Linch and East Linch continues in the Robert 5 (William 4, Robert 3, William 2, John 1) family until all of the lines daughter out at which point I have not made note of what happened to that property but it is into the early to mid 1700s that this land continues with this line. We already know that John Siderfin is at Selworthy (also close to East Linch so can understand why this other Siderfin family was known to the Franck family). Just a bit of logic to understand this document which I do not really need as it doesn't affect the descendancy of the Siderfin family. What is interesting though is the proof that Robert Siderfin married to Ursula Webber has survived to 1653 at least as has his wife and his son John. This does fit with the initial descent that James Sanders proposes but it is the individual Robert baptized in 1656 and married that is in discussion and he does have this Robert married twice, once to Thomasine and once to Elizabeth Blackford and both are incorrect as he married Elizabeth Question of Dunster. But I will continue to transcribe the document simply as it supplies proof for one of my arguments concerning this line of Robert 4 (Robert 3, William 2, John 1) and sets the stage for the changes that I made to the Pedigree Chart for the Robert Siderfin at East Linch and the William Siderfin at Minehead and both sons of a Robert Siderfin namely Robert  6 (Robert 5, William 4, Robert 3, William 2, John 1). The John Siderfin named as the father of Robert Siderfin at East Linch and William Siderfin at Minehead is incorrect. He is likely the father of the John Siderfin baptized 15 Jul 1565 at Wootton Courtney who married first Mary Chapman (listed as unknown on the Pedigree Chart of James Sanders) and second marriage was to Maria Winter bu I can find no descendants of the son Robert from the first marriage to Mary Chapman (baptized 15 Dec 1688 at Selworthy).

More proof for this particular postulation would be welcomed and is perhaps there in the Record Office but I feel with the documents acquired thus far the idea is certainly reasonable and I will proceed with it leaving further proof to others much closer to the registration office than I am!

In general though the Francke family does appear to be more in the Porlock area that the Carhampton/Cannington area. The holding though at Timberscombe does appear to be somewhat more substantial then other holdings at Porlock so there would be a strong desire to retain this piece of property.

Will continue with the transcription today.

Yesterday the sand was completed on the patio and probably the hardest task of this Fall. Another beautiful sunny day perhaps although just 10 degrees celsius at 6:30 a.m. The air quality though is at 54 so will have to work inside probably today.  That is always an interesting prospect!

On to the day.

No comments:

Post a Comment