Humphrey (died 1577/78) WILLIAMSON of New Hall
New page 19 July 2019
Links:
Immediate ancestors: unknown
Immediate descendant: John WILLIAMSON
The Williamson of Crosthwaite story - WILLIAMSON of Crosthwaite research notes
index of surnames
(Apart from the overall shakiness of the Crosthwaite connection). Humphrey names his son John and a number of his other children in his will, as well as his son John's son John, and his daughter Mary's married name of WARD. The son John names several of his siblings in his own will, and they match, plus his own son John and his sister Mary's married name WARD.
I have not identified Humphrey's parents. Obviously I would like to. It would be fun to attach this Humphrey to the Williamson pedigrees in the Herald's visitations to Cumberland, Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire, Middlesex etc. All the names of the sons of this Humphrey also appear on those pedigrees. Also, this Humphrey rents and lives in New Hall, the house of the second John Williamson from the pedigrees, when it is owned by his son Thomas who moves out of the county. Thomas then sells New Hall to Humprehy's son.
In the pedigrees, the first John has a son Humphrey, who in turn has a son Humphrey. It would be great to identify this Humphrey with one of those. Age-wise, the older pedigree Humphrey (younger brother to the second pedigree John, who according to Cumberland Families and Heraldry, by C Roy Hudleston and RS Boumphrey, was born about 1508), if he married a bit late and had a younger wife, could be father to the children below. The younger pedigree Humphrey, a whole generation later, is therefore a bit of a squeeze to have adult children in the early 1560s. But the wife and heir of the older Humphrey (mother and brother of the younger) were of Oxfordshire, and this Humphrey shows no connections beyond Cumberland in the evidence I have. Also the three children of the older Humphrey in the Middlesex pedigree (Robert, Humphrey and Thomas) are not a great match for the children of this Humphrey known from his will. Therefore my speculations may need to resort to assuming that the pedigrees' first John Williamson had a brother or cousin, who could have been father to this Humphrey. And I need to find some way of testing this possibility with evidence.
As you may haveg guessed by now, I don't have actual evidence for this Humphrey's childhood. Working back from his datable children and grandchildren, I would guess he was born in about the 1510s or 20s. He seems likely to have come from a fairly well-off family.
Humphrey can be inferred from his will (and entries in the parish registers from 1562 onwards) to have had the following children (perhaps in only roughly this order):
Anthony who appears to have married in the mid 1560s
Mary who married in 1563
John, who appears to have married by 1569 and has his own page
Nicholas, who appears to have been Humphrey's successor on his property at Applethwaite, and who I will make a page for shortly
Thomas
Robert who may have married in the later 1580s if he stayed in the parish
Isabel, who perhaps married Gawen Birkett 1580
James, who was probably born between 1556 and 1562, as he is treated as a minor in Humphrey's 1577 will, but does not appear as a baptism in the parish register from 1562 onwards
Janet, likewise
I have no evidence on the mother of these children, except that she appears to have died by 1577 as she is not mentioned in Humphrey's will and living wives generally are in other wills I have seen.
Mary was I think one of the eldest children, and married (and presumably moved out) in 1563. Anthony also seems to have married by 1567, possibly earlier.
Humphrey's will looks rather yeoman-like, in that he leaves agricultural equipment as well as household goods to a son. In yeoman wills this usually indicates that the son in question is the eldest and main heir, and has taken ownership of the main family farm and will work it.
However, at least later in life, Humphrey called himself a gentleman and seems to have been richer than that. In the seventh year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth (between November 1565 and November 1566), Humphrey WILLIAMSON, gentleman, is mentioned as the tenant and occupier of New Hall, when it is sold by Thomas WILLIAMSON of the pedigrees (son of John WILLIAMSON of New Hall, 1508-58) to John WILLIAMSON, Humphrey's own son. [research note, check whether there was another Humphrey WILLIAMSON gentleman in Crosthwaite at this time--I'm making a bit of an assumption that the tenant of New Hall is this Humphrey].
I'm lacking evidence as to when Humphrey may have moved in to New Hall, except that the last definite occupier, John WILLIAMSON of the pedigree, died about 1558 (Hudleston and Boumphrey). His son and heir Thomas was around 22 by this point and may already, or shortly after, have moved south with his Northamptonshire bride (see a reference around this period in a the Victoria County History article on Denford, Northants, and note that by 1574 the same couple were at Tusmore, Oxfordshire)
[note just sitting on this page until I make a Thomas page to put it on, that there was an apparently separate set of Williamsons also having lands in Denford]
John the purchaser seems not to have moved in to New Hall until at least 1569, a couple of years or more after buying it, so I speculate that Humphrey may have continued in residence there and this may indicate that he was the real funder of the purchase, although it was in his son's name.
Noting that at least two and probably more of the children would still have been young or even yet to be born at this point, it may be that Humphrey and his family had more need of a good-sized house than John, who during 1566-70 was a single young man, then a new husband, and then a father of one. John and his wife, and presumably their first child, moved in to New Hall by 1571, but there is no positive evidence as to when Humphrey and the rest of the family moved out.
By 1577 Humphrey was living at Applethwaite, and I guess from his bequest of his agricultural equipment and household goods to his son Nicholas, later of Applethwaite, that this was a working farm, and may perhaps have been Humphrey's original yeoman property, before some increase in wealth (or borrowing) enabled him to buy New Hall or help his son to do so.
Humphrey made his will on 11 December 1577, 'seike in bodye fearyng the pange of deathe' (a fairly standard form of words, but consistent with the pattern of the day that people didn't make wills until they thought they were dying). He survived for about a month, being buried in Crosthwaite on 12 January 1577/78. The will was not proved until 30 July 1578, suggesting that his probate took a while to sort out.
I am going through this will in the order it is written, as I often do, but I think the order of bequests may be unusual, rather than going in order of seniority as I've come to expect.
Humphrey leaves his agricultural gear and some large house contents such as chests and bedsteads to his son Nicholas, along with some other movables, including all the sheep that are marked with Nicholas's own mark. In a typical yeoman or farmer will, I would read this as the bequest to the eldest son who was taking over the main family property, and that either the land ownership has been made over to his name already, or that the tenancy succession is arranged separately with the landlord.
But see below for what I read as indications that Anthony and John may be older, or at least more trusted, and see above for my thought that John may be set up in a house fit for a gentleman. On the other hand, this bequest goes on to make what seems to me an unusual provision that Nicholas is penalised if he challenges the will, that he would then not receive these goods but would in fact have to pay his youngest brother James 70 pounds out of something (I read as possibly 'five farmhold') that Nicholas has (from his father, I infer). So I'm hypothesing that Humphrey is aware he's treating Nicholas less favourably than might have been expected, and this may be a matter of the eldest not receiving such a lion's share as normal, or it may be a matter of a younger son who may seek to challenge greater settlements on his more privileged older brothers.
Jumping to the son who I think is the youngest, Humphrey gives James tenancy to lands at the far end of the parish, 'beyond Derwent', plus 20 marks (13 pounds, six shillings and eightpence) and a few items of household goods. He makes Anthony responsible for James's upbringing, and gives him the use and profit of James's inheritance during James's minority. This makes me think that Anthony (perhaps along with John, see below) is the oldest and/or the most trusted of the sons, in Humphrey's eyes.
There then follow a series of small bequests. They seem token, compared to the impression I get of Humphrey's wealth, and unless the individuals concerned have been otherwise provided for then it seems they are calculated as cut-offs--especially seeing that James the youngest son gets property rights. Regarding other provision, I have discussed above my reading of the New Hall purchase as Humphrey providing for John. Something would I think normally have been settled on a daughter at her marriage (Mary). I don't have information on what was done for Anthony but I expect there was something as he is given responsibility for a younger sibling. Perhaps also for Thomas and Robert.
The bequests are:
Thomas gets 40 shillings (2 pounds) and a silver spoon
Mary's son John WARD gets six lambs and a silver spoon
Mary herself gets three bushels of grain
John's son John gets a sheep and one of the best silver spoons
Anthony's son Gawen gets similar, though the spoon might not be one of the best
Then for Robert there is another small bequest and an interesting note: a gold ryal of 15 shillings 'desiring of him to see my will performed and fulfilled according to my deed." To me this suggests that Humphrey's wishes in some matter have been set down separately--perhaps some other transaction has been set up that Robert is party to and needs to complete as Humphrey has instructed. Or it may just be that he sees Robert as the foremost among the supervisors of his will (see below)
Isabel gets 20 nobles, five or six (can't read which) silver spoons, a brass pot and the best feather bed. This seems like a more substantial bequest of movable goods than to some of the other children and may actually be her whole inheritance. I'm not totally sure what sum a noble represents in this context. There were mediaeval coins called nobles worth 80 pence (before 1461) or 100 pence (1461-70), so 20 of them would be 6 pounds 13 and 4, or 8 pounds 6 and 8 depending on which issue is meant in the will. Or in 1577 the coin mentioned above called the ryal (worth 15 shillings) was also known as the rose noble, of which 20 would be worth 15 pounds. So in any case, 20 nobles seems to be several pounds.
Humphrey finally makes a legacy of three shillings and fourpence to the parish free school.
The residue of his estate (I don't know whether this is major property or just the rat droppings in the wood shed) he leaves to his daughters Isabel and Janet. They are presumably the unmarried ones, though evidently Isabel is grown up whereas Janet is a minor, because John is entrusted with her upbringing (with the proviso that if Janet prefers she can instead go to her married sister Mary, in which case John is to give 4 marks (2 pounds, 13 and 4) yearly for the increase of Janet's goods.
He names supervisors, with relationships in some cases which may be of genealogical use. As best I can read them they are: My cousins Mr Thomas [and] Mr James BRAITHWAITE Mr Nicholas WILLIAMSON, my sons Mr Robert, John, Anthony, Randall WARD my son-in-law, and Will WILLIAMSON of Lyzzick
Humphrey's will mentions Anthony's son Gawen. There is only one baptism by 1577 of a Gawen to an Anthony WILLIAMSON in the Crosthwaite parish register, so I take it that he is the same Anthony. In which case we can see that he married Elizabeth and they baptised seven children from 1567 to 1584. They may have had a first child in 1565, when living at Applethwaite, but mothers are not given at that date, so with the different location it is hard to say.
Mary married William STANGER in 1563 and then Randall WARD in 1570, with whom she had a son John. [look in the PR for her STANGER and/or other WARD children, if in parish]
John also married and had children baptised between 1569 and 1577. He has his own page.
Nicholas, having perhaps taken over at Applethwaite in 1578, can perhaps be identified with the one who married Margaret and baptised children in 1583-87. He also has his own page.
There are a number of Thomases baptising children in the parish register in the 1580s and 90s, but it is hard to pick out which if any may be this one.
There is just one Robert baptising children in Crosthwaite in that period, but other than the plausible date it is hard to say whether it is the right Robert.
There is an Isabel WILLIAMSON of Applethwaite marrying a Gawen BIRKETT of Portinscale in 1580, who may well be this one.
As with Robert, there is just one candidate for James as a father in the baptismal register in the 1590s, but the identification cannot be confirmed.
There are two marriages of Janet WILLIAMSON in 1585, to Gawen TICKELL and Richard WILSON, and more in the 1590s. I can't say which if any might have been this Janet.
If you are interested in this family I'll be pleased to hear from you. Click this link to email me at deletethis.ianwilliamson161@gmail.com but delete everything up to and including the first dot, leaving just my name and number @ service provider.
Links:
Immediate ancestors: unknown
Immediate descendant: John WILLIAMSON
The Williamson of Crosthwaite story - WILLIAMSON of Crosthwaite research notes
index of surnames