1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SOC.GENEALOGY.MEDIEVAL

  • Is this correct? William Wentworth "visited" New England, 1636, and has

    From Johnny Brananas@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 20 11:51:52 2021
    "Mr Beaumont is descended from William Wentworth, who visited New England in 1636, and several members of the family went on to hold prominent positions in colonial America."

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-58982457

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Higgins@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Oct 20 20:35:57 2021
    On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 11:51:53 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote:
    "Mr Beaumont is descended from William Wentworth, who visited New England in 1636, and several members of the family went on to hold prominent positions in colonial America."

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-58982457
    If the reference here is to William Wentworth of New Hampshire, I think the answer is "no". Wentworth Beaumont appears to be descended (in a female line) from the Wentworth baronets of Wet Bretton. AFAIK no connection has been found between these two
    Wentworth families - but I could be wrong....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johnny Brananas@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Oct 21 06:49:15 2021
    On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
    On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 11:51:53 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote:
    "Mr Beaumont is descended from William Wentworth, who visited New England in 1636, and several members of the family went on to hold prominent positions in colonial America."

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-58982457
    If the reference here is to William Wentworth of New Hampshire, I think the answer is "no". Wentworth Beaumont appears to be descended (in a female line) from the Wentworth baronets of Wet Bretton. AFAIK no connection has been found between these two
    Wentworth families - but I could be wrong....

    Maybe an "easy" explanation why they had the 1652 New England shilling. Since there were other, much later American coins in the lot, the probability is that they were all acquired much more recently as a group.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)