Lincolnshire Tindall Origins

[John Gage]

My 9th. Great grandfather is Henry Tindall b. bef. 1571 (IGI) of Digby Lincolnshire, d. 1635 Digby, married 1591 Joan Thorpe, b. bef. 1571. I have three children for them: Elizabeth, bap. 1591, Digby, Robert, b. 1592 at Scopwick, bap. 1593, Digby and Mary bap. 1595, Digby. My problem is that I cannot establish coroborated parents for Henry (1571-1635). I have discovered numerous trees on Ancestry, in Roots and stand alone sites on the WEB, many of whom give Henry's father as a Henry Tyndale, b. 1545, Bushley, Worcester, bur. 1588, Thornbury, Gloucester, married Unknown, son of Edward Tindall of Worcestershire (1500-1546) by Joan Lawrence (1500-1571). But none of these sites offers a shred of evidence to explain why my Henry born in Lincolnshire should have been the son of another Henry who was born and lived in Worcestershire and was buried in Gloucestershire? One account actually states, without any supporting doccumentation, that the Worcestershire Henry died at Digby on the same day as he was buried in Gloucestershire!!
So can anyone shed some light on Henry (1571-1635) parentage? I have searched high and low but can make no headway.
Any help would be most appreciated.
Kindest Regards,
John Gage

[REbdon]

My 9th. Great grandfather is Henry Tindall b. bef. 1571 (IGI) of Digby Lincolnshire, d. 1635 Digby, married 1591 Joan Thorpe, b. bef. 1571. I have three children for them: Elizabeth, bap. 1591, Digby, Robert, b. 1592 at Scopwick, bap. 1593, Digby and Mary bap. 1595, Digby. My problem is that I cannot establish coroborated parents for Henry (1571-1635). I have discovered numerous trees on Ancestry, in Roots and stand alone sites on the WEB, many of whom give Henry's father as a Henry Tyndale, b. 1545, Bushley, Worcester, bur. 1588, Thornbury, Gloucester, married Unknown, son of Edward Tindall of Worcestershire (1500-1546) by Joan Lawrence (1500-1571). But none of these sites offers a shred of evidence to explain why my Henry born in Lincolnshire should have been the son of another Henry who was born and lived in Worcestershire and was buried in Gloucestershire? One account actually states, without any supporting doccumentation, that the Worcestershire Henry died at Digby on the same day as he was buried in Gloucestershire!!
So can anyone shed some light on Henry (1571-1635) parentage? I have searched high and low but can make no headway.
Any help would be most appreciated.
Kindest Regards,
John Gage

Hello there,
Henry Tindall buried 1635 in Digby, was one of my 11x great grandad's.
I myself have looked on Ancestry, and found the same information that you have.
I also think some trees have this Henry emigrating to Jamestown Virginia in 1607.
I can also find no concrete evidence regarding his parents.

This reminds me a bit of by Bee ancestors of Harmston and Coleby:
My 11x great grandad was Michael Bee.
According to some trees he was born in Harmston in either 1571 or 1578. They have him being the son of an Edmond.
The trouble is that the parish register did not give the name of the father.
Now if these people who had done the trees, looked at the will of Edmond Bee, and saw the words:
"I bequeath to my son, Michael Bee...": I would understand where they got the evidence from that Michael was the son of Edward.
But they have not put that they have seen the will of this Edward.
And quite a few trees have this Bee ancestry going back to 1480 in Newton on Trent.

It can be quite puzzling at times.

Regards.

Richard Ebdon.

[Sandyhall]

When you see other peoples trees on ancestry if they connect to your tree you can tell where the information comes from

It will tell you for instance - Ancestry Member Trees - This hint compiles information from 11 other Public Ancestry Member Trees.

when you click on Review it gives you a list of other trees you can see how many of these trees have taken there information from other trees for instance
I have delited the names but you can see they have 10 records that they have found but they have 11 Sources that's where the problem is the source is taken from Ancestry Family Trees that the person has added to there tree. they have all copied each others trees
Birth1827DIFFERENT Streatham, Surrey, England
DeathJuly 1887 Pancras, London
sources (11) records (10)
I have for the same person sources 12 and 12 Records because that is what I have found, I never connect to other peoples trees on Ancestry.

[Lesley Robertson]

Everything Sandyhall says is true.

When looking for 17th century (and earlier) records, finding them should be treated as a special piece of luck as many (other than those locked up in the strongrooms of rich folk) have not survived. Take a look at the political situation back then - people destroying the churches (and often their members) because they were the wrong denomination did nothing for record survival. Then there's natural factors including damp, mould and fire, and poor materials including cheap paper and acid ink (which can leave a page looking like lace). Also ignorance and dishonesty - one of the Parish registers I'd like to find was taken away when the 18th century parish clerk was fired - paper was valuable.

One of the best sources of early records is probably gravestones - IF the family could afford them and they've survived acid rain...

The most useful thing that I can think of to try is the Lincoln Archives HERE. I have always found them very helpful.
I see that GENUKI says that the Digby Anglican parish register dates from 1560, but that the Lincolnshire FHS only has microfiche from 1679.

[REbdon]

Yes Thank you for this,

I have used the Lincolnshire Archives often to look at Bishops Transcripts, and Wills for my ancestors.
I went today and looked at the Will of Edmond Bee of Harmston from 1583.
I was able to confirm from this that he did indeed have a son called Michael.

I know that you can view other people's trees on Ancestry matches.
I suppose I was just talking of generally that sometimes people put information on their trees, and you cannot see where the origin of that source of information has come from, because they have not given one, that's all.

Thank you.

Richard.

[REbdon]

When you see other peoples trees on ancestry if they connect to your tree you can tell where the information comes from

It will tell you for instance - Ancestry Member Trees - This hint compiles information from 11 other Public Ancestry Member Trees.

when you click on Review it gives you a list of other trees you can see how many of these trees have taken there information from other trees for instance
I have delited the names but you can see they have 10 records that they have found but they have 11 Sources that's where the problem is the source is taken from Ancestry Family Trees that the person has added to there tree. they have all copied each others trees
Birth1827DIFFERENT Streatham, Surrey, England
DeathJuly 1887 Pancras, London
sources (11) records (10)
I have for the same person sources 12 and 12 Records because that is what I have found, I never connect to other peoples trees on Ancestry.

Aha!
Yes I see where the problem may lie here:
I also never connect to other people's trees on Ancestry: I know what you mean now by "connecting.": Comparing other peoples trees to your own, and adding people to your tree in that way.
I would rather research it myself.
Relating to my Tindall ancestors for example:
There is a tree on Ancestry, and it has connected back the Tindalls to the 12th/13th century in Northumberland.
If memory serves me correctly, after a certain point there are absolutely no sources to support what has been put down.

Regards.

Richard.

[Sandyhall]

Aha!
Yes I see where the problem may lie here:
I also never connect to other people's trees on Ancestry: I know what you mean now by "connecting.": Comparing other peoples trees to your own, and adding people to your tree in that way.
I would rather research it myself.
Relating to my Tindall ancestors for example:
There is a tree on Ancestry, and it has connected back the Tindalls to the 12th/13th century in Northumberland.
If memory serves me correctly, after a certain point there are absolutely no sources to support what has been put down.

Regards.

Richard.

You are right there I never believe what others have I've even had 2 lots of family trees from relatives that have done the research pages and pages of hard copy but no I went and did my own research on the whole lot that was years ago when I was on Genes Reunited