Edward Fitz Randolph

Other Events:

• Name: Edward Fitzrandolph
• Reference Number: 3475
• Arrival: 1630, Salem, Essex, Massachusetts, USA

Notes:

The following was copied from werelate.org:

Edward of Sutton-in-Ashfield and later of Kneesall in the County of Nottingham. Mentioned in the will of his father, June 1588, and in that of his uncle Thomas Fitz Randolph, May 1600. Buried at Kneesall.

Address: Sutton-in-Ashfield and later of Kneesall, County of Nottingham, England

References
1. Edward left his son Edward 10 pounds sterling "if he cum to demand it." The son had emigrated to New England in 1630.


Birth:
FitzRandolph-20

Edward married Francis Howis on 17 Dec 1605 in Sutton In Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, England. Francis was born in 1585. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

1. Edward Fitz Randolph was born on 5 Jul 1607 in Sutton In Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, England; died between 1684 and 1685 in Piscataway, Middlesex, New Jersey, USA; was buried in Edison, Middlesex County, New Jersey, USA.

Other Events:

• Reference Number: 3835

Notes:

Birth:
FitzRandolph-87

Christopher married Anne Wood. Anne was born about 1545 in Normantown, Derbyshire, England; died in 1588. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Other Events:

• Reference Number: 1971

Notes:

Birth:
Wood-3155

Other Events:

• Reference Number: 7965

Notes:

Birth:
FitzRandolph-163

Christopher married Joan Langton. Joan was born about 1499 in Kirby, Ashfield, Warwickshire, England; died about 1573 in Sutton-in-Ashfield. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Other Events:

• Reference Number: 7964

Notes:

Birth:
Langton-50

Other Events:

• Reference Number: 7966

Notes:

from https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/233782/edward-randolph-fitzrandolph-longer-proven-gateway-ancestor#:~:text=No%2C%20the%20Fitz%20Randolphs%20are%20not%20descended%20from,York%20%28no%20connection%20to%20the%20Dukes%20of%20Westmorland%29.

OK, I think I understand this all now. The simple answer is, no, Edward Fitz Randolph the immigrant is not a known descendant John of Gaunt, Edward III or have any other known connection to the kings of England.

The connection comes from: L.V.H. Randolph. Fitz Randolph Traditions. (New York, 1907), p. 120. It is complete garbage. This book made the Fitz Randolph line go:

Edward Fitz Randolph -- Emigrant,

son of Edward Fitz Randolph of Langton Hall d. 1635

son of Christopher Fitz Randolph

son of Randolph de Neville

5th son of Ralph (or Randolph) de Neville -- Duke of Westmoreland d. 1565.

No, the Fitz Randolphs are not descended from the Dukes of Westmorland and the spectacular ancestry that would go with it. They are thought to descend from the Fitz Randolph family of Spennithorne, co. York (no connection to the Dukes of Westmorland).

This family had been traced back quite a few generations to Ranulph Fitz Robert who married Mary le Bigod, daughter of the Magna Carta Surety, Roger Le Bigod. The line appears in early editions of Magna Carta Sureties and in Douglas Richardson’s 1st editions of Magna Carta Ancestry. However, there is an unproven or doubtful generation (John Fitz Randolph who m. Joan Conyers is not proven to have had a son John) and the line has been removed from Richardson’s most recent work Royal Ancestry. The line remains in WikiTree.

SEE:

NEHGR vol. 97 (1943), 275-277 and 295-298

NEHGR vol. 99 (1945):335-336.

Weis. Magna Carta Sureties 5th edition (1999): line 164, for old line. There is a good discussion of both the evidence and of the problems with the line by the noted genealogist John Insley Coddington

Richardson. Magna Carta Ancestry 1st ed. (2005):342-343, for old line.

See Richardson. Royal Ancestry vol. IV (2013):226, sub Neville. showing the line removed.

answered Mar 27, 2016 by Joe Cochoit G2G6 Pilot (206k points)
selected Nov 11, 2018 by Elizabeth Ernst
Just to clarify that the "old line" here is the Spennithorne line. The "Dukes of Westmorland" line was never in any reputable book.

Fitz Randolph Traditions is a very odd book. There's a lot of interesting stuff in it. The pedigree is deliberate fakery, not a mistake or just over-optimism. And yet the book never mentions Edward III - the author draws the line at making that claim explicit.

Birth:
FitzRandolph-23