Help please? Going slightly doolally.

[bubblebelle]

Hello

Would any kind soul offer an opinion on some of my research please. I really feel like I am swimming against the tide.

As you may know I am a bit of a dog with a bone with my research.

So it's back to those Pye's

Thomas Pye b. unknown died 1785 Bredgar Kent. Married Susan sometimes Susannah Spencer in Linstead in Kent in 1739.

From his will he had children named Elizabeth (eldest daughter)
Mary
Martha
and son Thomas
a son William died as a child.

Now all Ancestry trees and contacts keep identifying Admiral Sir Thomas Pye, son of Henry Pye of Farringdon Berks and Anne Bathurst (or the like) as this Thomas Pye of Bredgar. Now from my research I believe that this Admiral Sir Thomas Pye left no legitimate issue.
I have gone through his will and these are the names featured

Names in Sir Thomas Pye's will

Charles Pye brother
Robert Pye brother
William Pye brother
Elizabeth sister

Capt James Anthony Pye nephew
Lieut (unreadable) Pye nephew
Charles Malloy nephew

Elizabeth Lady Aston
James Primrose Maxwell

Caroline Sophia Bennett, wife of Thomas Bennett of Glason

Mary Pye niece (her father being Henry James Pye of Farringdon)
Matilda Pye as above

Polly Pye Bennett niece but writes that he considers his daughter within the will.

The confusion may derive from this Thomas Pye dying in 1786 (London) and the information re Thomas Pye of Bredgars will was obtained from Kentish studies and is not on the internet.

So now I am looking at a baptism of a Thomas Pye 1713/4 I believe that the church calender of this era did not change year dates until April.

Thomas Pye baptised 3rd Jan 1714 in Linstead Kent (same parish as marriage and 25 years earlier), his parents were Thomas and Elizabeth.
I have then found siblings, Elizabeth and Martha born to the same parents. There is also a possible burial of a boy William son of Thomas, in the same time frame, all in this same parish.

Delving a bit further it would appear that there had been Pye's in Linstead from at least the 1480's.

So with the clear naming patterns of the later generations of the Pye family, does anyone concur with my thoughts and if so so you think I am on the right track?


I am so sorry for the rambings but I just need to sound this out.... Many thanks.

[Chrissie Smiff]

I have never been very good at anything before 1837 Bubblebell. Having read through what you have found though, my first thought is - that unless those with the trees can give you good reasons why they suspect him to be Admiral Sir Thomas Pye, they have probably done what others have done when trying to link themselves to royalty/nobility etc. The ones you have found and the naming pattern would suggest possibly a different family.
In other words - I'm with you

[margaretmarch]

I think the ones you have found in Linstead starting with Thomas 1714 sound more likely to be your family than the others mainly because of the names as we all know the same ones recur time and again in families either because of a tradition or because of knowledge of names sticking in the mind when thinking of naming newborns.

Margaret

[maudarby]

Hi Bubblebelle
My first thought was if there are two wills then there must be two Thomas Pyes. While Ancestry trees can sometimes be helpful a lot are pure works of fiction. I was looking up a person re a query on here and several trees have this person's mother born 6 years after he was!
Moggie

[bubblebelle]

Thank you, all three, it does reassure me. Some of those trees on Ancestry have great detail in relation to the noble ones, but then I suppose the information for them is relatively easy to find. I have been contacted by others too, all having what I believe to be the wrong line, so I was beginning to doubt myself.
I have great faith in the contributors on this site and really value your help and contributions, so I am most grateful for your thoughts. Many thanks. I will continue to swim against the tide and continue on this track.