Sherbourne, Dorset Churchill link to Winston Spencer line?

Question

Has anyone come across any connection between the Sherbourne,  Dorset Churchills and Winston Spencer Churchill line? Or back to De Courcell?

My family tree traces back to John Churchill in Sherbourne, Dorset in the mid 1700's,  through his grandson Henry (1811). This is where things get murky.  I haven't been able to find a RELIABLE source with John's biodata.

Members of my tree seem to mostly have been labourers and/or traders.

Answer 1

Hi! Stephne: In 30+ years of researching the Churchill family I have only seen a reference to Sherbourne once.. It was the marriage place and settling place of Roger Churchill and Jane Peverell who were both born in the early part of the 16th. century. Your John and son Henry may be descendants and you may be closing in on a connection. Sir Winston Churchill is actually a Spencer and not a Churchill as previously discussed in this tag. His 5th. great grandmother Lady Anne B Churchill was the daughter of John, Duke of Marlborough. John is a direct CFA descendant of Roger Churchill and Jane Peverill. Rogers parents were William Churchill 1495 - 1583, = MaryCruwys. who are considered to be the ancestors of all Dorset Churchills. All the above is thoroughly researched and you should be able to find appropriate sourcing. Then the family moves from Dorset to Rockbeare, Devon, to Somerset and to Baron Roger de Courcelles, which is partly covered with sources but still needs lots of work. I am currently working on this period but it is tough slugging. From the Norman family of Roger de Courcelles to William de Curcella, to Hugh de Ivry to Raoul de Ivry to Asperlenge de Pitres. it is soundly document by a contemporary chronicler, a Benedictine monk named Guillaume de Jumeige.

If you have any question or need assistance with sourcing or anything else, please let me know by private e-mail on my profile. The volume of information is so high that direct e-mail is the best option.

 

Regards: George Churchill

Comments

George what evidence have you that Jane Peverell married a Churchill. ?Is this a different , earlier Jane Peverell  from the claim usually made  ie  that Roger Churchill of Catherston " is said to have married Joan, (Jane) daughter of William Peverel of Bradford and widow of Nicholas Meggs.

 Jane d of William  certainly married Nicholas  Meggs  but  died as his wife. She was buried at Bradford Peverell in 1578 (Nicholas Meggs was buried the following year.) He is buried under the same 'blue marble stone ' as she is. (see Fry transcript of old  Register which is the only surviving copy, plus Visitation of Dorset.)  If Jane had married a Churchill and had a son  by him before this, then that child, a Churchill  would have been the  heir to the Peverell estate rather than Lawrence Meggs who inherited.

There are certainly Churchills in Bradford Peverell at the time   (John and Robert) but neither are referred to as gent or as Mr  One .An Edith Churchill  has an illegitate child.

---

Good afternoon Helen:

I had sent you some information by e-mail a few weeks ago on the Dorset Churchill's, that you had requested, also a couple of follow up e-mails and I have not heard from you. Did you get the information ? Perhaps I used the wrong e-mail address.

You are absolutely right. They are not the same Roger Churchill and Jane Peverell. The information on the new Roger and Jane was developed by my brother who lives in England; sources are LDS and Dawes, Notes & Queries of Somerset and Dorset, The Dorset Churchills p.185. The BDM dates of the family group do not match up with The Meggs family.

The Roger/Jane/Meggs fiasco, I believe, started with the author A Leslie Rowse, getting it wrong, In his book The Early Churchills, An English Family, on pages 6-7, it brings in the Meggs marriage to Roger. As it is known that Rowse had access to the family records of the Duke of Marlborough, I suspect the " old Cavalier " is the original culprit.

The information I mentioned earlier in this message group about the Norman family of Roger de Courcelle is accurate and well sourced. I did the research myself. I am now working on the 13th. - 15th. century line but there seems to be a severe drought in the realm of sourcing.

Best Regards: George