Francis lived at Kingsthorpe, Northamptonshire.[2][3]
Francis married Mary Woolhouse, daughter of Anthony Woolhouse (a London haberdasher) and Millicent Strelley, and sister of Elizabeth Woolhouse, who was the second wife of his brother Richard.[2][3][4] They had four children:
Robert, who became a baronet[2][3] and who was born in 1601[5]
Francis died in 1630,[2][3] quite likely at Kingsthorpe, Northamptonshire.
Research Notes
Children
The following children have been previously shown as children of Francis Bernard and Mary Woolhouse, and have been detached in the absence of reliable sources:
Son John is not the John, Barnard-152 who immigrated to Massachusetts.
Sources
↑ Walter C Metcalfe (ed.). The Visitations of Northamptonshire, made in 1564 and 1618-19, Mitchell and Hughes, 1887, p. 3, Internet Archive
↑ 2.02.12.22.32.42.52.62.7 Douglas Richardson. Magna Carta Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families, 4 vols, ed. Kimball G. Everingham, 2nd edition (Salt Lake City: the author, 2011), Vol. I, pp. 187-188, BERNARD 15, Google Books
↑ 3.03.13.23.33.43.53.63.7 Douglas Richardson. Royal Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families, 5 vols, ed. Kimball G. Everingham (Salt Lake City: the author, 2013), Vol. I, p. 346, BERNARD 18
↑ Joseph Hunter. Familiae Minorum Gentium, Vol. II, Harleian Society, 1895, pp. 467-468, Internet Archive
↑ G E Cokayne. Complete Baronetage, Vol. III, William Pollard, 1903, pp. 249-250, Internet Archive
Frederick Lewis Weis, with additions and corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard and William R Beall. The Magna Carta Sureties, 1215, 5th edition, Genealogical Publishing Company, 1999, p. p. 66, line 46/14
"Barnard Pedigree" from the Robert Barnard family papers, 1658-1917 (MS 0541), The Historical Society of Washington, D.C., catalogue entry (pedigree not viewable on the web; not seen when this profile was re-reviewed)
Acknowledgements
Magna Carta Project
This profile was re-reviewed for the Magna Carta project by Michael Cayley on 17 October 2022.
See Base Camp for more information about identified Magna Carta trails and their status. See the project's glossary for project-specific terms, such as a "badged trail".
Added "Disputed Children" section to retain information and links to questionable children added Jan 12, 2019. This information was retained in order to allow research to continue for verifiable sources. The sources provided for the children in question appear to be family trees of unknown reliability.
Liz, I don't know how much more specific you need. MC is merging away profiles (with data being lost/deleted in those merges), and it is akin to Ancestry- by not showing sources. Ancestry has unviewable links, and MC just puts "Douglas Richardson, Plantagenet Ancestry. P___". That is not quoting, or showing, primary sources. There is no difference in someone dropping an Ancestry link, and someone dropping a (purchasable- expensive) book name. The whole point of Wikitree is to provide information- to which many have stated things such as "(such and such) is not a primary source"- and then they have deleted, or detached people from the tree. Richardson has mentioned that he omits people, and makes mistakes, and that his work is not complete.
M: I take exception to your comment "primary sources, information, and all else being deleted, detached, and discarded" - An Ancestry Family Trees reference is NOT a primary source. I especially disagree with your statement that "You guys are making a mess for people to sort..."
I also do not see how your statements apply to this profile. You obviously are not happy with something that the Magna Carta Project has done. Please be specific about what that is.
In addition, I cannot fathom that you expect all the profiles imported without sources from multiple Ancestry Family Trees gedcoms to remain attached to the profiles they get attached to. If you believe this is what WikiTree guidelines call for, please post that opinion to G2G so that it can be discussed by the community.
Yes Joe, as you stated "attempts to". You guys are making a mess for people to sort (which had been long ago compiled and was being worked on). It's sad to see the primary sources, information, and all else being deleted, detached, and discarded- based on following one author's stuff. The books also do not (always) have primary sources listed, and Richardson, himself having acknowledged, makes mistakes, leaves out people, and is incomplete.
I fully agree that relationships ought to be sourced, and Ancestry trees arent a good source... Ive found a number of instances where Richardson has omitted relationships. His forewords accept that his works inevitably have errors and omissions, and that some of his sources are incomplete and not always accurate. Where theres a relationship on Wikitree for which there seems no good source, but which is found on the web & cant be proved wrong, what I sometimes do - after commenting on the profile or raising a G2G question - is delete the relationship but refer to it in a research note, with a link to the other profile, as found on the web but not well evidenced. This serves as a warning, may encourage research, & makes it easier to restore the relationship if good sources are found.
Gervais, that is not actually true. Richardson attempts to list all known children whether he traces them further or not. Leaving false children attached is just creating false genealogies and decreasing the reliability of wikitree. If Richardson does not list the children, then we need to have some reliable source which does show the relationship.
OK. Well. I just realized that Elizabeth was also recently attached as a daughter - no mention anywhere about her & her profile has only an Ancestry Family Trees source. I was going to detach her too but I suppose this is what Uncertain is for.
M - if you can find a decent source for Elizabeth, please do!
- now DONE
edited by Michael Cayley
I also do not see how your statements apply to this profile. You obviously are not happy with something that the Magna Carta Project has done. Please be specific about what that is.
In addition, I cannot fathom that you expect all the profiles imported without sources from multiple Ancestry Family Trees gedcoms to remain attached to the profiles they get attached to. If you believe this is what WikiTree guidelines call for, please post that opinion to G2G so that it can be discussed by the community.
Thanks!
M - if you can find a decent source for Elizabeth, please do!
Thanks!