tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post3450590078430628264..comments2023-11-03T17:20:18.270-07:00Comments on William & Mary Dyer: Who were Mary Barrett Dyer's parents?Christy K Robinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-56730703593265566812019-09-05T18:26:12.076-07:002019-09-05T18:26:12.076-07:00Hi Christy! Thanks so much for confirming where my...Hi Christy! Thanks so much for confirming where my own research led me to...that Mary is a Barrett. Excellent article!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02662945523222827998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-2396670570004837082018-12-04T15:08:55.621-07:002018-12-04T15:08:55.621-07:00With the origin of the spurious story laid out abo...With the origin of the spurious story laid out above, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Mary Barrett to be Arbella Stuart's and William Seymour's secret child. Arbella did not have any children. Ever. <br /><br />It is absolutely outlandish to cling to a piece of fiction invented in 1890, based on the wannabe-royal fantasy of Frederick Nathaniel Dyer. Read my article again, slowly. Read the links for yourself. I shared them with you after countless hours of research over several years, at no profit to myself. <br /><br />There are no DNA samples from either William or Mary Dyer to compare to modern descendants' DNA. Science could detect their DNA if they had a skeletal remains that could be proven to be William and Mary--but they don't. With commercial DNA companies like Ancestry and 23andMe, they will give you a very general idea of geographical areas your thousands of ancestors came from, and they can compare your DNA segments to similar segments on their other customers to deliver distant cousin matches. But they don't distinguish your ancestors' families beyond about 200 years--and William and Mary Dyer were born 400 years ago.Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-76989124694360542492018-12-04T13:51:43.539-07:002018-12-04T13:51:43.539-07:00Too bad there can be no genetic tests now that the...Too bad there can be no genetic tests now that they are available. If she was a secret child, of course there would be no official record of her. So following a paper trail doesn't seem to be enough to completely disprove such claims. There are records however that prove there were conjugal visits between Arbella and William. It's not that outlandish to imagine there was a secret child. LEDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00044688879506938131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-47822983130300053442017-12-06T11:08:23.007-07:002017-12-06T11:08:23.007-07:00Hi, Zach.
The farm was about that place, but had ...Hi, Zach. <br />The farm was about that place, but had been subdivided and sold by the Revolutionary War, when maps were made for defense purposes. Several generations of Dyers were buried on their farm, and the few bones or headstones found when the War College was built, were moved to Common Burying Ground. There, not exactly close to the headstones, is Dyre Avenue (an unpaved lane in the cemetery). See my photos in this site, http://marybarrettdyer.blogspot.com/2016/08/visiting-newport-historical-society.html <br />and http://marybarrettdyer.blogspot.com/2017/03/life-sketch-of-charles-dyer-1650-1709.html (photo there)<br />The farm was in the general vicinity of the Pell Bridge interchange, and the west coast of Aquidneck Island. A strip of land on the coast may have extended south to Dyer Point, now called Battery Park. Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-17769236681843529332017-12-05T15:52:25.974-07:002017-12-05T15:52:25.974-07:00Do you know where the Dyer Farm in Newport was loc...Do you know where the Dyer Farm in Newport was located? I have looked at a few colonial era maps of Newport and do not see the Dyer name. Plimpton says it was in what is now the US Naval War College, just south of the Coddington farm as I recall. There is a Dyer Lane somewhere in Newport, I am told, but cannot locate that either.zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06481937837133088764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-86952030917386092302016-12-18T19:35:06.971-07:002016-12-18T19:35:06.971-07:00Dear Anonymous,
Because reputable, professional g...Dear Anonymous, <br />Because reputable, professional genealogists, using the best resources, deny that Dorothy Shirley was William Dyer's mother. The father is known. The mother is not. There was a Dorothy Shirley who married a George Dyer in Somerset, and she cannot be the same woman who married William Dyer Sr. and lived in Lincolnshire. <br />https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/115864/was-dorothy-shirley-the-mother-of-william-dyer Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-80004210414457784802016-12-18T18:38:20.368-07:002016-12-18T18:38:20.368-07:00Why would the Dyer who wrote about her alleged Stu...Why would the Dyer who wrote about her alleged Stuart-Seymour descent care about royal ancestry when he was already of royal descent through Mary's husband William? William-->Dorothy Shirley-->John Shirley-->Francis Shirley-->Ralph Shirley-->John Shirley-->Ralph Shirley-->Ralph Shirley-->Hugh Shirley-->Isabel de Meynel-->Alice d'Audley-->Nicholas d'Audley-->Ela Longespee-->WIlliam Longespee-->William Longespee-->King Henry II<br /><br />There are also descents from the House of Capet, Bourgogne, Dunkeld, Carolingian, and others. These facts diminish the theory of a blood-royal hungry hobbyist. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-79066712197751107202016-12-18T18:20:48.249-07:002016-12-18T18:20:48.249-07:00Ja, when I compiled my genealogy I didn't incl...Ja, when I compiled my genealogy I didn't include the legend of the Stuart-Seymour descent. It is fantastic to think about, but yes, women can give birth at 35, prison guards can be corrupt, Monarchs protecting their throne will kill to do it, her descendants claim to have a dress Barrett wore in the court of Charles I, who also condemned capital punishment after she died; she was extremely educated for her upbringing, she possessed a royal-like divine spirit in the way she led her life, and no one knows who her parents were. Her so-called brother could've have been an adopted sibling, who no one knows who his parents were either. If we could find her grave and test her DNA with Stuart's the questions would be put to rest, for good. But until then, we'll just never know, and although just a commoner who did incredible things, the Stuart-Seymour legend just makes her even more incredible because if so, she stepped down to do great things. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-31790891328202807742016-07-06T14:39:38.484-07:002016-07-06T14:39:38.484-07:00Mary Barrett's father may have carried a Frenc...Mary Barrett's father may have carried a French name, though she certainly lived in the borough of Westminster and parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields as a young woman. It's possible that her birth parents died in the many epidemics and hazards of the early 17th century (see my article on William Dyer's Annus Horribilis), and she could have been raised by guardians. <br /><br />Many, many women's surnames remain unknown to us, over many centuries. William Dyer's mother, named in some pedigrees as Dorothy, is unknown, according to professional genealogists. William's second wife, Catherine, who bore him a child, Elizabeth, in the early 1660s, has no recorded surname. William's son Charles (from whom I descend) had children by a Mary Lippett, that many say is not connected to the Rhode Island Lippetts. And surely you have many blank spaces in your pedigree where the wife/mother was never known. They didn't have birth certificates and national ID numbers. And if the births were recorded in parish registers, those books were susceptible to loss, fire and flood damage, and even willful destruction. We just put an X on that line and look for other lines. <br />Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-64220791349892394382016-07-06T14:15:46.540-07:002016-07-06T14:15:46.540-07:00I just left Mary's parentage blank on my own f...I just left Mary's parentage blank on my own family tree because I don't any knowledge of who they were. I agree that the Arbella story sounds fantastical, but I am bothered by the fact that there is NO information connected to Mary's family (besides a brother). This seems very odd for an educated woman, who married well at this time in London. This strange and total lack of family information does give Mary's story an air of mystery. HumanKindEducationhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17125547182430994550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-65458884075719565512016-06-01T19:53:45.135-07:002016-06-01T19:53:45.135-07:00Yes, really. Those links lead to actual BOOKS and ...Yes, really. Those links lead to actual BOOKS and peer-reviewed, scholarly JOURNALS written by HISTORIANS. Read them before you cling to the myths furthered by genealogy hobbyists. What do Arbella-birthers offer? A legend invented by a guy who wanted to be royal and then perpetuated by a little old lady who admitted it was only her theory. A lie that's easily debunked--if you'd bother to read the references. <br /><br />I have jpegs of the NEHGS (New England Historical Genealogical Society) journal articles that I transcribed above. What more do you expect? A Hawaiian birth certificate delivered by a unicorn? <br /><br /> Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-7591528654356331632016-06-01T19:36:59.575-07:002016-06-01T19:36:59.575-07:00Do you really have proof? Where is it? Websites? R...Do you really have proof? Where is it? Websites? Really?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-53138374040283909922015-05-22T13:38:44.339-07:002015-05-22T13:38:44.339-07:00Yes! Accuracy! Do you know that people actually as...Yes! Accuracy! Do you know that people actually ask me to prove that Mary wasn't born to Arbella, and they demand that I produce a birth certificate or something tangible? (facepalm) A genealogist friend and I call them birthers. <br /><br />My pessimistic assertions (yes, women gave birth into their 40s occasionally, and babies could be borne in silence) aside, this would, indeed, make a historical novel. That is what FN Dyer wrote in 1890: complete FICTION about all parties involved. If only he hadn't attached Mary Barrett Dyer, a real person, to his legend, and if only Ruth Plimpton hadn't copied that fantasy into her book on Mary Dyer. And then internet genealogy came along, and the fiction replicated like Star Trek tribbles. Mary has thousands of descendants. They shouldn't be lied to. <br /><br />But if you give due diligence to the actual letters and biographies of Arbella Stewart as I have, She. Never. Had. A. Child. Don't believe me. Believe Arbella and her husband. Believe Arbella's biographers. I've given links for you to investigate for yourself. FN Dyer and Ruth Plimpton didn't read them, and have perpetuated a fantasy. <br /><br />Historians who are familiar with Arbella's story have no clue that she was supposed to have had a secret baby. It's only Mary Dyer descendants who have heard the legend, and you can trace that back to 1890, when FN Dyer created it--279 long and eventful years after Mary was born. I hope that if anyone does write a Stewart-Seymour novel about a secret baby raised by commoners, that they don't call the baby Mary, and that they write an author's note that the conspiracy-baby plot is fabricated. Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-77706322626323398242015-05-22T09:52:31.039-07:002015-05-22T09:52:31.039-07:0035 was old for a first pregnancy, but that doesn&#...35 was old for a first pregnancy, but that doesn't rule it out. I can think of possible scenarios under which a child could have been born in prison, secreted away by a sympathetic guard or his wife, and given to commoners to raise rather than risk the child being killed by the reigning monarch. Not all women scream and groan when giving birth (another myth). Most newborns cry very softly at first, and some don't cry at all. But all that said, there is no proof, and all this leads to is the plot of a smashing historical novel. As far as my family tree goes, I always prefer to err on the side of accuracy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-12712160256867495582013-11-08T16:47:45.487-07:002013-11-08T16:47:45.487-07:00Comment from J.R. through website email:
"I ...Comment from J.R. through website email:<br /><br />"I want to thank you one hundred times over for writing truthfully of Mary Dyer (Barrett). If it is ok, I put a link to your Blog under Mary in my family tree on ancestry.com in hopes of squelching an age old rumor that she is the child of William Seymour and Arabella Stuart. So many people would rather stand on the backs of others rather than stand on their own. In other words, "surely MY ANCESTOR couldn't have been that awesome on her own...it MUST have been due to her royal blood". Anyway, thank you again. It is truly appreciated."<br />Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-87134959003373788282013-07-27T10:31:39.849-07:002013-07-27T10:31:39.849-07:00But we know the majority of hobby genealogists won...But we know the majority of hobby genealogists won't take it out. *le sigh* <br /><br />The thing is, almost everyone -- millions of people -- can claim royal ancestors. They had large families, married across Europe, and had the means to escape the dangers of the plague or battlefield. The poor and the peasant no-names were the arrow-fodder and bubonic plague victims, as well as the ones who died from war-induced or Little Ice Age famines. Most of us living today had royal and noble ancestors who managed to survive.Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-6302397092798729982013-07-27T10:22:54.140-07:002013-07-27T10:22:54.140-07:00Thanks for your comment, Maria. Between Facebook a...Thanks for your comment, Maria. Between Facebook and this blog, I get requests, emails, and oodles of search results trying to find info on Mary Barrett Dyer's Tudor ancestors. I'm glad YOU took it with a grain of salt, but because the illogical, improbable myth is replicated in the Plimpton book and countless websites where no one ever checks accuracy or asks a critical question, it not only survives, but (ACK!!) flourishes. I'm not sure if the searches and hits are increasing in frequency, or if my blog has risen in Google results. Or maybe a third factor: the popularity of Tudor TV series and books, and the wishful genealogical connection. Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-9996920460802937912013-07-27T07:06:22.209-07:002013-07-27T07:06:22.209-07:00I took the Tudor connection with a grain of salt w...I took the Tudor connection with a grain of salt when I read Plimpton's book. The whole "baby born in secret and spirited away" thing is too mythical, too much like King Arthur and Moses. Thanks for debunking it for good! I agree that Mary Dyer is more interesting as an ordinary person who did extraordinary things.Mariahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02319810567723643844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-58784625378155684742013-07-21T22:37:31.586-07:002013-07-21T22:37:31.586-07:00STT wrote on Facebook: "As an English history...STT wrote on Facebook: "As an English history major and a genealogist by profession, I was always a bit dubious of this claim."Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582751663390398171.post-81052245508541294582013-07-21T15:35:16.855-07:002013-07-21T15:35:16.855-07:00Looks like the other rumors that people are descen...Looks like the other rumors that people are descendants of Queen Katherine Parr, Lady Margaret Douglas (with a child by Seymour), and others connected to old royals. I've encountered several lines in which people REFUSE to change the mistakes because they would like to believe the lie and that someday there might be a connection found. If it's been disproven--take it out! GoldenAgedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05658587961758448346noreply@blogger.com