Reviving an abeyant peerage

[youngboteler]

For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b. 1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an heir.

My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant, however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).

Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and claiming?

- youngboteler

[Graham]

Post by youngboteler
For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b. 1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an heir.
My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant, however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).
Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and claiming?

You may wish to read https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1989/jul/27/barony-of-grey-of-codnor

I assume that the John to whom you refer was a descendant of William le Boteler who died about 1328? https://archive.org/details/completepeerageo02coka/page/230

[u***@gmail.com]

Post by Graham

Post by youngboteler
For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b. 1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an heir.
My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant, however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).
Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and claiming?

You may wish to read https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1989/jul/27/barony-of-grey-of-codnor
I assume that the John to whom you refer was a descendant of William le Boteler who died about 1328? https://archive.org/details/completepeerageo02coka/page/230

Thanks for the very interesting read Graham. It seems that I might not have a chance since the Lord Boteler of Warrington have been dormant for well over 100 years (though I wonder if that restriction will still apply if I only ask to be added to the Roll of Peers and not be eligible for election to the House of Lords, which I have no interest in).

Also yes I am a descendant of that William le Boteler. It is interesting that source states that he was the last Boteler to be summoned to Parliament, because I found a source stating that my 16th Great Grandfather was summoned to Parliament (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=IEUJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263&dq=John+Boteler+warrington+1429&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiW0tCL2M7fAhWDfbwKHccYBncQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=John%20Boteler%20warrington%201429&f=false) (John Botoler heir to John Boteler heir to William).

[Louis Epstein]

Post by u***@gmail.com

Post by Graham

Post by youngboteler
For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical
research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered
that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b.
1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington
has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an
heir.
My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to
Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing
every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and
records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need
to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in
which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as
strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant,
however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).
Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be
possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and
claiming?

You may wish to read https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1989/jul/27/barony-of-grey-of-codnor
I assume that the John to whom you refer was a descendant of William le Boteler who died about 1328? https://archive.org/details/completepeerageo02coka/page/230

Thanks for the very interesting read Graham. It seems that I might not
have a chance since the Lord Boteler of Warrington have been dormant for
well over 100 years (though I wonder if that restriction will still
apply if I only ask to be added to the Roll of Peers and not be
eligible for election to the House of Lords, which I have no interest
in).

The 100-year policy was invented in the 1920s and I think anti-sexist
considerations should encourage it to be discarded...the whole abeyance
system is based on women being equal to fractions of a man.

Note that if you are not a British national you could not sit in the
Lords regardless...you don't indicate either way on that.

Are you in fact the heir-of-line who would have inherited had
women not been seen as fractional heirs...and at the same time
not "out-fractioned" by any junior heir representing an ostensibly
larger portion?

At the same time anti-hereditary prejudice needs to be discredited.

Post by u***@gmail.com
Also yes I am a descendant of that William le Boteler. It is
interesting that source states that he was the last Boteler to be
summoned to Parliament, because I found a source stating that my 16th
Great Grandfather was summoned to Parliament
(https://books.google.com.au/books?id=IEUJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263&dq=John+Boteler+warrington+1429&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiW0tCL2M7fAhWDfbwKHccYBncQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=John%20Boteler%20warrington%201429&f=false)
(John Botoler heir to John Boteler heir to William).

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

[Graham]

Post by u***@gmail.com

Post by Graham

Post by youngboteler
For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b. 1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an heir.
My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant, however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).
Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and claiming?

You may wish to read https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1989/jul/27/barony-of-grey-of-codnor
I assume that the John to whom you refer was a descendant of William le Boteler who died about 1328? https://archive.org/details/completepeerageo02coka/page/230

Thanks for the very interesting read Graham. It seems that I might not have a chance since the Lord Boteler of Warrington have been dormant for well over 100 years (though I wonder if that restriction will still apply if I only ask to be added to the Roll of Peers and not be eligible for election to the House of Lords, which I have no interest in).
Also yes I am a descendant of that William le Boteler. It is interesting that source states that he was the last Boteler to be summoned to Parliament, because I found a source stating that my 16th Great Grandfather was summoned to Parliament (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=IEUJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263&dq=John+Boteler+warrington+1429&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiW0tCL2M7fAhWDfbwKHccYBncQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=John%20Boteler%20warrington%201429&f=false) (John Botoler heir to John Boteler heir to William).

1. John Boteler did sit in Parliament in 1449. However, he sat in the House of Commons as one of the MPs for Lancashire - see https://archive.org/details/cu31924030494987/page/n63 - this indicates that he was not considered to be a baron in the peerage of England at that time.

2. The "Annals of the Lords of Warrington" counts the barons from the time of William Rufus, so it seems to be talking about feudal barons as opposed to barons in the peerage.

3. NB that a barony in the peerage of England only goes into abeyance when a holder leaves daughters (or their descendants) but no son. So *if* you could prove that you were the heir male of the body of William Boteler, who sat in Parliament in 1295, you would not have to worry about the 100-year rule.

4. More detail about the procedure is at https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/resources/peerages-and-baronetcies/proving-succession-to-a-peerage and http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/images/downloads/Guidance-Notes---Peerage-claims.pdf "If a claim is not pursued on the death of a peer, it is likely to become progressively more difficult for each succeeding holder of the title to produce all the relevant evidence to support a peerage claim" i.e. very difficult indeed if the last holder to sit in Parliament as a baron was alive 700 years ago.

5. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscount_Mountgarret is definitely a male-line descendant of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Butler,_8th_Earl_of_Ormond - however, he has not proved that there is no-one ahead of him in succession to the earldom.

[u***@gmail.com]

Post by Graham

Post by u***@gmail.com

Post by Graham

Post by youngboteler
For the past few months, I have been conducting genealogical research of my family history. Through my research, I have discovered that I am a direct paternal descendant of Baron Sir John Boteler (b. 1429) of Warrington. I also discovered that the Barony of Warrington has been abeyant even since Edward Boteler died without leaving an heir.
My question is thus whether I might actually be able to lay claim to Baron title of my ancestor John Boteler? I have a document detailing every single one of my paternal ancestors (along with citations and records mentioning them), would that be enough? Or would I also need to prove that I am the eldest/nearest descendant of John Boteler (in which case I also have records to show this, however, they are not as strong and it's possible that I am not the nearest descendant, however, I have not yet found any evidence otherwise.).
Has something like this ever been attempted before? And would it be possible to escape the requirement of 100 years between abeyance and claiming?

You may wish to read https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1989/jul/27/barony-of-grey-of-codnor
I assume that the John to whom you refer was a descendant of William le Boteler who died about 1328? https://archive.org/details/completepeerageo02coka/page/230

Thanks for the very interesting read Graham. It seems that I might not have a chance since the Lord Boteler of Warrington have been dormant for well over 100 years (though I wonder if that restriction will still apply if I only ask to be added to the Roll of Peers and not be eligible for election to the House of Lords, which I have no interest in).
Also yes I am a descendant of that William le Boteler. It is interesting that source states that he was the last Boteler to be summoned to Parliament, because I found a source stating that my 16th Great Grandfather was summoned to Parliament (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=IEUJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263&dq=John+Boteler+warrington+1429&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiW0tCL2M7fAhWDfbwKHccYBncQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=John%20Boteler%20warrington%201429&f=false) (John Botoler heir to John Boteler heir to William).

1. John Boteler did sit in Parliament in 1449. However, he sat in the House of Commons as one of the MPs for Lancashire - see https://archive.org/details/cu31924030494987/page/n63 - this indicates that he was not considered to be a baron in the peerage of England at that time.
2. The "Annals of the Lords of Warrington" counts the barons from the time of William Rufus, so it seems to be talking about feudal barons as opposed to barons in the peerage.
3. NB that a barony in the peerage of England only goes into abeyance when a holder leaves daughters (or their descendants) but no son. So *if* you could prove that you were the heir male of the body of William Boteler, who sat in Parliament in 1295, you would not have to worry about the 100-year rule.
4. More detail about the procedure is at https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/resources/peerages-and-baronetcies/proving-succession-to-a-peerage and http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/images/downloads/Guidance-Notes---Peerage-claims.pdf "If a claim is not pursued on the death of a peer, it is likely to become progressively more difficult for each succeeding holder of the title to produce all the relevant evidence to support a peerage claim" i.e. very difficult indeed if the last holder to sit in Parliament as a baron was alive 700 years ago.
5. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscount_Mountgarret is definitely a male-line descendant of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Butler,_8th_Earl_of_Ormond - however, he has not proved that there is no-one ahead of him in succession to the earldom.

Thanks for all the great advice everyone! I have consulted a herald at the College of Arms and after learning about the amount of money and research required for me to prove such a pedigree, it does seem like a large amount of effort to get something that was really just a pet-project.

I will contiune to research my line and provide more sources and evidences for my pedigree, but I don't think it is yet ready for me to make a claim. My ancestors were not all the eldest, which means I would need to somehow find their other siblings and prove that they didnt have children (which I wouldn't even know where to begin to prove that), as well as proving that the birth and death records I have actually belong to the same parents I am claiming them to be.

Thanks again!

[Maltagenealogy.com]

It may likely have a number of heirs, though to be certainly to should try Peerage News, some experts will advise you one way or another.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/peerage-news