Roger Lane - Parents of Roger Lane

I've gone through the Roger Lane families adding reference notes, including your comments, and more clearly distingushing the Maud Parr line. Take a look now.

The About section looks good for Roger Lane, of Hereford, but we still need to remove him from Ralph Lane and Wife of Ralph Lane and attach him to an unknown father and mother. There is no evidence that Roger's father was Ralph, nor any evidence to suggest he was descended from William Lane of Orlingbury, Northampton.

Agreed and done.

I see that @Kevin Daniel Flick has re-added Sir Ralph Lane and Maud Parr as the parents of Roger Lane. As I said before, there is absolutely no credible evidence for this.

Done. This time I added "placeholder" parents with a curator note:

The parents of Roger Lane (1569-1603) are not known.  They are NOT Ralph Lane and Maud Parr.

Looks like people continue to try to add parents of Roger Lane without adequate sources and proof. We should all know that unsourced online family trees, family group sheets, etc., make very poor sources.

I have a copy of "Major Samuel Lane (1628-81): His ancestry & some of his descendants." Send me a private message with your email address and I'll send it to you. Another good secondary source is "A Reminiscence Sung" By Frederick V. Schultz at http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~rawl/reminiscence.html, although it doesn't go back much beyond Richard Lane.

By the way, why are we including "The Apothecary" as part of Roger Lane's name? Is there a source document referring to him this way? If not, I don't think it conforms with the name conventions in the wiki.

That's in the Display Name field, which is sort of a catchall for identification and differentiation purposes - titles, by-names, nicknames, and so forth.

It might be better to Display it as Roger Lane, Apothecary (since apparently that was his profession).

His occupation is already listed on the Work tab of the profile. I have seen no other profiles on Geni including the occupation in the Display Name, unless they were royalty. The Wiki lists uses of the Display Name, but including the occupation isn't one of them (http://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Naming_Conventions). If there were another Roger Lane in Hereford, then I could see it to distinguish him from the other. Is anyone aware of any others living at the same time?

Unless there are any strenuous objections, I'm going to remove "the Apothecary" from the Display Name.

Keith - when I clean up trees with profiles of similar names & dates, I have learned from bitter geni experience that use of the display name helps enormously in keeping the trees disambiguated.

The most common strategy is use of a toponym (e.g. Roger "of Hereforshire" Lane; Roger Lane, of Herefordshire). When there's a will source -- or a genealogical study -- to quote from this is what I use.

But "by names" / occupation names, even for ordinary folk, is fine. There's a line of "Bonesetters" in Colonial America for instance, and the genealogical literature uses that by name in reference. And the lit is also full of an occupation nickname to distinguish between same names / same towns: Thomas "the miller" Miller vs Thomas "blacksmith" Miller.

Anyway - what I really ask for, in this case, is an easy / visual way to keep the Apothecary's line from being confused with the "other" Lane families.

Again.

LoL Ok, got it! If the goal is to keep our Roger from being confused with another line, why don't we put "NOT the son of Sir Ralph Lane of Orlingbury and Maud Parr in the Display Name? Just kidding.

Seriously, his Display Name used to be Roger Lane, of Hereford. Isn't that a bit more specific than "the Apothecary?" There must have been many Roger Lanes who were apothecaries. Or, since there may have been more than one contemporary named Roger Lane, why not "Roger Lane, Apothecary of Hereford?

Hmm, we don't know that Roger was the only apothecary of Hereford.

I have it now as

Also Known As: Roger "the Apothecary" Lane
Display name: Roger Lane, of Hereford

Hopefully this helps both with a geographic & a class orientation.

Now we just need a good image, and working through the descent.

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/broughttolife/people/apothecaries.aspx

Not quite it ... But great for a project!

http://www.apothecaries.org/the-archives/family-history/

Unfortunately the livery company was established 1617 but presumably he had descendants who carried on the craft? And before him?

http://www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/medieval/towns/medievaltowns....

http://www.bl.uk/learning/images/medieval/towns/large14512.html

Did his widow carry on the shop?

http://www.chemheritage.org/discover/media/magazine/articles/27-3-w...

https://dralun.wordpress.com/category/apothecary/

I love this stuff (my grandfather was a pharmacist)

Erica, very interesting information about apothecaries. As for your question about descendants who carried on the craft, according to Frederick Schultz, son John was a grocer. I noted that the apothecaries split off from the grocers guild, so perhaps John carried on the tradition. John actually lived and worked in London, so either the Worshipful Company of Grocers or the Apothecaries Society might have info on him. Presumably Hereford or Herefordshire had a grocers and/or apothecaries' guild.

Son Richard was a tailor. I don't have anything on the other sons or what Beatrix did after Roger's death.

See what we've learned just by thinking about his profession? Yes, that was interesting that Apothecaries evolved from the Grocers livery company. I believe the Grocers contributed a run of Mayors of London.

Erica, I love the image, but if it came from https://dralun.wordpress.com/category/apothecary/, it's probably rights managed. Looks like it originated from http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/S2658/17th-c..., and we don't have the license to use it. However, there's one with a CC license at http://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/image/L0035212.html . May I suggest we use that one? The Wellcome site has lots of other interesting images, also.

I went ahead and changed the profile photo.

Sorry for late response! By all means contribute images & select which is most appropriate (set as profile default).

I embellished Roger's "About" section without removing any relevant data. Please review at your convenience, and air any complaints here. Thanks.

Looks good to me, John, thank you.

John, Roger's date of death has been reported as BEFORE 30 Apr 1603 in Hereford because that is the date of his burial. I don't think this is erroneous because the source is fairly reliable:

Slagle, A. Russell, Major Samuel Lane (1628-81): His Ancestry and Some American Descendants (Genealogical Publishing Co., Baltimore, Maryland, 1976; http://search.ancestry.com/Browse/BookList.aspx?dbid=48199, Digital images), in Maryland Genealogies, Vol. II, p. 129, citing records from St. Peter's Church, Hereford, England.

Also, his estate was probated in 1603:

UK, Extracted Probate Records, 1269-1975 (Online database, 2009), Ancestry.com, citing Index to Acts of Administration in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury 1596 - 1608, p. 154, Record for Lane, Roger, Hereford. To Beatrice L., rel., 1603. https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=1610&a....

I think it's safe to assume he died and was buried in Hereford, especially since his last child, Mary, was born there in 1602 (recorded in St Peters Church christening record).

Could you please edit the "About" accordingly?

Thanks,
Keith