George III William Frederick of Hanover (Guelph), King of Great Britain and Ireland, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg - George the ???

I have been asked to connect George III, King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and Jane Town as the parents of Thomas Town (1798-1859)

I have asked them to put their evidence into this discussion.

This is not my area of knowledge so I will leave it to Curators and Profile Mangers with far more knowledge than I have of this time period and location.

Raúl, please. We are trying to have a serious discussion here. Bragging on your ancestors is no help and only clutters up the available bandwidth.

To recap:

================================
Leanne Minny (Volunteer Curator) C
Today (8/3/2018) at 4:32 AM

I have been asked to connect George III William Frederick of Hanover (Guelph), King of Great Britain and Ireland, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg and Jane Town (Longley) as the parents of Thomas Town, (1772-1843) (1798-1859)

I have asked them to put their evidence into this discussion.

This is not my area of knowledge so I will leave it to Curators and Profile Mangers with far more knowledge than I have of this time period and location.

=====================================================

(Me) Any of the other Hanovers might be suspect - but not George III. He was the only well-behaved one.

George's younger brother, Prince William Henry, Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_William_Henry,_Duke_of_Glouces... is a possible suspect, since his record is not unblemished.

Another, perhaps stronger, suspect is Prince Henry, Duke of Cumberland and Strathearn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Henry,_Duke_of_Cumberland_and_..., whom scandal followed like a storm cloud.

I'd place my bets on one of those two.

By the way, I found the source of Dr. James Town's comment. George III had (perhaps as many as) 56 illegitimate GRANDchildren as a result of his sons' (and possibly one daughter's) rowdy behavior. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descendants_of_George_III_and_Charlot...

> I have been asked to connect George III William Frederick (Guelph) of Hanover, King of Great Britain and Ireland, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg and Jane (Longley) Town as the parents of Thomas Town, (1772-1843) (1798-1859)

The optimum case would be positive evidence from primary sources, not family traditions and speculation.

Ancestors: What Constitutes Proof?
https://dna-explained.com/2018/07/11/ancestors-what-constitutes-proof/

In any case, Jane (Longley) Town is erroneous - it seems to be Sarah (Short) Town Sarah Town (Short) - Chamber maid for King George III Brighton summer palace whose whereabouts in the night time, and with whom, are in question.

There's really not much to go on except a "family tradition" of dubious provenance (note that the source had mental problems), and coincidental resemblances.

George III can be ruled out on the grounds of being a stickler for propriety (he was a well-intentioned fathead, but he kept his hands - and other appendages - off other women). His younger brothers are possible suspects, depending purely on opportunity.

Maven, si mi informacion no le sirve simplemente ignorela, a otras personas les puede ser util. Le sugiero no suponer intenciones a nadie. Saluda a Ud. Raul Castro Chacon.

Sorry my mistake I attached his wife Jane Longley rather than his mother Sarah Short to this discussion

Raúl, there is a time and a place for bragging on ancestors. The middle of a discussion of possible illegitimate offspring is NOT IT.

Because of your extensive brags, I was forced to copy/paste information from the top of the discussion to below the brag posts.

How about starting your own discussion about your ancestors, instead of crashing other people's discussions?

Maven - I'd rather read what Raul has to say OVER the BS occult screed above. Let's forget about Objective Reality and go have our palms read.

Maven: Transcribo "The explanation of my relationship with King George III is complicated so I will write to you at a proper address when I receive it."
Mi intencion fue proporcionar informacion que ayudase a dilucidar esta complicacion y a reforzar mi teoria de la Ley de Genealogia. Por mi parte doy por superada esta discusion que se torna bizantina. Saluda a Ud. Raul Castro Chacon.

Raúl: Your long lists of ancestors were *not* helpful, they were a hindrance. The specific question was whether Thomas Town (1772?-1843?) could be a son of George III (*in spite of* George's impeccable reputation for marital fidelity), or whether one of George's brothers or cousins (notorious rakes all) might have been responsible and given rise to a family myth - or whether the whole thing *was* just a myth.

Thomas Town
Añadido 21 de junio de 2018 por Dr. James Donald Town
Colección: Árboles Familiares de MyHeritage
Nombre del sitio: Winlaw Web Site
Gestor del sitio: Robert Neilson Winlaw
Nacimiento: 26 de Abr de 1772 - Steyning West Sussex England
Fallecimiento: 17 de Feb de 1843 - Steyning West Sussex England
Padres: Thomas Town, Sarah Town (born Short)
Hermanos: Sarah Town, Elizabeth Witten (born Town), John Town, Ann Botting (born Town), Mary Town, William Town
Esposa: Jane Town (born Longley)
Hijos: William Town, Thomas Town, Jane Town, Francis Town, Ann Town, Susanah Town, Elizabeth Town, Henry Town, James Town, Barbara Town, John Town

All very well as far as MyHeritage goes, which isn't very far - see Justin's link to "Ancestors: What Constitutes Proof?"

The next step is to see if this information can be verified from primary sources (parish records, etc.). It probably can, since the fellow is fairly precisely dated (although those might be baptism and burial dates, which are usually "close enough").

We do, somewhat encouragingly, have a marriage record for Sarah Short and Thomas Town (Sr.), with a date of Dec 25, 1759, in Steyning, (West) Sussex, England. This information comes from "England Marriages 1528-1973", which Werelate.com tells us is "an index of information transcribed from digital copies of original records housed in repositories throughout England...The original sources may include church records, civil registrations, and family records." Pretty good, although if the original record is extant one might want a look at *that*.

Sarah is claimed to have been "Chamber maid for George III [at] Brighton summer palace", but a bit of fact-checking throws doubt on at least part of that statement - the Brighton summer palace was built in 1787, by order of the Prince Regent (later George IV). On the other hand, it is noted that one of our other suspects, Prince Henry of Cumberland, was seasonally in residence at Grove House in Brighton from 1771. (Grove House, we find, was built in 1752 by a Dr. Richard Russell, to facilitate his prescriptions of patients "taking the waters" at Brighton. He died in 1759 and his house was thereafter let out to important visitors.)

Although Brighton is in "East" Sussex and Steyning in "West" Sussex, the distance between them is not great. It would be a reasonable commute nowadays, but back in the day servants usually "lived in" wherever they were working. On the other hand a chambermaid might only be needed seasonally, particularly in a "to let" house.

The original story isn't holding up, but there's still some suggestive smoke around the edges. Further research is necessary.

One thing we do *not* have is confirmed Hanoverian Y-DNA. There are still some of them around, but so far none of 'em have volunteered for testing.

I don't think that this is even remotely correct. I've gone ahead and fixed the tree to fit what logically makes sense.

I will also be chopping the connection between George and Sarah.

Kevin

Hi Kevin,
I am confused by which part you are referring to with this "I don't think that this is even remotely correct. "

What connection was on Geni between George and Sarah?

Leanne M (Volunteer Curator - Australia) 🇦🇺,

George III was only married once. Sarah was connected as his partner, which she clearly wasn't.

There was a mix up in the tree of Sarah that was fixed by rearranging her tree.

Take a look at the revision from Jan 8, 2018 (may be Jan 9, 2018 to you) and you will see that Anne never finished clearing up the issue: Ann Botting

I just noticed that there was another error in the tree and it has now been corrected.

Kevin

Sorry still confused

George III, King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland revisions shows no wife / partner Sarah being removed, actually it shows no changes being made to it at all.

Can you please post links to the profiles of Sarah and George you are referring to?

Sorry the reason I am asking is that I thought I had locked Sarah so that no-one could add a spouse George to her but you are saying that you have had to disconnect George from her so I am not sure how someone worked around the block unless I didn't put it on correctly.

I think I have worked out what has happened

Private on 6/3/2019 created a new branch for Sarah SHORT's daughter ( Sarah Town and merged it https://www.geni.com/merge/view?revision_id=73242797970 with the existing daughter giving her 2 sets of parents.

In order to stop this from reoccuring (and us having to constantly clean it up) - do we need to relationship lock every profile around Sarah SHORT and Thomas TOWN?

Probably, Leanne.

Leanne M (Volunteer Curator - Australia) 🇦🇺,

There was another George III profile and after rejecting the request to merge it into the MP, I fixed up the tree and then once I could get him cut out on his own, I isolated him and sent him off for deletion by Mike. That hasn't been done as of me typing in this message, so here's the isolated profile: King George III of Hanover Hanover, III.

Kevin

I have relationship locked Thomas Town

Thanks.

I'm the manager of Thomas Town. What the linked between Thomas Town and King George iii. And why it locked?

Julia Mills,

There is no link between them. Someone made it up and I will allow Leanne M (Volunteer Curator - Australia) 🇦🇺 to let you know why she locked the relationships on Thomas.

Kevin

Lol I put his name there not years ago as my fourth great uncle years ago not expecting chaos over this poor little man. I have seen the house he lived in Littlehampton.