Sir John Baptist Cissell, Kt. - Missing son

On this Williams death date. Obvious the wrong death date.

I'm not sure on this. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO.

John Baptist did mention his son William in his will, so he obviously had a son by that name. Do we know for sure that he had a brother named William? The father's profile at Sir Thomas Cecil, Knt., of Keldon says "Sir Thomas Cecil married Anne Lee & they had 8 daughters. He married Susan Oxenbridge & they had 1 son, John Cecil. Sir Thomas painted portraits of Queen Elizabeth I & King Henry VIII. He was an engraver also. He came to America in 1635 & made the first map of Maryland. He was given a land grant for his effort by the English Crown. This was in Maryland."

His profile shows several additional sons, but I haven't been able to find any actual proof for the existence of any of his children except for John Baptist.

FWIW this is what MyHeritage shows for William the son of John Baptist: https://www.myheritage.com/person-1501023_271863821_271863821/willi...
And here is a transcript of his will: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Cissell-227 The names of the children match the children listed here: William Cecil, of St. Mary’s

I think the evidence strongly favors the idea that this William Cecil is the son of John Baptist Cecil. There is proof that both of them existed, that John had a son named William who is not currently in his profile, and that John had business in the colonies. There's at least one huge error in the profile for the William Cecil who is 114, I can't find any evidence that he actually existed, and his death year is the same as the younger William who is currently listed as his son. It looks like he is a time-traveling phantom who should be eliminated, and the proven-real William Cecil should be reclassified as the son of John Baptist Cecil.

That was John Batiste Cecil father will.... John had a half brother named William. Both came to America to settle on the land. That was given to thier father .For making maps of Maryland's coast.ect

From what i read William was older than John by 4-6 yrs.

The will can't belong to John Baptist Cecil's father. It was written in 1742, and JB's father died in England in 1662 according to the current family tree. This will belongs to the William Cecil who died in 1744 in Maryland, and appears to be the son of Sir John Baptist Cecil who was born in England and immigrated to Maryland.

According to the notes on the profile for JB's current father, it is doubtful whether this man is actually JB's father: Sir Thomas Cecil, Knt., of Keldon I haven't seen any documents supporting the existence of a half-brother William who lived to be 114.

Here's information on the will of John B, who died in 1698, from https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Cissell-14
"John Cissell, a gunsmith, wrote his will on 28 Apr 1698 and it was probated on 6 Jun 1698. To his sons John, William, Thomas, he left 150 acres of "White Acre." To his sons Richard and Robert he left 100 acres of "Long Neck". His son Edward was to receive the home plantation "Poplar Neck" after the death of Mary. If Edward died without heirs it was to pass to his youngest son James. "

Go to Sir Thomas Cecil.on your pages. Theres a list of children. Their's also a William Oxbridge Cecil. Who is John's Baptist brother. John also shows he had a son named William. The death date doesn't make since.. What are you trying to find out. If Williams Oxenbridge Cecil.Death date is wrong. So what. What do you want me to do about it.

I would like for for my family tree to be accurate, but based on your "so what" comment it looks like you don't care and aren't interested in trying to find out what the truth is. It will be best if I can find someone else to help.

I'm not sure what you mean by "my pages". The only link to Sir Thomas Cecil that posted was his Geni profile, which appears to be inaccurate. Just because it says something there it doesn't prove that it's true.

Early Families of Southern Maryland, Vol. 1, Revised, by Elise Greenup Jourdan, 1993, p. 59 "John Cissell of St Mary's Co., MD., a native of England, demands 50 acres of land for his own transportation in 1658; warrant vide return 25 Mar next" (Early Settler's List, 6,429). Since he only applied for 50 acres of land for his own transportation, we can assume he did not bring a wife into Maryland. John Cissell, a gunsmith, was the earliest known person of the Catholic Cissell family to settle in Maryland. Birth estimated ca 1630-1640 of unknown parents in England; d. 1698 St Mary's County ...

Disconnecting John "Baptist" Cissell, of St. Mary's County as child of Sir Thomas Cecil, Knt., of Keldon

It appears to be a spurious connection to me. And the Maryland settler was not a Knight.

Plus. Catholic.

The identification as father / son seems to be noted on a family study:

https://media.geni.com/p13/76/21/1b/50/5344483b9a2a1ecb/johncecil_o...

Linda Kathleen Thompson, (c) Do you have any issues with the disconnect?

Gerene May Jensen Mason Can I trouble you to take a look at Susan Cecil

You uploaded a pedigree chart - https://media.geni.com/p13/66/b9/37/91/534448493cf01d21/3ace4123-c9...

And looks like she’s missing her first husband. Can you help with that ?

Also questions - the notes are that Sir Thomas Cecil, Knt., of Keldon had no surviving sons. Can we find out anything about this Henry Cecil

Was Susan a Mother of any of the daughters ?

And any hints on religion for these Cecils, Oxenbridges, and Edward Cason?

And is her Cecil husband the correct one ?

It looks to me like Susan Oxenbridge was married to a different Thomas Cecil.

----

From https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/13ecaa6a-dad8-4...

*Reference: DE/Fp/21360
*Title: Settlement
*Description: Between Sir Thomas Cecill of Felix Hall, Keldon, Essex, knight, and Dame Susan his wife, [formerly wife of Edward Cason of the Middle Temple, London,] and Edward Cason of Furneux pelham, esq, [son of Dame Susan], 1st, Francis Flyer of Brent Pelham, esq, and Thomas Flyer, his son and heir, 2nd, and Humphrey Browne, citizen and mercer of London, and John Sampson, citizen and haberdasher of London, 3rd, on the marriage of Edward Cason and Martha Flyer, daughter of Francis Flyer. Covenant to levy a fine between the 1st and 2nd parties so that Francis Flyer and Thomas Flyer may be tenants in a recovery in which Humphrey Browne and Thomas Sampson shall be demandants, and Edward Cason vouchee: Browne and Sampson to be trustees. The Lodge House, Old Barn and certain lands in Furneux Pelham to be a jointure for Martha.
*Field names given. Signatures. Seals
*Date: 6 Oct 1651
*Held by: Hertfordshire Archives and Local Studies, not available at The National Archives

And there’s a (probably more important) issue:

John "Baptist" Cissell, of St. Mary's County Shows conflicting Y DNA.

DNA Markers: I2b1 R-M269

It is not possible for him to have both groups.

Open up the profile DNA tab to examine the descent lines and track down the pedigree error on Geni.

Looks like Susan Oxenbridge was the wife of this Sir Thomas Cecil

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/soc.genealogy.medieval/Ce...

wjhonson 5/21/11

Thomas Cecil, 1st Earl of Exeter married Dorothy Neville and had five sons and (I believe) seven daughters.
I had known for some time, that the fifth and youngest son was Thomas Cecil who is called "still a boy" in 1593. I don't believe I had known, and Leo apparently also didn't know, that this Thomas had offspring.

His first wife was Anne Leigh (or Ann Lee) the daughter of Sir Robert Lee, Alderman of London

Thomas and Anne had four children: Benjamin, Dorothy, Charles and Anne, of which I only know further details on Dorothy.

Thomas himself, married secondly to a Susan, the widow of Edward Cason of the Middle Temple, and mother by Edward to Edward Cason of Furneux Pelham, esq. Edward Sr was dead by 1651, when Susan and Thomas her then-husband made a marriage settlement for Edward Jr to marry Martha Flyer (settlement dated 6 Oct 1651) daughter of Francis Flyer of Brent Pelham, esq then living as well.

Dorothy Cecil *may* have been the sole surviving heiress of her father Thomas. She married as his second wife to Thomas Cudmore of Kelvedon, co Essex,
esq who died 25 Jul 1637

Private User I’ve spent the day on Sir Thomas Cecil, Knt., of Keldon and his wives and children!

It appears that his only child to have a family was Dorothy Cudmore

His 2nd wife Susan Cecil had already had her children in the early 1600s by her first husband, and there is no sign whatsoever she had any with her 2nd.

The story of John “Baptist” Cissell born about 1634 (when she would have been in her 60s ?) as her child seems to be outdated genealogy books. I saw it on an old SAR application for example.

In addition, the “traditional” story claims John came from Wales. This Cecil / Lee / Oxenbridge / Cason family was centered around London and the courts of the Inner Temple. This Sir Thomas held property in Essex.

It’s possible he along with other Cecil’s was interested in the colonization efforts in Virginia and Maryland. But so far I can only see this as a coincidence.

Thank you Erica Howton for your efforts! You are a master at this sort of thing. I'm not surprised that John Baptist Cissell didn't pan out as a son of Sir Thomas - I kind of expected it although I do wish that it hadn't worked out that way. I see that his son William is now on his profile. So that much of the tree has been fixed.

DNA results are hard to interpret, and I'm not an expert on them. But it doesn't always signal an incompatibility when the results show two different haplogroups for an individual. There are different levels of testing for Y-DNA, and the deeper you go the more it costs. The low-cost testing will tell you which general haplogroup a man belongs to, and the higher-priced testing will sort him into a more precise haplogroup. For example my ancestor Frederick Trent has DNA markers for R-M269 and R1b1a2: Frederick Trent, Sr. These are not incompatible. R-M269 is the main group and R1b1a2 is a subgroup. It the individual with the R-M269 results got more advanced testing, he might find that he was in the R1b1a2 subgroup, which is a match. If he was in a different R subgroup it would not be a match.

The results for John Baptist Cissell are R-M269 and I2b1. It's my understanding that anything starting with "I" is a completely different haplogroup from the R's, so this really does look like a mismatch. It doesn't actually prove anything, since one of the people tested might simply be mistaken about who his ancestors were.

Correct, I and R are impossible, and there’s a tree error on Geni. We all need to try hunting it down - DNA tab on the profile opens a DNA tree.

The R group propagation was from Norman Charles Cicle descends from William (son of John)

The I group from Private who descends from James (son of John)

Both are listed children at https://www.colonial-settlers-md-va.us/getperson.php?personID=I0232...

Next step is checking the ftDNA group results.

Unambiguously R-FGC51311

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Cecil-Cissell?iframe=yresults

Might as well add this comment:

—-

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/cecil-cissell/about/results

Updated 29 May 2018:

One of those branches was started by a male born about 1275. His descendants formed at least three separate branches. One of those branches was that of John Cecill (Cissell) who arrivedin St. Mary’s County, Maryland in 1658. ;

Another resulted in a male born about1345 and from which there are at least two known lines: That of William Cecil,Lord Burghley (Treasurer of England and Secretary of State for the first QueenElizabeth) and the Cecil family who arrived in Prince George’s County Maryland in the later part of the 1600’s.

——

So I would interpret that as - the PG County Cecil’s are more recently related to the Lord Burleigh Cecil’s than the St Mary’s line.

There is a suggested connection back in the 1300s.

So that rules out any possibility that John Baptist Cissell is a direct descendant of William Cecil, Lord Burghley. Who was the grandfather of the Sir Thomas Cecil who was just removed as the father of John Baptist Cissell.

Correct. As I read it, there has been recent Y DNA analysis that has been able to determine: yes, there was probably a common origin in the late 1200s for Lord Burleigh line & St Mary’s line. There may be a more recent (late 1300s) common origin for the Lord Burleigh line and the Cecil’s of Prince George. But there is no father / son relationship from the known / famous Tudor era Cecil’s and these two large American branches.

I love this. Amazing that we’re at a point we can time-line family evolution through Y DNA.

Do we know how many samples they have for the various lines? The accuracy of the results depends on how accurately the men being tested can identify their ancestors. Which can be very, very difficult because of all the family trees with mistakes in them. Not to mention all the "family secrets" where someone's ancestry was intentionally misrepresented back in the day.

Those are questions for the ftDNA project administrator. I just “see” the public spreadsheet and notes.

I will say that it seems like a well organized project, and there is nothing raising questions in my mind. But - I’m not a descendant.

I’m a lot more interested in sorting the DNA conflict on Geni.

Ive been tested on Ancestry, Heritage. For my DNA. I'll have check to find those numbers. They just gave me maps of where they came from. But no numbers that i remember. I also have a cousin who is with the Mormon church. He had his people research our family tree. I also have a Mormon Family tree on there web site. Through research from all three of those sites. We came up with our information .

As far as the missing William. Your talking about.?? I'll run it by my cousin to research. He one of the head guys up in Washington State. He has access to the people who all they do is this kind of research.. When i find out something i"ll let you know. It might be awhile. Im busy with my building business..

The LDS website (FamilySearch.org) is for everyone to look at and use, not just for Mormons. Ditto for their hundreds of Family History Centers, where everyone is welcome. I've gone to my local one a couple of times and no one tried to turn me into a Mormon lol.

I like FamilySearch because the profiles tend to be better researched than other genealogy websites, and there are more free documents available.

I found a family tree there that makes "our" William Cecil the son of a different William Cecil, and is very incomplete as far as siblings and other family members are concerned: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/2:2:9SX7-MNJ There is no documentation for it though, just some notes that don't cite any information sources:

"ALIA: William Oxenbridge /Cissell/ Birth: BET. 1634 - 1635 in England 2 Fact 1: 1658 immigrated with brother John Note: John CECIL BIRTH: 24 DEC 1691, Queen Anne's Par., Prince George's Co., MD DEATH: 28 JAN 1759, Queen Anne's Par., Prince George's Co., MD BAPTISM: 31 DEC 1691, Queen Anne's Par., Prince George's Co., MD Father: William CECIL Mother: Mary Family 1: Elizabeth SOLLERS MARRIAGE: 1718, Queen Anne's Par., Prince George's Co., MD Zephaniah CECIL Samuel White CECIL Elizabeth CECIL Sabret CECIL Thomas CECIL John CECIL William B. CECIL James CECIL Notes Some genealogies show him as the son Thomas CECIL(d.1662), an engraver of London who came to MD to make maps, and was paid in land. He later returned to England where he died. Supposedly, he was the son of Thomas CECIL(1544-1622), Lord Burghley, who m.1564 Dorothy, dau John NEVILLE. This line is unproven, and v, q.v. Also seen him as the descendent of a Henry CECIL (b.1577), grandson of Lord Burleigh (the Great Cecil)."