[ Proceed to Tree ]

General

The names (though not other details, unless so desired) of living members of the family have been included only where their consent has been obtained. If we have inadvertently included a living member without consent, please let us know and we will remove the name if so desired.

In some instances we have shown a title as a given name or surname in the Individual List, in order to make it easier to find the person concerned. In particular this applies to the Blackett Baronets, who will be found in the Blackett section under the first name of “Sir”. Monarchs have been given the surname “King” or “Queen” as appropriate, and appear as such. (Please see caveat below.)

The tree cannot be downloaded, nor can details be amended other than by Blackett Administration. If you have details that you would like to have added to the tree, restricted to descendants of Blacketts and their spouses, please submit them to us (large trees in GEDCOM format if possible), citing sources. (NB. IGI entries based solely on submissions by LDS members will not normally suffice.) In a tree of this size there will invariably be errors, and if you find one, please email us.

This site is run by three amateur (though enthusiastic!) Blackett descendants. We cannot guarantee to carry out major research into the ancestors of visitors to this site. (Anyway, the fun is in tracing your own roots!) We would however like to hear from you with comments on the site, where your family fits in, etc. and will try to answer your emails reasonably promptly.

Blackett v. Blacket

“The first thing to decide is how to spell Blackett!”, wrote Sir Anthony Highmore King (1890-1976) in 1968 in his notes on the Blackett family. As discussed in more detail in “My Name is Blacket” (see Links) by the late Nick Vine Hall, the spelling has varied since the name evolved from Blackved/Blackheved in the Middle Ages, but has now settled down to “Blackett”, overwhelmingly the spelling used in England, or “Blacket”, which is found far more frequently amongst the Australian side of the family.

Nick Vine Hall considered that, historically speaking, “Blacket” with one “t” is correct, but that in modern day usage, both spellings can be considered correct in a particular instance, depending on the accepted usage over several generations of the particular branch of the family in question.

Since in many cases the same individual is referred to in different records by differing spellings, the “Blackett” version has been used in this tree, other than the descendants of John Blackett (1747-1795), who, according to a long time tradition in the family reported by Nick Vine Hall, dropped one “t” from his surname when he opened a drapery shop in West Smithfield, as “no Blackett ever opened shop.”

The Royal Connection Caveat

Most family historians would love to prove a link to the Royal Family, and there may be a temptation to dismiss evidence to the contrary. In our case, we can only say that there is very possibly a link. In view of the importance of this, it is worth examining in detail the two steps in the tree where the line may not be fully secure.

1. Richard Blackett (died May 1597)

The line back to King Malcolm III of Scotland and Queen (and later Saint) Margaret, which provides the link to the present Royal Family, runs back from Alice Tempest, who married Nicholas Blackett (born 1500) around 1524. It is our belief that Richard Blackett was a son of Nicholas and Alice, but for 200 years researchers into the Blackett pedigree have searched in vain for conclusive proof of this. There is, however, considerable circumstantial evidence to support Richard’s link in the chain. In 1676 Sir William Blackett (who was Richard’s great-grandson) purchased Woodcroft from an impoverished Blackett cousin, and referred to it as the home of his paternal ancestors. In a letter to the College of Arms dated 20 March 1811 the eminent historian and genealogist, Robert Surtees refers to Richard as “our supposed homo propositius” (i.e. the father of all our troubles), and states that he was definitely alive in 1597.

Nick Vine Hall shows Richard as a younger brother to Nicholas, but this seems unlikely. In a 1575 heraldic record, Thomas Blackett shows his father, Nicholas, as having one brother, Lionel, who died without issue, but makes no mention of another brother, though this may be through Lionel having been an elder brother to Nicholas, rather than a younger one, as some researchers have supposed. Burke’s Extinct and Dormant Baronetcies 1844 (Blackett of Newcastle) shows William (1587-1648), the father of Sir William, 1^st Bt., as being the great-grandson of Nicholas. That fits with Nicholas being Richard’s father, and not brother. A Pedigree of Blackett of Wallington supports this, stating that Edward (1557- 1628), the son of Richard “of Shipley and Hole House” was the grandson of Nicholas. Burke’s Commoners 1838 and Burke’s Landed Gentry 1850 both cite Nicholas as an ancestor of the Blacketts of Wylam, who descend from Richard.

Thus, whilst no absolute proof has been found, in two centuries of research the only candidate for the “missing” generation to emerge has been Richard.

2. Marjorie of Huntingdon

A family tree, believed to have been compiled in the 19^th century by professional genealogists for the Blackett-Ord family, shows the line back to King Malcolm III of Scotland through the Tempest, Umfreville/Umfraville and Angus families. This has been cross-checked with online historical sources and corrected where appropriate. In the case of Marjorie of Huntingdon, however, some authorities differ. Wikipedia shows her as a child of Prince Henry of Scotland and Adelicia/Ada de Warrenne, showing her marriage to Gille Crist, Earl of Angus. Electricscotland states that Gilchrist married a sister of William the Lion (i.e. William I of Scotland), and Clandouglassociety states that she was reportedly a daughter of Henry of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. That would make her a great-granddaughter of King Malcolm III. (Incidentally, two contenders in the primaries for the 2008 US presidential election, Senators John McCain (R) and Barack Obama (D) are also descendants of King Malcolm III, through Isabel, the illegitimate daughter of William the Lion.) 

The Complete Peerage, however, raises doubts about this marriage, RoyaList Online omits her as a child of Henry of Scotland, and Stirnet refers to some confusion over Gilchrist’s marriages, though including her, subject to further verification.

The websites cite differing original sources for their information.

To confuse matters further, the family tree referred to above shows her as “Margery (or Maud)”. “Maud” is the Anglo-Saxon form of “Matilda”, so there could be three possible versions of her name.

The most detailed reference to her is in Electricscotland, which mentions a story related by Buchanan, on the authority of an old chronicle. According to this, Gilchrist was given the hand of King William’s sister in gratitude for the great services he had done for the Crown. She was unfaithful to Gilchrist, however, who had her killed, thus provoking the King into confiscating Gilchrist’s estates and banning him from the kingdom.

Whatever her name, the majority of sources we have come across support the belief that she was descended from Malcolm III, and therefore provides the blood link to H.M. The Queen, and thence on to Alfred The Great, Macbeth etc. So you pays your money and you makes your choice….!

[ Proceed to Tree ]