Note: For dates of the old style, where the year changed on 25 Mar, my database records dates 1 Jan to 24 Mar in the new style, so that calculations are consistent. In most cases, a note is made in the event field to indicate that this is a year that is double-dated. For example, an event recorded in the original record as 2 Feb 1587 will be recorded in the date field for the event in my database as 2 Feb 1588, with a note in the event description text that the year is 1587/8.

Also Note: I do not consider the variants in the spelling of the names to have any value in determining relationships. In the 1500's and 1600's, a word was written with whatever spelling the writer chose to use. Thus the variations in spelling are an artifact of the writer, who in the case of parish registers was an official of the church, such as the vicar. In the same parish, a later or earlier vicar may have spelled the name of the same subject person in his own way. Standardized spelling of names is a relatively recent convention and should not be anachronistically applied to the records of the period under consideration in this research note.

On 3 Jan 1579/80, at the parish of St Just in Roseland, Cornwall, the parish register records the baptism of "Stephan the Sonne of Johne HORE".

On 15 Nov 1601, the parish register of Roche, Cornwall, records the baptism of "Lancelot the sonne of Stephin HORE".

On 15 Mar 1637/8, Stephen HORE of Roche signed his will, including his son Lancelot HORE as an heir. Just 11 days later, on 26 Mar 1638, this same Stephen HORE was buried at Roche.

The problem is this: was the Stephen HORE baptized at St Just in Roseland the same as the Stephen HORE of Roche who fathered Lancelot in 1601 and died in 1638?

When I began this research note, I carried them in my database as the same person. But after laying out and considering all of the following evidence, I now believe that they were most likely two different men. This research note contains the evidence and reasoning that has led me to that conclusion.

The only document with specifics about the family of the Roche Stephen HORE is his 15 Mar 1637/8 will. In his will, he designates these heirs:

In addition, Stephen refers to himself as Stephen the elder, so that he may have had a son Stephen who pre-deceased him and was thus not included in the will.

The only baptismal record of any child of Stephen HORE at Roche that survives is the baptism 15 Nov 1601 of Lancelot HORE, which does not mention the child's mother.

These are all of the HORE baptisms at Roche prior to 1681 (per Cornwall OPC index):

The 1572 baptism shows that there was a HORE family at Roche that early but then a gap of 19 years, followed by another gap of 12 years.

The Roche baptisms have survived for this entire period, but there are gaps. For example, the pages numbered (apparently long after the fact) 34 and 35 (image: https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-11833-165928-83) jump from the start of the 1615 baptisms at the bottom of page 34 to the 1619 baptisms at the top of page 35 - preceded by one baptism which must have been from 1618 and not 1615. So the page for the baptisms for most of 1615, all of 1616 and 1617 and most of 1618 is apparently lost.

The 1601 Lancelot is almost certainly the son Lancelot in Stephen HORE's will.

The Robert and John who were the fathers in the 1613-1622 baptisms also seem likely to have been the sons Robert and John in Stephen HORE's will. This is especially true of Robert HORE, since he named his first daughter Catherin, most likely after his mother, who is in Stephen HORE's will as Katherin.

The Roche parish registers record only two HORE marriages prior to 1667, although the marriage part of the registers is definitely damaned, with only two before 1579 surviving intact and many after that date lost forever: all of 1583, some of 1586. all of 1687-1597 inclusive, some of 1598, some of 1599, some of 1601 and 1602, no marriages are recorded for 1604, 1605, 1610, some of 1611 is lost, and there may have been more. The only HORE marriages prior to 1667 to survive are:

Where they survive, the burials are in better shape than the marriages, but there are no burials before 10 Aug 1612. These pre-1681 HORE burials survive in the Roche parish registers;

It is not clear which John HOOR is being referenced in the 1629 (as husband), 1634 (as subject) and 1636 (as father) burials -- or even whether all three refer to the same John or to two or even three Johns. Was one or all of them the John who was the father in the 1572 baptism? I had initially thought that he was John the son of Stephen, and indeed one or more of them may be that John -- but not the one who died in 1634, since at Stephen's 1637/8 will his son John was still living. So it does seem most likely that the 1634-buried John HOOR was not Stephen's son but more likely the father of the 1572-baptized Constance. As we will see in the consideration of the St Just in Roseland records, a case can be made that this John was in fact the father of Stephen. But more on that below.

What does seem most solid is that the various references to Robert HORE all refer to the son of Stephen included in his will. Here is what can be pieced together from the records of Robert HORE's adult family:

Robert HORE married Jeyes HAMBLYE at Roche 16 Jan 1612/3. She was buried at Roche 28 Sep 1640. I have found no burial for him; Cornwall OPC's only two candidate burials, both at Roche were 4 Mar 1693/4 ("son of Stephen Hoare") and 17 Jan 1699/1700. Either one would be when he was about 100 years old. The "son of" construct is usually used for burials of children, so that this could be an unrecorded (in the baptisms) son of Stephen and Thomzen HORE, since on 2 Sep 1694 this couple named their next child Robert.

It is possible that the unidentified John HORE in Stephen's will was Robert's son since he is mentioned immediately prior to Robert in the will: "... vnto the said Katherin and he assignes duringe her Natural life annd after her decease my will and meaninge is That the said parte shall come vnyo John HORE during the Naturall life of my sonne Robert HORE". So John does have the appearance in the will of being connected with Robert.

So far, we have been working backward from the known will to the unknown at Roche. But we must also consider the context of the 1579/80 Stephen HORE baptism at St Just in Roseland.

It is certainly possible that the same John HORE who was the father of the 1572 Constance at Roche was then the father of these children baptized at St Just in Roseland:

This could also explain why Stephen moved to Roche from St Just (if there really was only one Stephen), if his parents had originally come from Roche.

There are other HORE baptisms at St Just that must also be considered. The CFHS database has these:

Searching the OPC St Just in Roseland marriages for surname "Hoa" and "Hor", there are only six for any dates:

So, many St Just records refer to Stephen HOAR/HOARE. It is possible that there were at least two men of that name, since there is gap of 17 years between the 1600 "reputed" baptisms (when the 1580 Stephen would have been 20) and the 1617 baptism after the 1616 marriage (when the 1580 Stephen would have been 36 and 37).

I have included the URLs of the original images, since I verified each date to make certain of the chronology. The bottom line is that there must have been two men at St Just in the mid-1620's named Stephen HOARE. One of them married 5 Jun 1625, so that the other was still married to Elizabeth who was not buried until the end of the following month.

The most likely scenario is that Elizabeth gave birth to the son Stephen HOAR who was baptized 3 Jul 1625 and then lingered for 3 weeks and died from complications of the birth. But as noted, Elizabeth's husband Stephen HOARE could not have married Anne ANDROWE, since Elizabeth was still alive when that marriage took place. So there were clearly two husbands name Stephen HOARE in the parish at that time.

Was the 1616-married Stephen HOARE the same as the 1580-baptized Stephen? Marrying at age 36 and having children in the following 9 years (when the 1580 Stephen would have been 45) is certainly well within the realm of the possible.

Or was the father of the two base children who were baptized in 1600 and died soon after the same Stephen who was the father of Lancelot HORE baptized in 1601 at Roche? With his reputation made in St Just, did he seek to start with a clean slate in Roche? If his parents had indeed come from Roche, he probably had ties there, so that this is also a possibility.

The two Stephen HOAREs who married at St Just in Roseland in 1616 and 1625 were not the Stephen HORE who wrote his will in 1637/8 at Roche. These two Stephens had children whose names are not included in the will: Peeter, Mawde, Jane.

There is also the Stephen HOAR who fathered the two base children baptized 14 Dec 1600 at St Just, who was most likely the same one baptized at St Just in 1580. And here we come to the crux of this research note. Could the 1580 and 1600 St Just Stephen HOAR have become the 1601 and 1637/8 Roche Stephen HORE?

The key factor, to me, is that those named in the will were apparently all born at Roche and were apparently all children of the Roche Stephen's wife Katherin. This is especially confirmed in the 27 Mar 1613 Roche baptism of Catherin, daughter of Robert HORE. The naming convention was that the first-born daughter would be named for her father's mother. And this weights strongly in favor of the Robert HORE who fathered this Catherin being the son of Stephen HORE (of Roche) and his wife Katherin.

When was Robert HORE born? He married Jeyes HAMBLYE 16 Jan 1612/3 at Roche. Assuming that he was then 18 to 24 years old, he would have been born in the period 1588 to 1594. At this time, the 1580-baptized St Just Stephen would have been 8 to 14 years old. Thus the 1580 St Just Stephen HOARE was not the father of the Robert HORE who married and baptized his children at Roche.

This is further confirmed by the evidence of Robert's wife's baptism, which appears to be the Jease HAMLY baptized 26 Jun 1592, daughter of Roger HAMLY, at St. Mabyn. (Image: https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-267-12896-154805-17)

The Stephen HORE who married Katherin and raised his family at Roche and wrote his will 15 Mar 1637/8 and was buried at Roche 26 Mar 1638 was not the same as the Stephen HOARE baptized 3 Jan 1579/80 at St Just in Roseland.

As always, these conclusions are the best that seem to fit with the evidence found thus far. If new evidence conflicts with these conclusions, I will evaluate the new evidence and may alter my conclusions.

The following transcription was made by Wesley Johnston 6 September 2015, from a copy of the original from the Cornwall Record Office (AP=H-996). Here is the complete text, modified to highlight the surnames.

1. In the name of God Amen. The fifeenth daye of Marche Ano dmi

2. 1637 I Steven HORE thelder of the pishe of Roche in the Countye

3. of Cornewall yeoman beinge sik in boddye but pfect of mynde and

4. memorye laude and prayse be geiven to Almightie God doe make

5. and ordayne this my laste will and Testament in Manner and forme

6. followeinge First I bequeath my soule into the handes of Almightie

7. God my maker and Redeemer and my boddye to christian buriall. Item

8. I geive and bequeath towardes the Reparacons of the Church of

9. Roche aforesaid Ten shillings. Item I geive and bequeath vnto the

10. poore of Roche aforesaid Ten shillings to be for a continuall stock for the poore Item I geive devise and assigne

11. vnto Katherin my wiffe All that parte of my Tenem^t of Treseble within

12. the prishe of Roche w^ch I holde by lease from John COLL of St. Cleere in

13. the countye aforesaid gent To haue and holde vnto the said Katherin and

14. her assignes duringe her Naturall life and after her decease my will and

15. meaninge is That the said parte shall remaine and come vnto John Hore

16. during the Naturall life of my sonne Robert HORE And farther I geive

17. devise and assigne vnto my said wiffe All those houses & grounds in –

18. Polskeyes als Polteskayes which is now in the possession of Stephen WEST

19. and all that one Close in Rosmellyn w^ch is now in the possession of

20. William CORKE To have and to holde the said houses grounde and close

21. of land vnto the said Katherin and her assignes duringe her Naturall

22. life. Item I farther geive and bequeath vnto my saide wiffe one milche

23. cowe and calf w^ch she now hath and one Redd Mare the colte of

24. the Mare which I haue solde to John CAME and my best bedd with the

25. furniture therof. Item I geive and bequeth vnto my son Robert HORE

26. one yeowe and to euery of his children xijd a peece. Item I geive

27. and bequeth vnto my son Lancelott one yeowe and to euery of his

28. children xijd a peece. Item I geive and bequeth vnto Anne my

29. daughter one yeowe and to euery of her children xijd a peece. Item

30. I geive and bequeth vnto my grandchild Stephen HORE the sonne

31. of John HORE after the death of my wiffe and my sonne

32. John my Silver salte saller and a dosen of silver spoones and to

33. euery of my sonne John HOREs children xijd a peece Item I geive

34. until William Hunnywill the writer hereof vs. The residew of all

35. my goodes and chattalls not given nor bequeathed I wholie geive

36. and bequeath vnto Katherin my wiffe and John HORE my

37. sonne whome I make and ordaine my full and whole exectors of

38. this my last will and testament. In witnes whereof I haue here

39. vnto sett my hand and seal the daye and yeere aforesaid In presence

40. of those whose names followeth

41. the sign of Stephen HORE

42. Wm: HUNNYWILL

43. John CAME

44. the sign of Stephen WEST