This tree, still under research, is the product of nearly two decades work by  myself, my cousin, Martin, and his wife, Antonella. Most of the painstaking  recording and tracking was done by Martin and especially, by Antonella. I just  bumbled around blindly -- knocking down the odd "brick wall" on the way !

Special thanks have to go to Valerie Mawhinney, a cousin from Australia, whose  painstaking research has led to many brick walls coming down and connections made, as  well as saving us another decade or so!!

The Tree presented on these pages is the result of the amalgamation of several  trees researched by others, as well as Visitations and other researches. We  have concentrated on the male line of descent from the present day Arndells  back to Roger De Montgomery. That direct line is supported by documentary  evidence. The side shoots, whilst we have no reason to doubt their accuracy,  have not been confirmed by our own research.

Basically, the pedigree, up until John Arundell m. Elizabeth Lanyon (1669), is  recorded and accepted by The College of Arms in London. Their son, Henry (b. 20  July 1674), although missing from the Visitations of Cornwall is recorded in  the Heralds records (Norfolk 6.13)and referred to in subsequent Royal Licences.

The descent from Henry, who married Jane Ralph in 1703, is supported by  original entries in Parish Records and post Civil Registration, certified  entries in the Registers of Births, Deaths & Marriages at the GRO.

Over the years, due to well documented literacy shortcomings, the name has lost  and gained an "L" and, of course, that "U" in the middle. Sometimes one  individual enjoyed several variations during their recorded lifetime. That "U"  managed to hang in there until James Arundell / Arndell ( b. June 1824) who  lost it during migration from Cornwall to South Wales.

In the early years of this new century we were aided in our research by The  Institute of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies. We are grateful for the hard  work and perseverance of Cecil Humphery-Smith, a well renowned and respected  expert in all matters heraldic and genealogical, and Christopher Schofield.  Unfortunately another "brick wall" that arose here proved to be insurmountable  by the course then being taken.

We, or should that be "I", took the maverick route and engaged another well  respected Genealogist, Anthony Adolph. Anthony has several books to his credit  and numerous media appearances as well as several T.V shows dedicated to  genealogical research.

Right away, with the benefit of "new eyes" and a fresh perspective the brick  wall came down and Anthony spent his time attempting to pick our research to  shreds and shoring up any weak points. I think it is safe to say that he  started his research from a sceptical standpoint, but has now been convinced by  the strength and quality of evidence supporting the pedigree.

Problems highlighted by the College of Arms were twofold: The Royal Licences,  apperently declaring the line extinct and the migration of the family from  Cornwall to Wales. The following are extracted from Anthony Adolph's report on  the pedigree:-

The issue of the Royal Licenses

In 1815, Francis Vyvyan Jago managed to procure a license, stating that his  great grandmother Susanna was one of the two surviving daughters and  coheiresses of John Arundell and Elizabeth Lanyon. By doing so, he thus secured  himself the right to use the name and arms of Arundell.

In view of the evidence we have seen, it is scarcely any surprise that, a  decade later, in 1825, his cousin Jane St Aubyn, her daughter Jane Hunter and  the latter's husband William Francis Hunter, secured a Royal License correcting  the 1815 one. It was a period of very poor standards in genealogy, and the 1815  license was issued in the very month of Napoleon's surprised return to power,  when you can be quite sure the minds of the King and his Privy Council were  very much distracted. Just as the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks  were "a good time to bury bad news", so it seems the Napoleonic emergency may  have been seen as a good time to rush through a thoroughly badly-researched  Royal License! It certainly looks as if Mr Vyvyan had obtained a license on  very flimsy evidence, probably on payment of a suitably hefty fee. In the draft  of the new, 1825 license (Coll. of Arms Ms Young Coll. 110, pp 5-7) it is  stated clearly that the 1815 license had been made "to the great prejudice of  your petitioner (sic) Jane Hunter, who upon the death of her mother [daughter  and at length coheir of Robert Arundell] will be one of the coheirs and  representatives of the ancient and honourable family of Arundell" and that the  license was sought "to correct the erroneous representations of Francis Vyvyan  Jago". The license itself (Coll. of Arms Ms 145.139) states that Jane St  Aubyn's father Robert Arundell was the "youngest but only son that left issue,  of John Arundell of Sithney, Co. Cornwall" and that this John was the eldest  son and heir of John Arundell of Truthall in Sithney, by Elizabeth Lanyon.

The 1825 license, therefore, is perfectly clear about the fact that the 1815  one was wrong, and the evidence we have seen amply backs this up. We can see  that, in 1825, nobody gave any serious consideration to the 1815 license. There  is therefore absolutely no reason to give the 1815 license a moment's further  consideration.

Coll. of Arms Ms Young Coll. 110, p. 333 includes a pedigree showing the  children of John Arundell and Elizabeth Lanyon. These include Henry Arundell,  second and youngest son, and the pedigree shows that he married Jane Ralph at  Sithney on 2 February 1703, that she was buried at Helston on 8 January 1753  and that their son Thomas was baptised at Helston on 24 January 1719.

In his letter of 20 April 2004, Mr O'Donoghue (then Bluemantle Pursuivant, College of  Arms in London) states that, whilst the 1815 license had stated that John Arundell  and Elizabeth Lanyon had no surviving sons, "the 1825 entries are less clear; but  they emphasize that no male line descendants of John Arundell, son of John Arundell  and Elizabeth nee Lanyon, then survived".

This is precisely the point, but it has subsequently been misinterpreted.   Nobody disputes that the 1815 license was wrong. The 1825 license does not  state that Henry Arundell did not exist, nor that he did not have any male line  offspring. It merely states Henry's elder brother John had only one surviving  son, Robert and that this Robert had no sons. Further, it states that Jane  Hunter, Robert's granddaughter, would "in direct contradiction to the claim  made ten years previously by Francis Vyvyan Jago be one of the coheirs and  representatives of the ancient and honourable family of Arundell".

To be clear: Jane St Aubyn was not claiming that she was the sole surviving  descendant of John Arundell and Elizabeth Lanyon. She made no comment about  Henry, nor did she need to. She was the heraldic heiress of her father Robert,  who was the senior male representative of John Arundell, the husband of  Elizabeth Lanyon. Her sole child, Mrs Jane Hunter would be one of the coheirs  and representatives of the Arundells. Not the only one: just one of them. As an  heraldic heiress, Jane St Aubyn had every right to pass her father's name and  arms on to her child, regardless of the existence or not of other surviving  junior branches of the Arundell family, whose existence she neither affirmed  nor denied. To stress this point further, let's be clear about the fact that,  whilst Jane St Aubyn clearly wanted to correct a wrong that had been done to  her family by Francis Vyvyan Jago, she wasn't an altruist. Let Henry's  descendants fight their corner if they wished: the outcome of her trouble in  obtaining a Royal License was to the benefit of her daughter alone, and so it  turned out.

The associated papers quoted above do, however, make it perfectly clear that  Henry Arundell had married, that his wife was buried in Helston in 1753, and  that by her he had a son Thomas Arundell, baptised in Helston in 1719. This is  on record at the College, and we have copies of the original parish register  entries to back this up, so we need not trouble ourselves any further over the  matter.

The licenses therefore present absolutely no bar whatsoever to the registration  of this pedigree.

The descent of the Arndells of Penwith from the Arndells of Helston:

The only task, therefore, is to prove that Thomas, who was baptised in Helston  in 1719, had any descendants. This is something I am perfectly sure nobody  would have tried to do in 1825. Genealogical research of that sort would have  been immensely costly and complicated. Thomas?s family had gone completely down  hill and were, as we know (always assuming our evidence is correct, of course)  tin miners. It would have been immensely difficult to have traced them, and it  would have served no purpose. Finding them had nothing at all to do with Jane  St Aubyn's claim. Further, one can only imagine the ridicule that would have  resulted from her appearing in London with a ragged tin miner from the far west  of Cornwall, and claiming that he was a long-lost male line representative of  the ancient and honourable family of Arundell! By the standards of the time,  the notion would have been preposterous: it would have been far better not to  have mentioned the matter - so nobody did.

  The move to Wales:

On the face of it, the evidence for this is clear. Many Cornish miners in this  period moved to south Wales to find work. Mr Arndell's immediate descent from  James Arndell of Aberdare is completely beyond dispute, and so too is the fact  that, in the censuses, James states that he was from (variously) St Just and  Buryan, Cornwall.

The only problem we have with connecting him back to the foregoing line in St  Just is that his stated ages make him a couple of years too young to have been  baptised in 1824. Further, his 1851 Welsh marriage certificate shows that he  was then aged 22, so born about 1829, and his death certificate from  Castleford, York shows that he was 52 in 1879, so born about 1827.

It is our assertion that the ages given for him were consistently inaccurate,  and that he was in fact born in or about 1824, and was the child baptised in  1824 in Buryan. To explore this in more detail and find out why this could be,  let us examine the censuses in more detail:

1841 James Arndal, aged 15 (ie, born between 1826 and 1821), a tin miner,  living at home as a tin miner at Carngrea, St Just [in Penwith] with John, 40,  and Elizabeth Arundell, 40, ie, his father and step-mother, and John, 15, tin  miner, William, 8, Ann, 6, Elizabeth, 4, Richard, 3 and Edward, 1. We can  accept that this is the same person who was baptised in Buryan in 1824.

1851 James Arundell, miner, a lodger in Aberdare, in the household of John  Vater, aged 22 (ie, born c. 1829) born at Buryan, Cornwall. The age is  definitely out when compared to the 1841 census and the baptism: it is out by  four years. The householder usually gave the census enumerator the information  required, so in this case Mr Vater was giving information on his own family and  at least six lodgers, three of whom, he said, were 22. He may certainly have  been inaccurate.

1861 James was a coal miner, very clearly recorded as a 33 year old (ie, born  about 1828) born in Cornwall, living at 28 Cardiff Road, Aberdare, with his  wife Elizabeth, born in Tredegar, and children including Charles Henry, his one  year old son. This shows that the man concerned considered himself to have been  33. His wife?s age appears to be 21, but it is not entirely clear and could be  28 or 29 (see below: the 1891 census confirms this): this is of course the same  woman who appears in the 1851 census as Elizabeth Vater, daughter of James's  former landlord John Vater. If John had been under the impression that James  was only four, not eight years older than Elizabeth, so too may Elizabeth  herself have been: in other words, if James had conveniently adjusted his age  to make himself closer in years to his wife, maybe the alteration had become a  convenient truth that remained unchallenged through the years.

1871 census James was 42, ie, born about 1829, born in St Just,   and was a coal miner at 302 Cardiff Road, Aberdare. He appears here with  Elizabeth his wife, very clearly recorded as 39 and born in Tredegar.

The foregoing argument that James of Aberdare had his age consistently quoted  inaccurately is, however, just that - an argument and not a piece of evidence.  It is not enough to show that he was the person who was baptised in Buryan -  indeed, he really may not have been.

First, is there any evidence from the Cornish end to show that we are wrong? 

We searched in the fully indexed online census indexes to Cornwall for any  James Arundell, Arndell or obvious variants aged between 10 and 19, born in the  county. My searcher reports:

I have searched the 1841 Census for Cornwall for James Arundell, Arndell and  variations aged between 10 and 19 born in the same county and have only found  one entry.

This was the entry for our James Arndell aged 15, a tin miner, born in the  county, living with his parents John and Elizabeth in St Just . (nb My searcher  notes that in the 1841 census The only other nearest entry I could find was to  a James Arnall, born 1827, living in Lanteglos with his family including his  parents James & Mary. Lanteglos is a long way (in Cornish terms) from the  western peninsular of Cornwall, and this boy has a different father's name  (James, not John) so he can safely be ruled out of the equation).

Next, could our James from Buryan be found in the 1851 census of Cornwall? 

My searcher reports: 

I have searched the original Census returns for St Just in Penwith which is  covered by HO107/1919 folios 75-358 and have not found anyone called James  Arundell or variations of the spelling of the surname.
  
 I have also searched the 1851 Census firstly online and then via surname  indexes we have for the whole county of Cornwall and have not found any entries  for any James Arundell (and variations) born between 1820 and 1830.

I have searched the original census returns for Sancreed (HO107/1919 folios 17- 71) & St Buryan (HO107/1919 folios 359-449).
  
 In Sancreed the nearest I found to the surname Arndell was Arundell.  On  HO107/1919 folio 33 page 27 there is a Elizabeth Arundell, a widow, age 51 and  her family.
  
 In St Buryan I have found an Ann Arndall, a house servant, unmarried, age 18  born in Sancreed, Cornwall (HO107/1919 folio 389 page 13).
  
 There is no sign of anyone called James Arndell (or variations).

So, unless the James baptised in 1824 had died by then, he had definitely left  the area and gone somewhere else by 1851.

What I believe clinches the argument is that we know from the Cornish registers  that James had at least two brothers, Thomas baptised in Buryan in 1823 and  Richard baptised in Sancreed in 1836. The Aberdare censuses show both Thomas  and Richard appearing there. Thomas stated his place of origin as St Just (just  as James himself did in the 1871 census, whereas in the 1851 census James  correctly said Buryan). In the 1861 census for Aberdare he had his younger  brother Richard with him, and Richard later went on to marry Mary Jane Vater   the sister of James Arndell's wife Elizabeth Ann Vater (in fact, Mary J. Vater  appears in the 1861 census under the same roof as James).

These three men in Aberdare, James, Thomas and Richard, had the same surname,  the same trade and all claimed to be from Cornwall. James and Thomas both gave  their place of origin as Buryan, and Richard, we know, was Thomas's brother.  All three men had ages that made them just a couple of years older than the  three brothers, James, Thomas and Richard, whose baptisms we have in Buryan and  Sancreed. All three of the latter disappear from Cornwall. Taken alone, one may  think that the identification of James of Aberdare with the James baptised in  1824 in Buryan is a mistake. However, that all three men should have been from  Buryan/Sancreed yet not be the three brothers we know were born there would be  an extraordinary coincidence, requiring a far more convoluted explanation than  the one offered.

In detail: Thomas was baptised on 9 February 1823 at Buryan. His marriage  certificate. The 1871 census seems to show him at 71 Gadly Street, Aberdare,  aged 46 and born in Cornwall, with his wife Frances, 43, and several children.  The age is a little out here too, but only by a year - highlighting the  unreliability of censuses in showing the exact ages of the poor. The 1861  census shows Thomas in Aberdare with his wife Jane and children, aged 35, a  coal miner, born in Cornwall: this indicates a birth in about 1825/6, again  suggesting - if we are right - that his age was being given as a little less  than it really was. In 1851 he was in Baglan Higher, Abergwenfrwd, with his  wife Frances and children - now he was only 20, and born in St Just: this  usefully shows that age discrepancies do occur in the censuses, but still  leaves the grey area open.

The main piece of evidence concerns their brother Richard. Richard was baptised  in 1836. He appears in the 1851 census of Sancreed with his widowed mother  Elizabeth as a 12 year old, born in St Buryan (the age is already slightly  out, but as she is listed with both her Arndell and Hoskin children, and all  the facts tie in, there is little doubt that this is the right family). In the  1861 census of Aberdare he appears with his brother Thomas (this is stated  explicitly), aged 21 and born in Cornwall: the age, yet again, makes him a  couple of years too young to fit the baptism in 1836. He is later shown in  Aberdare in 1869, marrying, Mary Jane Vater. His father is given as John  Arndell, miner and hers as John Vater, miner. I note that the witnesses were  Mary Ann Vater and James Arndell - the latter most likely "our" James. This  certificate shows that Richard married the sister of Eliza Anne, wife of his  brother James Arndell! He appears, just like his brothers, as slightly younger  than the Cornish parish registers prove they really were - his age at marriage  in 1869 was 27, suggesting a birth about 1842. The General Registration birth  indexes for Cornwall were scoured for the period 1842-1837 for any Richard  Arndell/Arundel and they were all checked for a father John. My searcher  reports: 
  
 I have searched the birth indexes for 1842-1837 and there are no Richard  Arndell/Arundel (and variations) entries for Cornwall.  I also looked for  entries under "male".
  
 Whilst one accepts that not all births in the early years of General  Registration were not recorded, the absence of this particular one can still be  taken as some measure of evidence that it never took place in this period - or,  to put it another way, if we were wrong in our theory, there was a reasonable  chance that the error would have been exposed by this search, and that it was  not is further evidence of the theory being correct.  
   
 Even the most convinced sceptic would acknowledge that it is unlikely there  were two parallel families of Arndells, with three sons of the same names, and  parallel sequences of ages, one who appear in Wales stating specific Cornish  origins, but whose origins in Cornwall cannot be found, and the other  originating in the self-same Cornish parishes, but who subsequently disappear  altogether.

On their Welsh marriage certificates, all three men said their father was a  miner called John. I had hoped to prove that there was only one John Arndell  living in the St Just area at the time - our one. To do this, I sought rate  books for St Just, Buryan and Sancreed for the years 1820-1840. Sadly, there  are none for these parishes for that period, and there are no poor law records  either for this period. I do not feel there is any more that could be done  realistically to prove (or disprove) the case.

The last option for proving that the three brothers in Wales were our three  brothers in Cornwall was to see if any later documentation on Richard Arndell  would show an age commensurate with a birth (and therefore a baptism) in about  1836. It was known that Richard emigrated to America. He cannot be found in the  American 1880 census, having only arrived in New York in 1879 - he may have  been misindexed, or was more likely, literally, in the middle of nowhere. The  1890 census has been destroyed and he had died by 1900.

The newspaper report of the death of Richard Arndell in America provides his  correct age:

2 February 1895, Reese River Reveille, Austin, Nevada newspaper Richard Arndell, who has been a sufferer for a long time past of miner's  consumption, died at his home this morning at 8 o'clock.   Mr Arndell has resided in this community for a number of years and was an  industrious man till the disease, which carried him off, unabled him for  labor.  Deceased was a native of Cornwall, aged 59 years, and leaves a widow  and his eight children to mourn his loss.  Mrs J. R Ganser, of Battle Mountain,  and Mrs J. P. Jones, of Austin, being daughters of the deceased.  We extend the  sympathy of the community to the bereved family.  The funeral will take place  Monday afternoon at 3 o'clock from the M.E. Church.

At last we have evidence that he really was born about 1836, the evidence we  need to connect him, and thus all three Arndell brothers (including our James)  back from Aberdare to the baptisms identified in Cornwall.

Proof that the foregoing Richard was the same Richard comes from the following  documentation.

First, his wife, as we know, was Mary Jane Vater. Here is her death notice 

State of Nevada Standard Certificate of Death, File 272, Registrars number: 114 Place of death: Washoe, Town of Reno, Hospital: 611 Eureka, Length in this  community: 20 Years, Female, White, Widowed, Birth of deceased: Mar 2 1848,  Age: 94 years,11 months, 22 days, Birthplace: England,  Occupation: Retired  housewife, Father: John Vater from Wales, Mother: Mary Clee from Wales,  Informant: Mrs Marguerite Fredericks, Address: 611 Eureka Street, Reno, Nev.  Burial date: 27 Feb 1943, Place:  Mt View, If foreign how long in USA; 60  years.

Margueritte Fredericks is named as the daughter in both documents, and the  death of Mary names her father as John Vater, which we know to be true. Linking  her directly to Richard is a newspaper report of Mary Jane?s 94th birthday  [item 55] the year before she died:

6 March 1942 Nevada State Journal, Reno, Nevada newspaper
 PIONEER NEVADAN HONORED HERE AT PARTY
 Ninety-fourth birthday of Mrs. Mary Jane Arndell was celebrated Monday at a  party given in her honor by members of the Adventist Church at the home of her  daughter, Mrs. Tony Fredericks, on Eureka Avenue. Singing and conversation  featured the afternoon, and the honored guest was presented with a potted plant  and other tributes. Mrs. Arndell was born in Abadaur, Wales, in 1848 and came  to Nevada in 1870 to join her husband, Richard Arndell, at Austin.  She was  accompanied by their other children, and in Austin four other children were  born. The family includes nine grandchildren, nine great grandchildren and nine  great great grandchildren.
 Present at the party were Elder and Mrs. J. R. White, W.S.MacPherson, Flora  Hawkins, Harold Tamka, B.L.Sanford, Mises Alice Laxhier and Myrtle Lasher.

Further evidence concerning the migration and lives of Richard and Mary is  available, but the foregoing should not allow any room for doubt.

The evidence of an American newspaper report shows that Richard Arndell, the  husband of Mary Jane Vater and brother of Thomas and Richard Arndell of  Abderare, was indeed the man baptised in Sancreed in 1836, and therefore that  his brother James was indeed the person baptised in Buryan in 1824.

I believe that this dispels all reasonable doubt from this line of descent. 

We are on the verge of returning to the College of Arms in London with  Anthony's report. More to follow ...........

Spring / Summer 2009:  The College of Arms have examined the pedigree thus far annd have accepted the move to Wales. They have further agreed that the line is feasable, save for a problem of identity, similar to the move to Wales, but a much smaller move from Helston to St Just, Penwith (less than a dozen miles to the west):-  Thomas Arundell was baptised in Helston in 1719, but extensive searches have not thrown any light upon his fate, other than a marriage between Thomas Arundell and Susanna Pender in Paul in 1741. Again, extensive searches have shown no other possible origin for Thomas in Penwith (nor, indeed, in any other nearby parish) other than the 1719 Helston baptism. Births and marriages of the children of the pair also demonstrate a link twixt St. Just and Helston, with much "to-ing & fro-ing". However, to date we have been unable to uncover 100% definate written proof that the only Thomas of the area at that time was the same Thomas who married Susanna at around the age of 22 (reasonable) just down the road in St Paul and then went on to have children who, in their turn, married and gave birth to grand children back in Helston.

We currently await ( and have been so doing for the last 7 months) the outcome of the College of Arm's thoughts on the matter...........