William ap ROBERT

                   BIRTH: Not located.
MARRIAGE:
DEATH:

BAPTISM, ENDOWMENT, SEALED TO PARENTS: Computer IGI.
	Surname - William Roberts and Angharad John abt 1596.
Wife (1)Angharad -12 Aug 1996 SLAKE Computer IGI .
	Wife(2) Margaret- 17 Mar 1994 SLAKE  Computer IGI Addendum surname

NAME:  Welch Patronymic name: William ap Robert ap Howell ap Rees Some of the records show an incorrect estimated birth date.

BAPTISM, ENDOWMENT, SEALED TO PARENTS & SPOUSE:  Computer IGI.
Marr: Abt 1621  Place:Cilcain, Flints, Wals , Ref. F800231  s/n 00261-7  MFID: 00087975

    "These children were all christened with the name of William ap Robert ap Howell, likewise the son (Hugh) by William's second wife, Margaret.

    "I made careful searches and study of the son-father tie between Robert and William ap Robert ap Howell.  I had previously read an article in Y Cymmrdor by an authorirty on Welsh names, a man named Morris.

    "In Wales, in the Cilcain area the majority of families switched to surnames in the period from 1650 to 1565.  In the case of William ap Robert ap Howell, if he made the change while the children were still at home, the family surname would have become ROBERTS.  If the children were grown and made the change themselves they would have taken the surname WILLIAMS, from their father.

    "I searched the parish register of Cilcain for all the persons with the given names of all the children of William ap Roabert ap Howell, except those buried as infants, in their roles as husband or wife in their own families.  I could ascertain no Williams surname springing from the children of William ap Robert ap Howell.  However, I could recognize only two from this family with the Roberts surname.  These were John and Robert.
    "In the case of Robert Roberts, I could find only one child in the Cilcain register with the given name of Robert for many months either before or after the child christened Robert of William ap Robert ap Howell; and he was the only child christened Robert in a much longer period who had a father or grandfather with the name Robert - that is the father had the name Robert himself or the father's father was named Robert and therefor the father himself carried the name ap Robert as in the case of William ap Robert.

    "I reached the conclusion when in Cilcain that William ap Robert ap Howell was the father of my forebear Robert Roberts. I have since done searching in six of the surrounding parishes and nothing I have discovered in these wider searches has shown or indicated a different conclusion."

Notes to accompany Roberts Family Chart. (Cilcain)

	Wm ap Robert ap Howell, Robert ap Robert & Hugh ap Robert were probably brothers.
	Robert Roberts who married Margaret verch John was evidently prominent as was John Roberts senior who married Lucy Hughes.
	The Mostyns and Wynnes were gentry and the Robert Roberts who married Dorothea was a very prominent man from the bold style in which they entered the records of his family events. I assume he was a son of the first Robert Roberts.
	Hugh Roberts who married Lucy James went to live at the same farm village where Robert Roberts and Dorothy Mostyn had lived so I assume Robert may have been his uncle.
	Wm Roberts died in Llyssycoed Township.  He may have been a son of Wm ap Robert ap Howell and grandfather of Hugh and Thomas who lived in that township later.  John Roberts who married Jane Twist lived there for a time.  He may have been a grand nephew of Wm.
	I searched diligently for any Hugh Roberts born 1680-1722 and the only records I could find was the one for 1701 and the one for 1709.
	 I combed the records for John Roberts from 1654 to 1676 and could find but one born 1664. Since there was a John Roberts raising a family at that time there probably were other Johns born and some may have lived. I assume that the John Roberts who married Lucy Hughes was the father of Hugh, though it may have been another John. I assume this because the family of John & Lucy stopped short in 1700 and no more entries appear.  There is a bare chance that the name Ursula is a mistake. There was a Roger Mostyn, Esquire in Cilcain at the time whose wife was named Ursula, and they had a daughter Ursula who died about the time of the birth of Hugh. The minister may have copied the wrong name. That of course is only a mere surmise - not to be paid attention.
	I searched closely for any Robert born 1650-1620 but found only one - the son of Wm ap Robert ap Howell. It would seem more reasonable for him to have been the son of Robert ap Robert but I could find no such entry. This Robert was a prominent man as judged by the entry. They gave more room and wrote with big bold hand or flourishes when they recorded events for the prominent folks. Since Wm was also a prominent man his son Robert may have taken the surname Roberts about 1650 or 1660 when most of them did so in this town. This writing was very hard to read. Undoubtedly I missed entries that when the record is copied or printed, will help to clear up the uncertainties.
	Apropos the parentage of Mary Roberts, there were two Marys born in 1731, one a cousin of Hugh and the other the daughter of Robert & Eliz.  The witnesses at the wedding were two John Jones. One was evidently a parish clerk who often acted as a witness.  The other may have been a relative or friend. If he was a maternal grandfather, this indicates that Mary was not Hugh's cousin. I did not find the record of the birth of this Robert, but I did not search closely for it.

        Howard S. Bennion