Cluer of Basingstoke
We are not sure that Cluer are actually ancestors.
They might be in-laws.
Cluer are said to be ancestors of Dicey, but there is some doubt.
says Thomas Dicey's wife was a Cluer, but there are problems with this:
says the wife of Thomas Dicey, and mother of his children, was Elizabeth Cluer, baptised 1671.
But if baptised 1671, she could hardly have two daughters already married by 1703.
Even one daughter married by 1703 would be a stretch.
Also Thomas' will says his wife is Margaret.
Maybe Burke's is wrong
and his wife was Margaret Cluer and was born before 1671.
Or maybe Thomas' wife was not even a Cluer at all:
- Thomas Dicey's son
William Dicey named his son "Cluer" in 1715.
That might normally indicate a Cluer ancestry
rather than his brother-in-law
- However his father died when he was young, and he seems to have gone to work for his brother-in-law in London.
Maybe his brother-in-law was a father figure and it was a tribute to him.
So maybe there is no Cluer ancestry.
They are just in-laws.
The Burke's version is
- Elizabeth Cluer,
bapt 6 Dec 1671.
She mar Thomas Dicey
and had issue.
Maybe identical with:
mar Ann ----,
- Henry Cluer,
born 19 Oct 1669, Basingstoke.
John Cluer of Basingstoke and London
John Cluer, originally of Basingstoke, later of London, married Elizabeth Dicey, daughter of
Thomas Dicey of Basingstoke.
Elizabeth Dicey's mother was said to be Cluer of Basingstoke (above).
If true, then she and John Cluer must be cousins.
Alternatively, Cluer might just be his family.
Dicey has no Cluer ancestry. They are just in-laws.
- Richard Cluer.
Mentioned in John's will 1728 as his brother.
- Sarah Cluer.
She mar --- Swan.
Mentioned in John's will 1728 as his sister.
born est c.1675.
Printer in London.
Apprentice in 1695.
John Cluer becomes an apprentice in London on 6 May 1695.
Shows his father as Henry Cluer of Basingstoke.
See full size