See also

Family of Henry LORT and [unnamed person]

Husband: Henry LORT ( - )
Wife: [unnamed person] ( - )
Children: Sampson LORT (c. 1610-c. 1710)
Roger LORT ( -1664)
John LORT ( - )

Husband: Henry LORT

Name: Henry LORT
Sex: Male
Father: Roger LORT (1555-1613)
Mother: [unnamed person] ( - )

Wife: [unnamed person]

Name: -
Sex: Female
Father: -
Mother: -

Child 1: Sampson LORT

Name: Sampson LORT1
Sex: Male
Name Suffix: of Eastnoix & Stackpool
Spouse: Olive PHILLIPS (1615-c. 1715)
Birth c. 1610
Death c. 1710 (age 99-100)

Child 2: Roger LORT

Name: Roger LORT
Sex: Male
Death 1664

Child 3: John LORT

Name: John LORT
Sex: Unknown

Note on Husband: Henry LORT

Note: Sheriff 1619.Henry had three sons: ROGER (who lived atStackpole); JOHN (who lived at Prickaston or Prickeston, near Castlemartin church - see Fenton, Pembrokeshire, 1903 ed., 223; today only a farmhouse), and SAMPSON, of East Moor, near Manorbier, who m. a daughter of Sir John Philipps of Picton. All three 'trimmed' dexterously during the Civil Wars. In 1642 Roger was on the Parliament's Militia Commission for Pembrokeshire, but in the same year he and Sampson were members of the 'Royalist Association,' and Roger a Royalist officer; both brothers signed several declarations on the king's side in 1643-4; Roger persuaded Tenby to admit a royalist garrison, and Sampson was one of the gentry who spoke of attacking Pembroke. In 1643 Stackpole was taken by Rowland Laugharne (q.v.), but Roger Lort was not there - he had gone up to London to make his peace with Parliament, and though in 1645 he was fined £1,000, the fine was never paid. Indeed, in 1645 all three brothers were in the Parliamentary 'Association' of west Wales. But it is clear that the Puritan leaders of west Wales had little faith in them; and in the same year it became obvious that all was not well between them and Poyer and Laugharne. This disagreement became important in 1647 when Poyer threw all three into gaol; Poyer's disobedience of Laugharne's order to release them was one of the causes of his downfall later on. They were released, and at the end of the wars, officially pardoned. Not that the Royalists either thought highly of them; one of these in 1661 (Laws, Little England, 356 = Camb. Register, i, 164) judged that Roger Lort was prepared to adhere to any principle or religion that would bring him wealth, and as for Sampson: 'he hath only the jaw of the Scriptural Sampson, yet he wrought much harm with it - he can pray as long as it profits him.' It is, however, fair to say that Sampson, of all the three brothers, most resembles a genuine Puritan.


1Barbara & David Withy