Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)
baronetcy
The Brown baronetcy, of Richmond Hill in the County Palatine of Lancaster, was created in the Baronetage of the United Kingdom on 24 January 1863 for the merchant and banker William Brown, of Astrop House, Kings Sutton, Northamptonshire. The baronetcy was conferred in honour of his services to the city of Liverpool.
The 2nd Baronet was High Sheriff of Northamptonshire in 1873. The 4th Baronet was a deputy lieutenant of the North Riding of Yorkshire.
Brown baronets, of Richmond Hill (1863)
Sir William Brown, 1st Baronet (1784–1864)
Alexander Brown (1817–1849), only son of the 1st Baronet.
James Clifton Brown (1841–1917)
Sir Alexander Brown, 1st Baronet (1844–1922)
Sir William Richmond Brown, 2nd Baronet (1840–1906), eldest son of Alexander Brown and grandson of the 1st Baronet.
Frederick Richmond Brown (1868–1933)
Sir Melville Richmond Brown, 3rd Baronet (1866–1944)
Sir Charles Frederick Richmond Brown, 4th Baronet (1902–1995), son of Frederick Richmond Brown and grandson of the 2nd Baronet.
Sir George Francis Richmond Brown, 5th Baronet (born 1938).
The heir apparent to the baronetcy is Sam George Richmond Brown (born 1979), eldest son of the 5th Baronet.
Extended family
James Clifton Brown, second son of Alexander Brown, eldest son of the 1st Baronet, was Member of Parliament for Horsham.
The public source identifies “Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)” as baronetcy. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Brown, baronets and Richmond.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)”, the useful work is to connect “baronetcy” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 19, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q137455953. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1863, 1873, 1784 and 1864.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863) primary sources, Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863) archive and Brown research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Brown baronets of Richmond Hill (1863)” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.