Sunday 22 December 2024, 05:17:00 pm
Adds

Wedding deals do often imply the timeframe when you look at the hence amarriage should have taken place

admin February 02, 2024 0 Comment

step one. Yet, in genealogy and family history, all of us knowthat each rule there clearly was a different. An effective vexing point ofgenealogy would be the fact no one extremely knows how to use this new exclusions orrules with one decisive adjective eg always, perhaps, probably,more than likely, etc. It would be interesting in the event that around most other examples ofjointures are produced annually or two just after a well-known matrimony go out.

2. Can there be an extant dispensation to the relationship away from ElizabethClifford and you will Sir Ralph Bowes who have been 3rd cousins through Henry Fitzhugh,third Lord Fitzhugh otherwise fourth cousins, just after taken off the brand new 5th LordClifford? Who would narrow down the matrimony time.

Arthur

Presumably, if a good dispensation are found and you may offered, it might havebeen from the one of the pursuing the, and might come in this new correspondingregister guide, whether it survives:

Thomas Savage, Archbishop regarding York 1501-1507Christopher Bainbridge, Bishop regarding Durham 1507-1508, Archbishop of York1508-1514William Senhouse, Bishop off Durham 1502-1505Thomas Ruthall, Bishop off Durham 1509-1523Richard Leyburn, Bishop off Carlisle 1502-1508John Penny, Bishop regarding Carlisle 1509-1520

5. If your tenth Lord Clifford does marry in early 1487 [say January] andhas Elizabeth later on in this 12 months, does brand new chronology not functions?

John arms?

Elizabeth born into the later 1487, Henry produced for the 1488/9, Joan into the ,etc. filling in the labels of posting from . In the event the (a) thechronology still performs; and (b) her relationship section wasn’t lower; thenwe simply have the new 1505 pedigree away from Henry VII’s that is inside the oppositionto the latest conjecture you to she is actually a valid child.

six. Concerning your 1505 pedigree: Will be the Clifford daughters the latest onlyknown Henry VII relations excluded? Were there others? If that’s the case,would not you to definitely mirror improperly about file because the a source?

From contrasting I have produced from the new c.1505 Henry VII Interactions pedigreeswith the latest 1480-1500 Visitation of Northern pedigrees, which can be

Regarding c.1505 Connections pedigrees, this new Clifford youngsters are perhaps not listedin an effective Clifford pedigree, but alternatively regarding St. John pedigree. Since I’mnot used to the brand new St. John family unit members, pursuing the is the pointers asit appears throughout the c.1505 pedigree, due to the fact obtained from new 1834 Coll. Most readily useful. etGen. post. The fresh new phrasing from inside the quotations is strictly since it looks inthe 1834 post (pp. 310-311).

“Zero. XII.”Away from my Lord Welles child, Sir Richard Pole, Domme Verney, SirJohn St. John, along with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess from Somerset got three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she got “My personal Woman this new King’s Mom.” who had “The latest Queen.” whohad “Prince “From the “Sir Oliver Saint John, basic spouse.” she got 3 daus & dos sons:

A. “Edith, married to help you Geoffrey Rod regarding Buckinghamshire.” That they had:A1. “Sir Richard Pole, Knt. wedded into Woman Margaret, dau. from theDuke of Clarence.” They’d: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, wedded so you can Ralph Verney, Esq.” That they had: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[a special youngster, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He’d five students:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” who’d “Four daughters and you will oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. in order to Harry Lord Clifford.” They’d “Jane. Mabill.Henry, young buck and you may heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Elizabeth, married in order to Thomas Kent, Esq. of Lincolnshire.”B4. https://kissbrides.com/sv/costa-rican-brudar/ “A great Nun of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, married so you can Sir Richard Frognall.” That they had:C1. “Edmond Frognall and his brethren and sistren.” That have issueindicated, although not titled.C2. “E, married in order to Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Age, wedded first into the Lord Zouche; after toward LordScrope off Bolton.” Issue:D1. [because of the Zouche] ” Catesby.” That they had:”Elizabeth. George. John. William.”D2. [from the Scrope] ” Conyers.” Having issueindicated but not titled.

Margaret Duchess away from Somerset, by “Lionel Lord Welles, past husband.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. of K. Edward IV.” andthey had “E.”

Tags -

Similar Articles

  • Wedding deals do often imply the timeframe when you look at the hence amarriage should have taken place

    February 02, 2024 No Comments

  • Western Brides Mail order Brides become Regarding Usa

    February 02, 2024 No Comments

Video of the week

Categories