Joan Waterton, wife of Lord Welles - a CP contradiction?

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Clagett, Brice

Joan Waterton, wife of Lord Welles - a CP contradiction?

Legg inn av Clagett, Brice » 05 jan 2005 00:21:02

This message reviews various versions of the parentage of Robert
Waterton (d. 1425), the father of Joan, Lady Welles.

Walker's article in Yorkshire Arch. Journal vol. 30 says that Robert
was the third son of William Waterton, of Waterton, and his wife,
Elizabeth Newmarch. (To compound the confusion, the article at
p. 368 says that Robert was third son of JOHN Waterton, but the
pedigree at the end shows that the statement on p. 368 was a care-
less error.) If the pedigree is accurate, Robert Waterton had royal
ancestry through his mother, daughter of Roger Mewmarch of Womers-
ley, Yorkshire, who was son of Adam Newmarch and his wife, Eliza-
beth, daughter of Sir Roger de Mowbray, 5th feudal Baron of Mowbray.

Hall's article in Thoresby Soc. Publications vol. 15 expresses doubt
as to where Robert fits into the family, but leans towards the view that
he was son of John Waterton, son of William Waterton (who accordi
ing to the Walker article married Elizabeth Newmarch). This seems
more comfortable chronologically, because according to the Walker
article William Waterton was alive though not yet of full age in 1316,
and Robert was not born until the 1360s.

Roskell's History of Parliament sub John Waterton says that it is
"demonstrably untrue" that Robert Waterton was son of William,
citing a royal pardon of 1398 which says Robert was son of Richard
Waterton of Waterton. Walker's article shows a Richard Waterton
(who may have lived at Waterton though he was not the owner of the
manor), fl. 1379, dead in 1392, who was a second cousin once removed
of William Waterton who (allegedly) married Elizabeth Newmarch.

ODNB sub Robert Waterton says that Robert was a son of William
Waterton and Elizabeth Newmarch, and was "apparently the cousin
of Sir Hugh Waterton." But the same oracle, sub Sir Hugh Waterton,
says that Hugh was the second son of William Waterton and Elizabeth
Newmarch -- and was a cousin of Robert! Obviously both entries
cannot be right.

What a mess. As far as I can see at the moment, the most likely
version is that of the 1398 pardon cited by Roskell. Perhaps Roskell is
a bit dogmatic concluding that it is "demonstrably untrue" that Robert
was son of William -- surely this would not be the only time that a
14th-century pardon was mistaken as to the name of the pardonee's
father -- but it seems to be the most concrete evidence that we have.

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»