At least three traditional published pedigrees of the family of Markham of Nottinghamshire include, in part, the following generations (shown without full details):
Sir John Markham, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (d. 1409), m. (1) Elizabeth [or Margaret] Cressy
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Elizabeth Burden
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Jane/Joan Daubeney
This last couple had 2 sons and 3 daughters, some of whom have currently living descendants.
A descent from this family shown in a recent publication cites at least one of the traditional pedigrees, but says that the second Sir Robert (m. Daubeney) was son, not grandson of Sir John the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (who should not be confused with another Sir John, his son by a 2nd wife, who was Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench).
Are the traditional pedigrees still correct, or has there been an unnoticed new discovery regarding this family? (The traiditional pedigree has also appeared, without comment, at least a couple of times in the Gen-Med/SGM archives) Or perhaps the newly published descent is wrong?
MARKHAM of Nottinghamshire
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Gaye
Re: MARKHAM of Nottinghamshire
I have two Markham daughters of Sir John Markham
Cotham Nottinghamshire marrying into my 'Bassano' line:
Elizabth b 1594 d abt 1631 = Daniel Bassano in 1615
and
Anne b abt 1599 = Edward Bassano 16 Feb 1615 Southwark
I would like the pedigree of these two ladies if anyone
can help please.
Many thanks,
GAYE - NZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 5:34 PM
Subject: MARKHAM of Nottinghamshire
full details):
Daubeney) was son, not grandson of Sir John the Chief Justice of the Common
Pleas (who should not be confused with another Sir John, his son by a 2nd
wife, who was Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench).
has also appeared, without comment, at least a couple of times in the
Gen-Med/SGM archives) Or perhaps the newly published descent is wrong?
>
Cotham Nottinghamshire marrying into my 'Bassano' line:
Elizabth b 1594 d abt 1631 = Daniel Bassano in 1615
and
Anne b abt 1599 = Edward Bassano 16 Feb 1615 Southwark
I would like the pedigree of these two ladies if anyone
can help please.
Many thanks,
GAYE - NZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 5:34 PM
Subject: MARKHAM of Nottinghamshire
At least three traditional published pedigrees of the family of Markham of
Nottinghamshire include, in part, the following generations (shown without
full details):
Sir John Markham, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (d. 1409), m. (1)
Elizabeth [or Margaret] Cressy
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Elizabeth Burden
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Jane/Joan Daubeney
This last couple had 2 sons and 3 daughters, some of whom have currently
living descendants.
A descent from this family shown in a recent publication cites at least
one of the traditional pedigrees, but says that the second Sir Robert (m.
Daubeney) was son, not grandson of Sir John the Chief Justice of the Common
Pleas (who should not be confused with another Sir John, his son by a 2nd
wife, who was Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench).
Are the traditional pedigrees still correct, or has there been an
unnoticed new discovery regarding this family? (The traiditional pedigree
has also appeared, without comment, at least a couple of times in the
Gen-Med/SGM archives) Or perhaps the newly published descent is wrong?
>
-
Gjest
Re: MARKHAM of Nottinghamshire
I have the dates 1399-1446 for the first Sir Robert, and c.1435-1495
for his son Sir Robert. The source was probably the HoP volumes as this
second Robert was an MP. (The most recent set is the most accurate and
covers 1386-1421; he is obviously outside that range, therefore from an
older work, and consequently treat as such.) Jane Daubeney seems to
have been his first wife. Anyway, these dates would support the
traditional view, but maybe there has indeed been some cause to revise
the relationships.
Incidentally, the new DNB clearly states that Sir John Markham
(d.1481), the younger son of Sir John (d.1409), was by the first
marriage (Elizabeth Cressy). IF the elder son (Robert) was b.1399, and
Elizabeth d.1400, then there isn't much room to play with- maybe she
died in childbirth. Or can we actually trust any information from the
DNB? There is rather a shortage of dates for the Sedgebrooke Markhams,
his descendants, in general. His son Thomas d.1491 insane, the latter's
son John dvp, leaving in turn a son Richard who was alive 1562.
"John Higgins" wrote:
for his son Sir Robert. The source was probably the HoP volumes as this
second Robert was an MP. (The most recent set is the most accurate and
covers 1386-1421; he is obviously outside that range, therefore from an
older work, and consequently treat as such.) Jane Daubeney seems to
have been his first wife. Anyway, these dates would support the
traditional view, but maybe there has indeed been some cause to revise
the relationships.
Incidentally, the new DNB clearly states that Sir John Markham
(d.1481), the younger son of Sir John (d.1409), was by the first
marriage (Elizabeth Cressy). IF the elder son (Robert) was b.1399, and
Elizabeth d.1400, then there isn't much room to play with- maybe she
died in childbirth. Or can we actually trust any information from the
DNB? There is rather a shortage of dates for the Sedgebrooke Markhams,
his descendants, in general. His son Thomas d.1491 insane, the latter's
son John dvp, leaving in turn a son Richard who was alive 1562.
"John Higgins" wrote:
At least three traditional published pedigrees of the family of Markham of Nottinghamshire include, in part, the following generations (shown without full details):
Sir John Markham, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (d. 1409), m. (1) Elizabeth [or Margaret] Cressy
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Elizabeth Burden
Their son was:
Sir Robert Markham, m. Jane/Joan Daubeney
This last couple had 2 sons and 3 daughters, some of whom have currently living descendants.
A descent from this family shown in a recent publication cites at least one of the traditional pedigrees, but says that the second Sir Robert (m. Daubeney) was son, not grandson of Sir John the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (who should not be confused with another Sir John, his son by a 2nd wife, who was Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench).
Are the traditional pedigrees still correct, or has there been an unnoticed new discovery regarding this family? (The traiditional pedigree has also appeared, without comment, at least a couple of times in the Gen-Med/SGM archives) Or perhaps the newly published descent is wrong?
-
John Higgins
Re: Markham of Nottinghamshire
"Robert O'Connor" <roconnor@es.co.nz> wrote in message news:db2lip$tr9$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
The "last couple" mentioned got cut out in the snip, but I assume we're talking about Sir Robert Markham and Joan Daubeney. My sources show only the single marriage for this Sir Robert, from which all 5 of his children were conceived. Who is this 2nd wife Alice?
""John Higgins"" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:002901c586a3$6434cba0$6562ac40@labs.agilent.com...
snip
This last couple had 2 sons and 3 daughters, some of whom have currently
living descendants.
Including, as it happens, my wife through their daughter Katherine, wife of
Sir Henry Bozom of Syreston, Notts.
Actually, I show this couple as being the parents of the three daughters.
It appears that the two sons were the issue of his second marriage to Alice?
The "last couple" mentioned got cut out in the snip, but I assume we're talking about Sir Robert Markham and Joan Daubeney. My sources show only the single marriage for this Sir Robert, from which all 5 of his children were conceived. Who is this 2nd wife Alice?
-
Robert O'Connor
Re: Markham of Nottinghamshire
""John Higgins"" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:004101c58894$4a49b910$8963ac40@labs.agilent.com...
snip
Correct
The Markham pedigree in the Visitation of Notts, p 24 indeed shows Sir
Robert with only one wife, she being Jane Daubeney.
However, the biography for Sir Robert in Wedgwood's 'History of Parliament,
1439-1509' p 574 gives him 2 wives, the first being Jane Daubeney, the
second being "Alice" (no parentage given). It appears from Wedgwood that at
Sir Robert's death, presumably in his IPM, his heir was found to be his son
John, then aged 40. John was described as son & heir of "Robert Markham
knt and Alice, late his wife". From this it would appear that Wedgwood
assumed that Sir Robert was married twice.
Perhaps locating the IPM of Sir Robert would assist?
Robert O'Connor
news:004101c58894$4a49b910$8963ac40@labs.agilent.com...
snip
The "last couple" mentioned got cut out in the snip, but I assume we're
talking
about Sir Robert Markham and Joan Daubeney.
Correct
My sources show only the single marriage for this Sir Robert, from which
all 5 of
his children were conceived. Who is this 2nd wife Alice?
The Markham pedigree in the Visitation of Notts, p 24 indeed shows Sir
Robert with only one wife, she being Jane Daubeney.
However, the biography for Sir Robert in Wedgwood's 'History of Parliament,
1439-1509' p 574 gives him 2 wives, the first being Jane Daubeney, the
second being "Alice" (no parentage given). It appears from Wedgwood that at
Sir Robert's death, presumably in his IPM, his heir was found to be his son
John, then aged 40. John was described as son & heir of "Robert Markham
knt and Alice, late his wife". From this it would appear that Wedgwood
assumed that Sir Robert was married twice.
Perhaps locating the IPM of Sir Robert would assist?
Robert O'Connor