article about Rohese. This may explain his reluctance to reveal details.
However, I do not think that is acceptable. He wants us to accept blindly
_because he says so_ that Rohese is a _full_ sister of Faramond de Boulogne.
I noted your difficiulty in finding John's post so have forwarded it
below. He gives evidence from a Merton priory charter of Godfrey, bishop
of Winchester calling Pharamus his uncle. There is no bibliographical
reference for the charter and DR must have witheld it otherwise John
Ravilious would have >posted it. We will have to wait until DR's article
is produced and he discusses his sources and evidence properly, as John
simplistically assumes that 'avunculus' was used to mean maternal uncle at
the time. It did not - it could also mean mother's sister's husband,
mother's brother, father's sister's husband, father's brother and these
could relate to half siblings too etc., so we need more to support it. So
if I were you I'd wait until the evidence is published before amending
your database instead of rushing into adding it.
We have been told _John Ravilious provided the proof_ and now it seems the
proof depends totally on Douglas Richardson. Are we being sent on a whild
goose chase?
Best wishes as always
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia