Jane Neville's tomb

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
jeffchip9

Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av jeffchip9 » 10 nov 2005 03:51:47

I posted my comments on the latest genealogical adventure of Doug
Richardson on another thread; I hope people will read it. But since
there seems to be a lot of interest in this topic, I am going to
reiterate my offer: I am going to contact the College Of Arms in
London and let them decide what the evidence means. There is a
solution here. It may not seem that way because people are trotting
out theories, speculation and everything but the proverbial kitchen
sink as "evidence" including stuff that apparently has since
disappeared.

Before I do this, though, I want to say in unambiguous terms what it is
that I am going to ask them to review. Specifically, it is a
photograph of a portion of a large scroll; the portion contains the
part of the scroll which has a drawing of Jane Neville's tomb with her
arms clearly displayed at her feet. The drawing was made in 1604 when
Francis Thynne, then Lancaster Herald, for some reason not stated in
the text I have, put together a pedigree for
Sir Henry Griffith, whose son had no male issue, and thus the manor of
Burton Agnes descended through a collateral female line. In 1948 the
owner of the scroll took it to the Society of Antiquaries of London,
and it was from them I obtained their evaulation and the copies of the
photos. Anybody can do this via email and a credit card.

The photo clearly shows the lozenge on Jane's arms. It is not
difficult to see and is in the conventional diamond shape. Both
reference books on heraldry I have say that this indicates either a
spinster or a widow. You don't have to go on a "Raiders of the Lost
Ark" search.

I do not think it is fair that I should have to defend my position
against evidence I have never seen, that nobody knows its current
location, and which cannot be evaluated by anybody. I'm not going to
get into the Harliean Soc., county rectors, etc. Let's do this the
right way.


Jeff Chipman

jeffchip9

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av jeffchip9 » 10 nov 2005 04:55:43

I'm going to try to describe what I'm looking at, so maybe people can
see it in their minds. I am not an expert, so here goes:
arms at Jane Neville's tomb

In the top left and lower right quarters are diagonal crosses.
The top right and lower left quarters do not have the same thing: the
top right quarter has a band horizontally through the middle; on the
top and bottom of the band are small crosses.
The lower left quarter has crosses only in the bottom half of the
quarter; again the quarter has a horizontal band through the middle;
above that appears to be the lozenge, which is partly obscured by a
shield in the center of the coat; the shield has spots in it and
overlays the arms of the crosses.
There is no doubt that the top right and lower left quarters are not
the same.
This doesn't seem to match the Hailwood description. I don't want to
mislead people, but I have tried to gather as much as I can on the
Griffiths and I have found it difficult to trace Zouche, Tyrwhitt, and
the Sancha de Ayala connection (her website says she only had two
children and Ann Blount wasn't one of them). The Somerville connection
seems well attested. After much "ink" spilled I still have no proof
that my Rhys d. 1489, and who had apparently his only child and heir in
1471 was a son of Catherine and John. Unless somewhere in the maze of
posts somebody has come up with this, I confess that I'm nonplussed. I
think somebody who really knows what they're doing should take a look
at this. I'm not denigrating all the people who have become involved
in these threads, but this is not what Hailwood described, and I think
it very likely that we have a case of some paint that was originally on
there no longer visible.

Jeff Chipman

Terry

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Terry » 10 nov 2005 05:46:02

The arms in the 1st and 3rd quarters, the upper left and lower right are
Neville, those in the upper right are Mar, and I would assume those in the
lower left are also, I have no idea what those others you described would
be.
Terry L. Mair
Mair's Photography
158 South 580 East
Midway, Utah 84049
435-654-3607
http://www.mairsphotography.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "jeffchip9" <jeffchip9@hotmail.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: Jane Neville's tomb


I'm going to try to describe what I'm looking at, so maybe people can
see it in their minds. I am not an expert, so here goes:
arms at Jane Neville's tomb

In the top left and lower right quarters are diagonal crosses.
The top right and lower left quarters do not have the same thing: the
top right quarter has a band horizontally through the middle; on the
top and bottom of the band are small crosses.
The lower left quarter has crosses only in the bottom half of the
quarter; again the quarter has a horizontal band through the middle;
above that appears to be the lozenge, which is partly obscured by a
shield in the center of the coat; the shield has spots in it and
overlays the arms of the crosses.
There is no doubt that the top right and lower left quarters are not
the same.
This doesn't seem to match the Hailwood description. I don't want to
mislead people, but I have tried to gather as much as I can on the
Griffiths and I have found it difficult to trace Zouche, Tyrwhitt, and
the Sancha de Ayala connection (her website says she only had two
children and Ann Blount wasn't one of them). The Somerville connection
seems well attested. After much "ink" spilled I still have no proof
that my Rhys d. 1489, and who had apparently his only child and heir in
1471 was a son of Catherine and John. Unless somewhere in the maze of
posts somebody has come up with this, I confess that I'm nonplussed. I
think somebody who really knows what they're doing should take a look
at this. I'm not denigrating all the people who have become involved
in these threads, but this is not what Hailwood described, and I think
it very likely that we have a case of some paint that was originally on
there no longer visible.

Jeff Chipman



jeffchip9

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av jeffchip9 » 10 nov 2005 06:07:12

Terry--
I thank you for your response. I want to say that I am completely
overwhelmed by the development of these threads. Doubtless there is
some great stuff in these posts. I notice that people are taking
another look at some of these old documents and unearthing more
information. That can only help. I never thought when I first posted
that it would get even a tenth of the responses that it has. Probably
you can sense some frustration. Apparently when Sancha de Ayala died
she left a will. A website devoted to her says she had only two
children, and Sir John Griffith's mother wasn't one of them (they say
there was only a son Thomas and a daughter Constance). I draw a blank
on Nicholas la Zouche. I cannot confirm Catherine Tyrwhitt's parents.
Some people think that Sir John's father was a Rhys and not Thomas, who
they say was a brother. From what I can tell I do think that Thomas
was John's father, but if John died in 1471 as claimed then I think he
must have been born around the mid 1390s instead of around 1380 as
claimed. 91 year old men during this period make me nervous. There
are many posts and the people who have posted have developed their
thinking over the course of them as new evidence is introduced. Current
thinking seems to be that Walter who married Jane was an adult at the
time of the nuptials. That would make him b. ca. 1415 or so, simply by
saying he was around 20 when he married and that was what I based my
estimate on. Has anyone quoted an IPM for this man, or for his father
Sir John (evidently there was one for him in 1471)? If Burton Agnes
was entailed would there even be any mention of the manor in the IPM?

Here's what Hailwood had to say about the Neville arms (I still don't
know why Agnes Constable's arms aren't at the Neville/Griffith tomb
where they ought to be if Walter was married twice):

"ii Quarterly: 1 and 4, (Gules) a saltire argent (Neville); 2 and 3
(Gules) a fess compony (or and sable) between six crosses patty
(argent) Boteler."

That's it. I don't have a problem with the Neville arms; the drawing
seems to be consistent with Hailwood's description.

It's the shield in the center, and the fact that the "Boteler" quarters
don't contain the same thing, as you can see from my rather inelegant
description above, and that some kind of angled device seems to be
beneath and partially obscured by the little shield in the center which
is displayed like the little one on the Griffith arms so I'm thinking
is this some arms she's displaying in pretence?

I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but David Faris's
"Plantagenet Ancestry second edition" p. 330 says Lionel Dymoke "was
married for the first time, probably in 1486, to Joan Griffith,
daughter and heiress of Rhys Griffith, Esq., of Stickford, co. Lincoln
(of baronial descent and descendant of Charlemagne)."

I think I can see the baronial descent from Somerville, but I do not
see the descent from Charlemagne; I wish I knew the source for the
Charles the Great reference. The notes do mention the research of
Marshall Kirk, but I know nothing of him.

I don't know if Doug has described Jane Neville's arms so that others
in the group see them clearly.
I think it would be a good idea to have somebody who is qualified look
at Jane Neville's arms and break them down into what they are. I think
it obvious that at one time there was some paint on them which is no
longer visible, but which was evidently still visible in 1604.

Jeff Chipman

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 10 nov 2005 06:47:38

In message of 10 Nov, "jeffchip9" <jeffchip9@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

The photo clearly shows the lozenge on Jane's arms. It is not
difficult to see and is in the conventional diamond shape. Both
reference books on heraldry I have say that this indicates either a
spinster or a widow.

This is ambiguous, like the definitions of lozenge in one or two of the
heraldic lexicons. It is not clear whether this lozenge is:

(1) what these arms are on,

Or

(2) A charge on the arms which are on a shield of some sorts.

I wonder if you can put a copy of the picture on the web somewhere? if
you don't have web access, I could put it on my site if you can make
and e-mail me an electronic file of it. Or even you could make a good
photocopy and post that to me (in which case contact me privately and I
will give my postal address).

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Gjest

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Gjest » 10 nov 2005 06:56:13

jeffchip9 schrieb:

Terry--
I thank you for your response. I want to say that I am completely
overwhelmed by the development of these threads. Doubtless there is
some great stuff in these posts. I notice that people are taking
another look at some of these old documents and unearthing more
information. That can only help. I never thought when I first posted
that it would get even a tenth of the responses that it has. Probably
you can sense some frustration.

Here's some frustration for you Jeff.

I have taken considerable time to respond patiently to your posts,
explaining your misunderstanding about the role of the lozenge in
heraldry, and you have ignored everything I have written.

Please go ahead and write to the College of Arms - although I have
little confidence that you will believe what they tell you, or that you
will not misinterpret their advice.

Their address is:

The College of Arms
Queen Victoria Street
London
EC4V 4BT

You should mark your letter to the attention of the Officer-in-waiting.

You should also expect to have to pay the scale hourly rate for the
advice.

Regards

Michael

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 10 nov 2005 07:10:39

In message of 10 Nov, "jeffchip9" <jeffchip9@hotmail.com> wrote:

I'm going to try to describe what I'm looking at, so maybe people can
see it in their minds. I am not an expert, so here goes:
arms at Jane Neville's tomb

In the top left and lower right quarters are diagonal crosses.
The top right and lower left quarters do not have the same thing: the
top right quarter has a band horizontally through the middle; on the
top and bottom of the band are small crosses.
The lower left quarter has crosses only in the bottom half of the
quarter; again the quarter has a horizontal band through the middle;
above that appears to be the lozenge, which is partly obscured by a
shield in the center of the coat; the shield has spots in it and
overlays the arms of the crosses.

A shield in the middle is a shield of pretence which indicates that the
armiger (a man) has married an heiress and their children will be able
to quarter her father's arms. The point here is that I have never seen
or heard of a shield of pretence on a lady's arms, it is specifically
something that only appears on a chap's arms. However these were still
early days of heraldry and the rules were no so clear cut as they are
now.

Certainly all the shields of pretence (that I have examined) on the
pre-1485 garter arms have been used in the above way, indicating that
there was a fairly strong rule on this even then.

So my question would then be: which chap is it who owns these arms?
Though it is still not clear where the lozenge is. (If it is a charge,
it might just be that it was a difference mark as Jane Neville's father
was a younger son. The Salisbury and Warwick Nevilles definitely used
a difference mark, a label though with different patterns on it, as they
too were of a cadet branch.)

<snip>

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Douglas Richardson

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 10 nov 2005 09:54:45

jeffchip9 wrote:

I do not think it is fair that I should have to defend my position
against evidence I have never seen, that nobody knows its current
location, and which cannot be evaluated by anybody. I'm not going to
get into the Harliean Soc., county rectors, etc. Let's do this the
right way.


Jeff Chipman

Dear Jeff ~

The "right way" to do this is to get a copy of Walter Griffith II's
tabula obituum dated 1511 in which he specifically names his parents,
Walter I and Agnes, and grandparents, John and Katherine. According to
Rev. Stebbing Shaw, the tabula obituum is recorded in Harleian MSS.
1077, f. 94a. You should be able to easily obtain a copy of this
document from the British Library.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Terry

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av Terry » 10 nov 2005 15:56:01

A shield on a shield can also be an inescutcheon, witch is a charge.
Terry L. Mair
Mair's Photography
158 South 580 East
Midway, Utah 84049
435-654-3607
http://www.mairsphotography.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: Jane Neville's tomb


In message of 10 Nov, "jeffchip9" <jeffchip9@hotmail.com> wrote:

I'm going to try to describe what I'm looking at, so maybe people can
see it in their minds. I am not an expert, so here goes:
arms at Jane Neville's tomb

In the top left and lower right quarters are diagonal crosses.
The top right and lower left quarters do not have the same thing: the
top right quarter has a band horizontally through the middle; on the
top and bottom of the band are small crosses.
The lower left quarter has crosses only in the bottom half of the
quarter; again the quarter has a horizontal band through the middle;
above that appears to be the lozenge, which is partly obscured by a
shield in the center of the coat; the shield has spots in it and
overlays the arms of the crosses.

A shield in the middle is a shield of pretence which indicates that the
armiger (a man) has married an heiress and their children will be able
to quarter her father's arms. The point here is that I have never seen
or heard of a shield of pretence on a lady's arms, it is specifically
something that only appears on a chap's arms. However these were still
early days of heraldry and the rules were no so clear cut as they are
now.

Certainly all the shields of pretence (that I have examined) on the
pre-1485 garter arms have been used in the above way, indicating that
there was a fairly strong rule on this even then.

So my question would then be: which chap is it who owns these arms?
Though it is still not clear where the lozenge is. (If it is a charge,
it might just be that it was a difference mark as Jane Neville's father
was a younger son. The Salisbury and Warwick Nevilles definitely used
a difference mark, a label though with different patterns on it, as they
too were of a cadet branch.)

snip

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org



John Brandon

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av John Brandon » 10 nov 2005 16:07:24

... witch is a charge.

"Who you calling 'witch,' witch?" (to quote the immortal Lawanda Page).

jeffchip9

Re: Jane Neville's tomb

Legg inn av jeffchip9 » 10 nov 2005 19:25:30

Tim, I appreciate your remarks. Why don't you email me at:

jeffchip9@hotmail.com

with your snail address and I will be happy to send you this photograph
of the drawing of the tomb of these people. You know a lot more about
this than I do and I think you could help resolve this matter. Unless
Doug has already done that. I can't post it on the web because I do
not own a scanner.

I don't know if anyone else has noted this, but in 1604 Sir Henry
Griffith claimed ancestry from the kings of England and other notables.
The link to Charlemagne, the kings of Scotland, and the anglo-saxon
kings of England comes to the Griffiths through the Merlay family (see
AR8, line 42) and I think is justified; although AR8 doesn't mention
mention the Somervilles, it does mention the father of Isabel de Merlay
(she m. Robert de Somerville). This must have been what David Faris
was referring to when he said that Rhys Griffith was of baronial and
Charlemagne descent.

I was disappointed to learn that the Sancha de Ayala ancestry is
disputed. The Sancha website does not claim John Griffith's mother,
but says Sancha had only two children, Thomas and Constance.

Doug, I see no reason to track down the tablet. Since you are the one
using it as evidence, I would think that would be your province.

This is an interesting family, and I hope when the dust settles
somebody with more patience than me will write it up. This would
appear to be a great family for the baronial project.

Jeff Chipman

Douglas Richardson

Tomb of Sir Walter Griffith (died 1481) and Joan Neville

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 10 nov 2005 20:20:55

Dear Jeff ~

I have a copy of the drawing of the alabaster table tomb of Sir Walter
Griffith II and his wife, Joan Neville in the church of Burton Agnes,
Yorkshire, which you kindly supplied me. I have studied and re-studied
the drawing. It shows two shields of arms which are placed on one end
of the table tomb, one displaying Sir Walter Griffith II's quarterings
and one displaying Joan Neville's quarterings.

The second shield is below the feet of Joan Neville's effigy and it
shows the arms of Neville quartered with Boteler. The Neville cross
(saltire) is clearly visible in the 1st and 4th quarters. The fesse
checky and the six cross formy for Boteler are clearly visible in the
2nd and 3rd quarters. So far, so good.

There appears to be a small shield of arms square in shape which lays
on top of the larger shield of Joan Neville's arms. I assume this is
what you are calling a lozenge. The arms on the smaller shield are not
distinct, but my guess is that they are vairy or checky, as the pattern
changes repeatedly through the arms. I might hazard a guess that this
square shield is actually an escutcheon which displayed the Ferrers
arms. The Ferrers arms are vairy.

The smaller shield of arms is definitely square in shape. It lays on
top of the larger shield in the center. It clearly is not a lozenge or
lozenge shaped. If it was a lozenge, it would be pointed on the top
and bottom creating a diamond looking object. It is not pointed. It
is straight on all four sides, forming a square.

Is this small square shield which has the ?vairy? arms what you are
calling a lozenge?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


..









jeffchip9 wrote:
Tim, I appreciate your remarks. Why don't you email me at:

jeffchip9@hotmail.com

with your snail address and I will be happy to send you this photograph
of the drawing of the tomb of these people. You know a lot more about
this than I do and I think you could help resolve this matter. Unless
Doug has already done that. I can't post it on the web because I do
not own a scanner.

I don't know if anyone else has noted this, but in 1604 Sir Henry
Griffith claimed ancestry from the kings of England and other notables.
The link to Charlemagne, the kings of Scotland, and the anglo-saxon
kings of England comes to the Griffiths through the Merlay family (see
AR8, line 42) and I think is justified; although AR8 doesn't mention
mention the Somervilles, it does mention the father of Isabel de Merlay
(she m. Robert de Somerville). This must have been what David Faris
was referring to when he said that Rhys Griffith was of baronial and
Charlemagne descent.

I was disappointed to learn that the Sancha de Ayala ancestry is
disputed. The Sancha website does not claim John Griffith's mother,
but says Sancha had only two children, Thomas and Constance.

Doug, I see no reason to track down the tablet. Since you are the one
using it as evidence, I would think that would be your province.

This is an interesting family, and I hope when the dust settles
somebody with more patience than me will write it up. This would
appear to be a great family for the baronial project.

Jeff Chipman

R. Battle

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av R. Battle » 11 nov 2005 00:47:29

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Nathaniel Taylor wrote:

<snip>
I thought Gary Roberts' _Ancestors of the American Presidents_
has charts showing a pretty broad descendancy from her to various
presidents, perhaps leading through more children than Thomas and
Constance? (I can't find it right now to check).
snip


It only follows descents through those two children, via 3 grandchildren
and 6 great-grandchildren (chart on p. 365 of the 1995 edn.).

-Robert Battle

John Higgins

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av John Higgins » 11 nov 2005 03:07:18

Of the other children of Sir Walter Blount and Sancha de Ayala besides
Thomas and Constance, two appear to have had descendants. Anne the wife of
Thomas Griffith has been discussed here and certainly has modern
descendants, including at least one line (and probably more) that can be
traced via RPA or MCA to Americans of the colonial era. Another son James
also had descendants at least into the 19th century (when the Croke book was
published), but I have no idea whether any of these leads to Americans.

----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Battle" <battle@u.washington.edu>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)


On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Nathaniel Taylor wrote:

snip
I thought Gary Roberts' _Ancestors of the American Presidents_
has charts showing a pretty broad descendancy from her to various
presidents, perhaps leading through more children than Thomas and
Constance? (I can't find it right now to check).
snip

It only follows descents through those two children, via 3 grandchildren
and 6 great-grandchildren (chart on p. 365 of the 1995 edn.).

-Robert Battle

Nathaniel Taylor

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av Nathaniel Taylor » 11 nov 2005 03:37:09

In article <004401c5e65c$10311900$5f7e8d47@labs.agilent.com>,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net ("John Higgins") wrote:

Of the other children of Sir Walter Blount and Sancha de Ayala besides
Thomas and Constance, two appear to have had descendants. Anne the wife of
Thomas Griffith has been discussed here and certainly has modern
descendants, including at least one line (and probably more) that can be
traced via RPA or MCA to Americans of the colonial era. Another son James
also had descendants at least into the 19th century (when the Croke book was
published), but I have no idea whether any of these leads to Americans.

Thanks (and thanks, Robert, for correcting my memory of the charts in
Gary's AAP). For what it's worth, I have seen allegations of male-line
descent from the younger son, James Blount, to more than one colonial
immigrant with the surname, but I have not evaluated them.

Nat Taylor

a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/

my children's 17th-century American immigrant ancestors:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltay ... rantsa.htm

Leo

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av Leo » 11 nov 2005 07:52:02

Dear John,

The descendants of Sancha de Ayala have many links with the USA.

Presidents George Washington, Williamn Henry Harrison, Gerald Ford, George
Herbert Bush and George W Bush

Carter Brxton who signed the Declaration of Independence

Francis Scott Key who wrote the Star Spangled Banner

Gateway Ancestors : Robert Abel III, Paul Abney, Alicia Arnold, Edward
Hutchinson, Josepoh Kirkbride, Judith Lewis, Mary Lewis, Gabriel Ludlow,
Roger Ludlow, Anne Marbury, Catherine Marbury, Elizabeth Marshall, Rev. John
Oxenbridge, John Price, Col. John Washington, Lawrence Washington, Mary
Wolseley

On Gen-Med Tim Powys-Lybbe, Malinda Jones, Gordon Banks, Brice Clagett, Nat
Taylor.

Hope this is of use?
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)


Of the other children of Sir Walter Blount and Sancha de Ayala besides
Thomas and Constance, two appear to have had descendants. Anne the wife
of
Thomas Griffith has been discussed here and certainly has modern
descendants, including at least one line (and probably more) that can be
traced via RPA or MCA to Americans of the colonial era. Another son James
also had descendants at least into the 19th century (when the Croke book
was
published), but I have no idea whether any of these leads to Americans.

----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Battle" <battle@u.washington.edu
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)


On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Nathaniel Taylor wrote:

snip
I thought Gary Roberts' _Ancestors of the American Presidents_
has charts showing a pretty broad descendancy from her to various
presidents, perhaps leading through more children than Thomas and
Constance? (I can't find it right now to check).
snip

It only follows descents through those two children, via 3 grandchildren
and 6 great-grandchildren (chart on p. 365 of the 1995 edn.).

-Robert Battle



R. Battle

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av R. Battle » 11 nov 2005 09:01:15

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Leo wrote:

Dear John,

The descendants of Sancha de Ayala have many links with the USA.

Presidents George Washington, Williamn Henry Harrison, Gerald Ford, George
Herbert Bush and George W Bush
snip


Also, according to the GBR's AAP (1995), pp. 365-368, Benjamin Harrison
(obvious, as he was a grandson of W. H. Harrison), Franklin Roosevelt,
Grover Cleveland, and Herbert Hoover (though his depends on the
conjectural descent of Gov. Thomas Dudley of Massachusetts).

-Robert Battle

Douglas Richardson

Re: Tomb of Sir Walter Griffith (died 1481) and Joan Neville

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 11 nov 2005 16:42:10

I need to amend my comments I posted previously. The small shield of
arms with the ?vairy? arms in the center of Jane Neville's arms is
square in shape, OR slightly curved on the bottom. It is not diamond
shaped (lozenge) as far as I can tell.

DR

Gordon Banks

Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 11 nov 2005 20:04:32

Also Franklin D. Roosevelt is a Marbury descendant. I always mention
him when people recoil from me when they find out I'm related to Bush.

On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 17:23 +1100, Leo wrote:
Dear John,

The descendants of Sancha de Ayala have many links with the USA.

Presidents George Washington, Williamn Henry Harrison, Gerald Ford, George
Herbert Bush and George W Bush

Carter Brxton who signed the Declaration of Independence

Francis Scott Key who wrote the Star Spangled Banner

Gateway Ancestors : Robert Abel III, Paul Abney, Alicia Arnold, Edward
Hutchinson, Josepoh Kirkbride, Judith Lewis, Mary Lewis, Gabriel Ludlow,
Roger Ludlow, Anne Marbury, Catherine Marbury, Elizabeth Marshall, Rev. John
Oxenbridge, John Price, Col. John Washington, Lawrence Washington, Mary
Wolseley

On Gen-Med Tim Powys-Lybbe, Malinda Jones, Gordon Banks, Brice Clagett, Nat
Taylor.

Hope this is of use?
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Higgins" <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)


Of the other children of Sir Walter Blount and Sancha de Ayala besides
Thomas and Constance, two appear to have had descendants. Anne the wife
of
Thomas Griffith has been discussed here and certainly has modern
descendants, including at least one line (and probably more) that can be
traced via RPA or MCA to Americans of the colonial era. Another son James
also had descendants at least into the 19th century (when the Croke book
was
published), but I have no idea whether any of these leads to Americans.

----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Battle" <battle@u.washington.edu
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Sancha de Ayala (was re: tomb of Sir Walter Griffith...)


On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Nathaniel Taylor wrote:

snip
I thought Gary Roberts' _Ancestors of the American Presidents_
has charts showing a pretty broad descendancy from her to various
presidents, perhaps leading through more children than Thomas and
Constance? (I can't find it right now to check).
snip

It only follows descents through those two children, via 3 grandchildren
and 6 great-grandchildren (chart on p. 365 of the 1995 edn.).

-Robert Battle



Gjest

Re: Tomb of Sir Walter Griffith (died 1481) and Joan Neville

Legg inn av Gjest » 11 nov 2005 21:21:12

Douglas Richardson schrieb:

I need to amend my comments I posted previously. The small shield of
arms with the ?vairy? arms in the center of Jane Neville's arms is
square in shape, OR slightly curved on the bottom. It is not diamond
shaped (lozenge) as far as I can tell.

DR

Thanks, Douglas. The "lozenge" proposition seems to be increasingly
without foundation for a number of reasons, but I look forward to
seeing a scanned copy when Jeff and Tim are able to post one.

Kind regards

Michael

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Tomb of Sir Walter Griffith (died 1481) and Joan Neville

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 11 nov 2005 22:50:18

In message of 11 Nov, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:

Thanks, Douglas. The "lozenge" proposition seems to be increasingly
without foundation for a number of reasons, but I look forward to
seeing a scanned copy when Jeff and Tim are able to post one.

Almost certainly Bill will be posting it as his copy is bound to arrive
before mine, having far fewer miles to travel.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»