Blount-Ayala
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Gjest
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
<<In a message dated 10/6/2007 7:33:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am trying to find Middletons in the period 1100-1600, and Yorkshire seems
likely, as
well as Suffolk. The Yorkshire Visitations I read online are incomplete as
far as I have
viewed, so far. Can anyone help with a full pedigree, dates, as I read in
the Mauleverer
posts?>>
--------------------------
Bill you have a lifetime? Five hundred years is far too much to cover. Can
you narrow your request down to a specific line?
Will
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am trying to find Middletons in the period 1100-1600, and Yorkshire seems
likely, as
well as Suffolk. The Yorkshire Visitations I read online are incomplete as
far as I have
viewed, so far. Can anyone help with a full pedigree, dates, as I read in
the Mauleverer
posts?>>
--------------------------
Bill you have a lifetime? Five hundred years is far too much to cover. Can
you narrow your request down to a specific line?
Will
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Brian Sharrock
Re: Kings, Queens, Queers, Bones and Bastards
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:EHPNi.297$6q5.1041@eagle.america.net...
Displaying his ignorance of maners, Hines top-posted the following; -
Hey Davey! Have you read any edition of the 'Times' recently? [You've become
rather quiet about your claims concerning Murdoch's teeny tiny Times!]
--
Brian
news:EHPNi.297$6q5.1041@eagle.america.net...
Displaying his ignorance of maners, Hines top-posted the following; -
The Universal Disclaimer of pogues and poguettes.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Brian Sharrock" <b.sharrock@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:QdPNi.3563$WX3.1962@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
{Luckily, I prefaced my paragraph with AIUI ... ]
Hey Davey! Have you read any edition of the 'Times' recently? [You've become
rather quiet about your claims concerning Murdoch's teeny tiny Times!]
--
Brian
-
Renia
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he *does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001) (Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
-
Gjest
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
<<In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.>>
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he *does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001) (Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.>>
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he *does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001) (Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Gjest
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
<<In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:35:16 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
Jimserac@gmail.com writes:
I would use "bombast" or "balderdash" but
"claptrap" has a nice ring to it.>>
----------------------
Hogwash? Codswallop? Monkeyspew?
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Jimserac@gmail.com writes:
I would use "bombast" or "balderdash" but
"claptrap" has a nice ring to it.>>
----------------------
Hogwash? Codswallop? Monkeyspew?
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Clay's edition of Dugdale's 1664-5 visitation is much more extensive than
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was
published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's
edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google
Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he
*does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and
finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001)
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware
of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert
Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Clay's edition of Dugdale's 1664-5 visitation is much more extensive than
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was
published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's
edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google
Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he
*does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and
finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001)
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware
of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert
Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Clay's edition of Dugdale's 1664-5 visitation is much more extensive than
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was
published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's
edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google
Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he
*does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and
finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001)
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware
of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert
Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Clay's edition of Dugdale's 1664-5 visitation is much more extensive than
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
the Davies edition of the same visitation published by the Surtees Society.
J. W. Clay was a very able genealogist and antiquarian. Although it's
apparently not on-line (not everything is on-line, you know!), the
three-volume set I mentioned earlier has been filmed by the FHL and should
be borrow-able through their branch system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was
published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's
edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google
Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
--------------------------------------------
Re: What is online, your first stop here
_http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb/index.php/Sources_
(http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources)
where Will Johnson isn't helpful in finding Vis Yorkshire 1664 but he
*does*
link further to
Chris Phillip's here
_http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/visitations.shtml_
(http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sou ... ions.shtml)
who says that
"_The visitation of the county of Yorke, begun in A. D. MDCLXV, and
finished
A. D. MDCLXVI by William Dugdale_
(http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/tex ... 7.0001.001)
(Making of America, University of Michigan)
Choice of images, PDF files or text, with a search facility (but beware
of
sometimes inaccurate text conversion); from the edition of Robert
Davies
(Surtees Society, vol. 36, 1859) "
So there ya go, it appears to be online
That genealogy begins only in the 16th century.
The earlier 1563-4 visitation, (available through
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk
at
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... retext.pdf
does show earlier Middletons (or Myddletons).
There is a great deal of Myddleton material available at the West
Yorkshire Archives at Sheepscar, Leeds.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Gjest
Re: English currency
Margaret the funny looking italic L is the symbol for "Pounds".
If he left them a thousand pounds then they were pretty well set. That was
quite a lot of money.
Will
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
If he left them a thousand pounds then they were pretty well set. That was
quite a lot of money.
Will
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Richard Casady
Re: Kings, Queens, Queers, Bones and Bastards
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 05:14:56 +0300, Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr>
wrote:
Maybe. Didn't they invent the committee to muddy the waters regarding
responsibility?
Casady
wrote:
Responsibility is never a murky concept
Maybe. Didn't they invent the committee to muddy the waters regarding
responsibility?
Casady
-
Gjest
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Dear Fellow Posters,
Diana was only another signifigant player in
the long Royal parade.George IV and his wife Caroline of Brunswick made quite
as much asses of themselves as George philandered and manuvered about seeking
a divorce while she tried to block him even though she had affairs of her own.
Back further, Charles II had many mistresses yet valued none more highly
than his consort Catherine of Braganza. socially she always came first, as She
should have.
Even further back James IV, King of Scots is said to have given one of his
mistresses Margaret Drummond a wedding ring and his refusal to enter into a
marriage treaty with Henry VII, King of England to marry his daughter Margaret
Tudor is said to have cost Margaret Drummond and a couple of her sisters their
lives as they may well have been poisoned. After which the marriage treaty was
concluded.
Eleanor of Aquitaine was one tough woman. She rode with her first husband
King Louis VII of France on the 2nd Crusade in full armor. After their divorce
and her marriage to King Henry II of England She led a revolt againest him and
was eventually captured and imprisoned for some years. It is clear though that
if She did imprison Henry II`s mistress Rosamund Clifford (if She did exist)
it was not over William Longespee whom She had brought up with her own children
as well as Henry II`s other bastard son Geoffrey the monk. William Longsee`s
actual mother Ida (apparently de Tony) in fact was not persecuted by Eleanor
as She was married to Roger le Bigod, 2nd Earl of Norfolk long before that
Queen`s death.
Finally, another very OT royal holds up very well againest Diana Spencer,
Princess of Wales, Grce Kelley, the American born movie star who married Prince
Rainier III of Monaco. Grace had an abundance of class and style while still
being very much royal. She had her causes She promoted as every Recent British
Royal has also done since long before Diana Spencer was heard of by most of
the world. She had three Children by Rainier III, the present Prince Albert II,
Princess Caroline and Princess Stephanie. all have large social
consciousnesses though Queen Elizabeth II had She had to put up with Stephanie`s antics
would quite possibly now be obliged to wear a wig as she`d of torn all her hair
out.Grace , unfortunately also died way too soon in a automotive accident.
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Diana was only another signifigant player in
the long Royal parade.George IV and his wife Caroline of Brunswick made quite
as much asses of themselves as George philandered and manuvered about seeking
a divorce while she tried to block him even though she had affairs of her own.
Back further, Charles II had many mistresses yet valued none more highly
than his consort Catherine of Braganza. socially she always came first, as She
should have.
Even further back James IV, King of Scots is said to have given one of his
mistresses Margaret Drummond a wedding ring and his refusal to enter into a
marriage treaty with Henry VII, King of England to marry his daughter Margaret
Tudor is said to have cost Margaret Drummond and a couple of her sisters their
lives as they may well have been poisoned. After which the marriage treaty was
concluded.
Eleanor of Aquitaine was one tough woman. She rode with her first husband
King Louis VII of France on the 2nd Crusade in full armor. After their divorce
and her marriage to King Henry II of England She led a revolt againest him and
was eventually captured and imprisoned for some years. It is clear though that
if She did imprison Henry II`s mistress Rosamund Clifford (if She did exist)
it was not over William Longespee whom She had brought up with her own children
as well as Henry II`s other bastard son Geoffrey the monk. William Longsee`s
actual mother Ida (apparently de Tony) in fact was not persecuted by Eleanor
as She was married to Roger le Bigod, 2nd Earl of Norfolk long before that
Queen`s death.
Finally, another very OT royal holds up very well againest Diana Spencer,
Princess of Wales, Grce Kelley, the American born movie star who married Prince
Rainier III of Monaco. Grace had an abundance of class and style while still
being very much royal. She had her causes She promoted as every Recent British
Royal has also done since long before Diana Spencer was heard of by most of
the world. She had three Children by Rainier III, the present Prince Albert II,
Princess Caroline and Princess Stephanie. all have large social
consciousnesses though Queen Elizabeth II had She had to put up with Stephanie`s antics
would quite possibly now be obliged to wear a wig as she`d of torn all her hair
out.Grace , unfortunately also died way too soon in a automotive accident.
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
The sequence of three Middletons which you list below does appear in the
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe.
I notice that much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family Index.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
________
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe.
I notice that much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family Index.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600: with thanks to all responses, I am taking
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire
properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir
William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the sire
de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had
been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter de
Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p. 398.
]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its
descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with
the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I
understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married the
sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to
some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
*******************************
--- WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 7:33:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am trying to find Middletons in the period 1100-1600, and Yorkshire
seems
likely, as
well as Suffolk. The Yorkshire Visitations I read online are
incomplete as
far as I have
viewed, so far. Can anyone help with a full pedigree, dates, as I read
in
the Mauleverer
posts?
--------------------------
Bill you have a lifetime? Five hundred years is far too much to cover.
Can
you narrow your request down to a specific line?
Will
************************************** See what's new at
http://www.aol.com
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the
message
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo!
Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
David Hesketh
RE: Battle of Agincourt Roll of Honour - Regional Makeup
A special thank you to Derek Howard and Nat. This gives me a lot to go on.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600: with thanks to all responses, I am taking
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the sire de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter de Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p. 398.]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married the sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
*******************************
--- WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the sire de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter de Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p. 398.]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married the sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
*******************************
--- WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 7:33:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am trying to find Middletons in the period 1100-1600, and Yorkshire seems
likely, as
well as Suffolk. The Yorkshire Visitations I read online are incomplete as
far as I have
viewed, so far. Can anyone help with a full pedigree, dates, as I read in
the Mauleverer
posts?
--------------------------
Bill you have a lifetime? Five hundred years is far too much to cover. Can
you narrow your request down to a specific line?
Will
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
-
David Hesketh
RE: English currency
To Margaret - I've often tried to work out the answer too.
This site (http://www.measuringworth.com/) gives a useful description of the
different methods of calculating relative worth. The main problem is that
you can measure an increase in value of cash in a number of ways. You could
look at the price of everyday goods like flour and milk and compare them
over time. However, these methods seem to ignore improvements in efficiency
and decrease in cost relative to total income. Another method might be to
calculate what percentage of the population is richer than your ancestor and
compare that to today's levels. A bit difficult when you don't know all the
numbers!
Just to add to Chris Dickinson's markers I've detailed the value of various
items in a few inventories I have from 1664.
LIVESTOCK
A milking cow was worth around £3
A weened pig was worth 10s (£0.5)
Notes: According to (http://www.fwi.co.uk/StaticPages/daicattrends.htm), the
average price of a milking cow in the first quarter of 2007 was £737 and a
weened pig was £106.
Implied multiplier: 212-246
LUXURY ITEMS
A brass clock was worth around £2
Notes: A brass clock in 1664 was probably considered akin to one of the top
personal computers available now (see
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa072801a.htm). Let's assume a
top computer is worth around £2000
Implied multiplier: 1000
BEDS
A chaff bed with chaff bolster 4s (£0.2)
One featherbed and a bolster with two pillows being 60 pound waight att sixe
pence the pound £1 10s (£1.5)
Notes: I've just come back from a shopping trip looking at beds. The
cheapest we could find was for around £100. This would compare well with
the chaff bed. We can't tell how nice the featherbed was back in 1664.
However, it is 7.5 times the price of the chaff bed. £750 would buy you a
reasonably nice bed today.
Implied multiplier: 500
So, your £1000 to each daughter was the equivalent of between £212k and £1m
according to these measures. This differs quite significantly from the 100x
multiplier you get if you just look at the Retail Prices Index.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Chris Dickinson
Sent: 07 October 2007 14:39
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: English currency
Margaret Bauer wrote:
#1000 to each of his daughters. That is a huge amount of money in 1649.
When my ancestor, William Dickinson, purchased his neighbour's (nowadays
about 70 acres) farm, he paid #90 in 1647 and a further #185 in 1654. So
each #1000 would have bought 4 farms with 250 acres of good farmland.
[OK - so 250 acres ain't large by Australian standards, but substantial in
England!]
Chris
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
This site (http://www.measuringworth.com/) gives a useful description of the
different methods of calculating relative worth. The main problem is that
you can measure an increase in value of cash in a number of ways. You could
look at the price of everyday goods like flour and milk and compare them
over time. However, these methods seem to ignore improvements in efficiency
and decrease in cost relative to total income. Another method might be to
calculate what percentage of the population is richer than your ancestor and
compare that to today's levels. A bit difficult when you don't know all the
numbers!
Just to add to Chris Dickinson's markers I've detailed the value of various
items in a few inventories I have from 1664.
LIVESTOCK
A milking cow was worth around £3
A weened pig was worth 10s (£0.5)
Notes: According to (http://www.fwi.co.uk/StaticPages/daicattrends.htm), the
average price of a milking cow in the first quarter of 2007 was £737 and a
weened pig was £106.
Implied multiplier: 212-246
LUXURY ITEMS
A brass clock was worth around £2
Notes: A brass clock in 1664 was probably considered akin to one of the top
personal computers available now (see
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa072801a.htm). Let's assume a
top computer is worth around £2000
Implied multiplier: 1000
BEDS
A chaff bed with chaff bolster 4s (£0.2)
One featherbed and a bolster with two pillows being 60 pound waight att sixe
pence the pound £1 10s (£1.5)
Notes: I've just come back from a shopping trip looking at beds. The
cheapest we could find was for around £100. This would compare well with
the chaff bed. We can't tell how nice the featherbed was back in 1664.
However, it is 7.5 times the price of the chaff bed. £750 would buy you a
reasonably nice bed today.
Implied multiplier: 500
So, your £1000 to each daughter was the equivalent of between £212k and £1m
according to these measures. This differs quite significantly from the 100x
multiplier you get if you just look at the Retail Prices Index.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Chris Dickinson
Sent: 07 October 2007 14:39
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: English currency
Margaret Bauer wrote:
Can anyone please tell me what amount of money the following was in
England at about 1649 please, it states the following....
"Leaving by his Will, 1000 (alongside the thousand there is then an
italics L) to each of his daughters .... "
#1000 to each of his daughters. That is a huge amount of money in 1649.
When my ancestor, William Dickinson, purchased his neighbour's (nowadays
about 70 acres) farm, he paid #90 in 1647 and a further #185 in 1654. So
each #1000 would have bought 4 farms with 250 acres of good farmland.
[OK - so 250 acres ain't large by Australian standards, but substantial in
England!]
Chris
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1055 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
10:24
-
Chris Dickinson
Re: English currency
David Hesketh wrote:
<snip>
Yes; as you implied in the earlier snipped part, this is because an
inflation basket has, as its central constituents, the two sets of items
that modern capitalism has most reduced in cost - food and clothing. An
RPI-based index is necessarily going to underestimate historic values in
other areas by many multiples.
Of course, property values are subject to their own distortions. The
seventeenth-century figures I mentioned were of property in Cumberland, and
so may be inconsistent with the expectations and opportunities available to
the heiresses under discussion. And, as US property-owners have recently
discovered, property values are subject to major ups and downs in a narrow
timeframe.
Chris
<snip>
So, your £1000 to each daughter was the equivalent of between £212k and
£1m
according to these measures. This differs quite significantly from the
100x
multiplier you get if you just look at the Retail Prices Index.
Yes; as you implied in the earlier snipped part, this is because an
inflation basket has, as its central constituents, the two sets of items
that modern capitalism has most reduced in cost - food and clothing. An
RPI-based index is necessarily going to underestimate historic values in
other areas by many multiples.
Of course, property values are subject to their own distortions. The
seventeenth-century figures I mentioned were of property in Cumberland, and
so may be inconsistent with the expectations and opportunities available to
the heiresses under discussion. And, as US property-owners have recently
discovered, property values are subject to major ups and downs in a narrow
timeframe.
Chris
-
wjhonson
Re: Genealogics : Linking the Cradocks
Eve has graciously pointed out in private that I have a typo in the
above.
The maiden name of Barbara, wife of Henry Slingsby the first bart was
of course Bellsyse as the source I linked states. Note "Bellasyne" as
I mistyped above.
Will
above.
The maiden name of Barbara, wife of Henry Slingsby the first bart was
of course Bellsyse as the source I linked states. Note "Bellasyne" as
I mistyped above.
Will
-
wjhonson
Re: Genealogics : Linking the Cradocks
On Oct 7, 12:42 pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Bellasyse... Not "Bellasyne" as I mistyped (and apparently am still
doing!)
Will recte Johnson
Eve has graciously pointed out in private that I have a typo in the
above.
The maiden name of Barbara, wife of Henry Slingsby the first bart was
of course Bellsyse as the source I linked states. Note "Bellasyne" as
I mistyped above.
Will
Bellasyse... Not "Bellasyne" as I mistyped (and apparently am still
doing!)
Will recte Johnson
-
John Briggs
Re: Kings, Queens, Queers, Bones and Bastards
Richard Casady wrote:
No - that's the firing squad
--
John Briggs
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 05:14:56 +0300, Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr
wrote:
Responsibility is never a murky concept
Maybe. Didn't they invent the committee to muddy the waters regarding
responsibility?
No - that's the firing squad
--
John Briggs
-
Gjest
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Dear Mean Preist,
Genealogy is a Useless Art or Useless Discipline
not a Useless Science as You contend as it is not a science useless or
otherwise. Speaking of Useless, could anything possibly be more useless than going on
a Genealogical forum and informing its` membership They are wasting their
time in pursuing their pet project. So go hear Confession and have a nice day.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Genealogy is a Useless Art or Useless Discipline
not a Useless Science as You contend as it is not a science useless or
otherwise. Speaking of Useless, could anything possibly be more useless than going on
a Genealogical forum and informing its` membership They are wasting their
time in pursuing their pet project. So go hear Confession and have a nice day.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
The visitation pedigree gives John Middleton of Stockeld and Alice
Mauleverer of Beamsley (for whom no dates are given) one son William (will
dated 18 June, proved 2 Dec 1474) who mar. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen
Hamerton of Hamerton and Wigglesworth. Four sons are listed for William and
Margaret; all of them married and at least three had children, so the
pedigree expands quickly at this point (5 more pages of details). However,
at least the senior line of the family (from the eldest son of William and
Margaret) is shown in the 1563/4 visitation which, as noted earlier in this
thread, is on-line (via the Univ. of Iowa). There are several Middleton
pedigrees in this visitation - the one you want starts on p. 210. Be aware
that this particular visitation has a pretty bad reputation as to accuracy -
so use with care. Also, it doesn't go as far forward as the Clay/Dugdale
version - but it may be a start for you.
Keep in mind that the visitation pedigrees, especially in the earlier
generations, frequently ignore any daughters, so there may well be more
children for both of these couples.
The will mentioned above for William Middleton is cited as being published
in "Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
________
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Mauleverer of Beamsley (for whom no dates are given) one son William (will
dated 18 June, proved 2 Dec 1474) who mar. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen
Hamerton of Hamerton and Wigglesworth. Four sons are listed for William and
Margaret; all of them married and at least three had children, so the
pedigree expands quickly at this point (5 more pages of details). However,
at least the senior line of the family (from the eldest son of William and
Margaret) is shown in the 1563/4 visitation which, as noted earlier in this
thread, is on-line (via the Univ. of Iowa). There are several Middleton
pedigrees in this visitation - the one you want starts on p. 210. Be aware
that this particular visitation has a pretty bad reputation as to accuracy -
so use with care. Also, it doesn't go as far forward as the Clay/Dugdale
version - but it may be a start for you.
Keep in mind that the visitation pedigrees, especially in the earlier
generations, frequently ignore any daughters, so there may well be more
children for both of these couples.
The will mentioned above for William Middleton is cited as being published
in "Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
John Higgins wrote:
"The sequence of three Middletons which you list below does appear in the
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe. I notice
that
much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the
family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might
be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family
Index."
Much thanks, John Higgins. May I beg your indulgence, for the benefit of
Middleton pedigree? Specifically, I am interested in the family of,
accepting
they are Middleton pedigree, as you have confirmed:
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,
married.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Is that too much to transcribe?
Thanks,
Bill
PS in the meantime, I will attempt to locate the sources
you so graciously put forth.
**********************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600: with thanks to all responses, I am taking
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire
properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir
William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the
sire
de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had
been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter
de
Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p.
398.
]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its
descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with
the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I
understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married
the
sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to
some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
John Higgins wrote:
"The sequence of three Middletons which you list below does appear in the
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe. I notice that
much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family Index."
Much thanks, John Higgins. May I beg your indulgence, for the benefit of
Middleton pedigree? Specifically, I am interested in the family of, accepting
they are Middleton pedigree, as you have confirmed:
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,
married.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Is that too much to transcribe?
Thanks,
Bill
PS in the meantime, I will attempt to locate the sources
you so graciously put forth.
**********************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
John Higgins wrote:
"The sequence of three Middletons which you list below does appear in the
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe. I notice that
much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family Index."
Much thanks, John Higgins. May I beg your indulgence, for the benefit of
Middleton pedigree? Specifically, I am interested in the family of, accepting
they are Middleton pedigree, as you have confirmed:
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,
married.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Is that too much to transcribe?
Thanks,
Bill
PS in the meantime, I will attempt to locate the sources
you so graciously put forth.
**********************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600: with thanks to all responses, I am taking
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire
properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir
William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the sire
de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had
been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter de
Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p. 398.
]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its
descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with
the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I
understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married the
sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to
some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
-
Kay Allen
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_priests@yahoo.com> wrote:
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_priests@yahoo.com> wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-
Charles McNett
RE: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Victor,
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell them. Mostly they find the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So don't go for archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist who does genealogy for my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_priests@yahoo.com> wrote:
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell them. Mostly they find the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So don't go for archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist who does genealogy for my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_priests@yahoo.com> wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
CE Wood
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Hmmm....no profits?......Tell that to the Greeks and many others.
Heard of Elgin?
CE Wood
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett" <cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
Heard of Elgin?
CE Wood
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett" <cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
Victor,
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell them. Mostly they find the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So don't go for archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist who does genealogy for my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_prie...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Charles McNett
RE: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Nope, not any more. That was generations ago. Today in the US you can go
to jail for collecting artifacts on federal property. I expect the same
thing is true in most countries. And Britain, for instance, is constantly
in trouble for artifacts collected by people like Elgin from the countries
where they worked.
Charlie
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of CE Wood
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:40 PM
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Hmmm....no profits?......Tell that to the Greeks and many others.
Heard of Elgin?
CE Wood
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett" <cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
to jail for collecting artifacts on federal property. I expect the same
thing is true in most countries. And Britain, for instance, is constantly
in trouble for artifacts collected by people like Elgin from the countries
where they worked.
Charlie
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of CE Wood
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:40 PM
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
Hmmm....no profits?......Tell that to the Greeks and many others.
Heard of Elgin?
CE Wood
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett" <cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
Victor,
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell them. Mostly they find
the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So don't go for
archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist who does genealogy for
my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_prie...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Dora Smith
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll bite. Or I would if that hadn't been posted to the usenet newsgroup
that's gatewayed with this list.
Usenet is largely made up of very rude, mindless people engaged in the worst
sort of verbal jousting matches. Usually on this one they atleast joust
about genealogy, but occasionally we have to be visited by people just
surfing for places to say something rude about whatever someone else is
talking about.
Yours,
Dora Smith
Austin, TX
tiggernut24@yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kay Allen" <allenk@pacbell.net>
To: "Victor Smootbank" <mean_priests@yahoo.com>; <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1056 - Release Date: 10/7/2007 6:12 PM
that's gatewayed with this list.
Usenet is largely made up of very rude, mindless people engaged in the worst
sort of verbal jousting matches. Usually on this one they atleast joust
about genealogy, but occasionally we have to be visited by people just
surfing for places to say something rude about whatever someone else is
talking about.
Yours,
Dora Smith
Austin, TX
tiggernut24@yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kay Allen" <allenk@pacbell.net>
To: "Victor Smootbank" <mean_priests@yahoo.com>; <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1056 - Release Date: 10/7/2007 6:12 PM
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Much thanks for your prompt reply. I have seen the page 210ff. Middleton
pedigree. I agree with all your points about this pedigree, as I have seen
less authoritative versions of it elsewhere. I do believe my interest will
involve looking at the wills of John Middleton of Stockeld and Alice
Mauleverer. My surmise is that, as you aptly put it, daughters being
ignored, there were daughters born of this union: the wills will probably
settle the question. I apologize for being elliptical about this at this
point, but I am in essence agreeing with you and assume that the Clay
version of Dugdale probably will not settle the issue unless daughters
are mentioned therein, and you presented the version I have seen with
son William married to Margaret Hamerton and no daughters mentioned
in the Middleton pedigrees extant.
My job seems clear: and hope someone can present me with the wills.
Unfortunately, I do not live in Yorkshire, nor in England, but far far away.
This is probably the appropriate forum for them to appear. I also would
solicit chancery cases, if any are extant about these named individuals.
Thanks,
Bill
***************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
pedigree. I agree with all your points about this pedigree, as I have seen
less authoritative versions of it elsewhere. I do believe my interest will
involve looking at the wills of John Middleton of Stockeld and Alice
Mauleverer. My surmise is that, as you aptly put it, daughters being
ignored, there were daughters born of this union: the wills will probably
settle the question. I apologize for being elliptical about this at this
point, but I am in essence agreeing with you and assume that the Clay
version of Dugdale probably will not settle the issue unless daughters
are mentioned therein, and you presented the version I have seen with
son William married to Margaret Hamerton and no daughters mentioned
in the Middleton pedigrees extant.
My job seems clear: and hope someone can present me with the wills.
Unfortunately, I do not live in Yorkshire, nor in England, but far far away.
This is probably the appropriate forum for them to appear. I also would
solicit chancery cases, if any are extant about these named individuals.
Thanks,
Bill
***************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
The visitation pedigree gives John Middleton of Stockeld and Alice
Mauleverer of Beamsley (for whom no dates are given) one son William (will
dated 18 June, proved 2 Dec 1474) who mar. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen
Hamerton of Hamerton and Wigglesworth. Four sons are listed for William and
Margaret; all of them married and at least three had children, so the
pedigree expands quickly at this point (5 more pages of details). However,
at least the senior line of the family (from the eldest son of William and
Margaret) is shown in the 1563/4 visitation which, as noted earlier in this
thread, is on-line (via the Univ. of Iowa). There are several Middleton
pedigrees in this visitation - the one you want starts on p. 210. Be aware
that this particular visitation has a pretty bad reputation as to accuracy -
so use with care. Also, it doesn't go as far forward as the Clay/Dugdale
version - but it may be a start for you.
Keep in mind that the visitation pedigrees, especially in the earlier
generations, frequently ignore any daughters, so there may well be more
children for both of these couples.
The will mentioned above for William Middleton is cited as being published
in "Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
John Higgins wrote:
"The sequence of three Middletons which you list below does appear in the
middle of the pedigree I cited in Clay's edition of Dugdale's visitation,
although without the dates (which are probably guesses anyway - from AF?)
and with a different wife for the middle Middleton (Alice Stapleton, not
Middleton). The pedigree includes 6 generations prior to your Sir Thomas
(including Sir Peter and Eustacia Plumpton, who were the parents of Sir
Thomas), as well as ten generations descended from John Stapleton and his
wife Alice Mauleverer. Obviously, far too much to transcribe. I notice
that
much of the Middleton pedigree appears on the Stirnet website
(now, unfortunately, pay-to-view), and its sources indicate that the
family
did appear in at least early editions of Burke's Landed Gentry. It might
be
worth checking out the BLG possibilities - start with Burke's Family
Index."
Much thanks, John Higgins. May I beg your indulgence, for the benefit of
Middleton pedigree? Specifically, I am interested in the family of,
accepting
they are Middleton pedigree, as you have confirmed:
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,
married.Alice Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Is that too much to transcribe?
Thanks,
Bill
PS in the meantime, I will attempt to locate the sources
you so graciously put forth.
**********************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Re: Middleton 1100-1600: with thanks to all responses, I am taking
them one at a time, finding them all full of information I must read
thoroughly, much appreciated:
Douglas Hickling wrote in *Which John De Mowbray was the Brother
of Christiana de Plumpton*: Part I: subhead: "Sir William de Plumpton,
son of Sir Robert de Plumpton and Lucy de Ros": at:
http://medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources ... ana1.shtml
the following:
"The Plumptons had since ancient times held most of their Yorkshire
properties
as tenants of the Percys, and in 1295, Sir Robert de Plumpton, Sir
William's
grandfather, adoped 'the armorial insignia of his lord parmount, "the
sire
de Percy,"'
slightly modified. [Stapleton, pp. xvii-xix.] William de Plumpton had
been
knighted by 19 September 1328 when he and his brother-in-law Sir Peter
de
Middleton
witnessed a charter by Sir Henry Percy. [CPR Edward III 1327-1330, p.
398.
]"
Thus, this is the Middleton line I am interested in: assuming its
descendants
married into the Mauleverer line, the latter then apparently ended with
the
Middletons, and any descendants thence were Middletons. From what I
understand
from the research of Douglas Hickling, Sir Peter de Middleton married
the
sister
of Sir William de Plumpton, who was Eustacia de Plumpton. According to
some
pedigrees I have seen, these were the following Middletons:
Sir Thomas Middleton,c.1321,Plumpton,m.Eliza Gramary,c.1325,Yorkshire
Sir Nicolas Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Middleton,c.1347,Yorkshire
John Middleton[Sir?],c.1430,Yorkshire,m.Alice
Maulereverer,c.1434,Yorkshire
Can anyone confirm the above pedigree from Sir Peter de Plumpton, and if
confirmed, can anyone provide additional descendants.
Thanks,
Bill
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
-
Kay Allen
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
And I would add to Charlie's commentary that Lord
Elgin was a collrctor, not an archaeologist.
Wnfortunately, this is a breed which is not yet
extinct.
K
--- CE Wood <wood_ce@msn.com> wrote:
Elgin was a collrctor, not an archaeologist.
Wnfortunately, this is a breed which is not yet
extinct.
K
--- CE Wood <wood_ce@msn.com> wrote:
Hmmm....no profits?......Tell that to the Greeks and
many others.
Heard of Elgin?
CE Wood
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett"
cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
Victor,
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make
private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they
have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell
them. Mostly they find the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it
try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So
don't go for archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist
who does genealogy for my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com] On
Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I
do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have
the
richness of family history. the friends I have
made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing
the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary
gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_prie...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the
word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject
and
the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-
Gjest
Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
On Oct 7, 5:25 pm, "Charles McNett" <cmcn...@aol.com> wrote:
I concur. Archaeology never made me rich, either. So I stopped doing
that & went into writing poetry for the money. :\
Victor,
Sorry, but archeologists are not allowed to make private collections of
artifacts for themselves or sell artifacts they have found!!!!! And few
ever find "hidden treasures" if they could sell them. Mostly they find the
broken debris that people discard -- and from it try to reconstruct their
lives.
I have never met a rich archaeologist, either. So don't go for archaeology
to get rich in money. I am a retired archeologist who does genealogy for my
own benefit as so nicely described by Kay.
Charlie McNett
Professor Emeritus
Department of Anthropology
American University
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kay Allen
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 6:16 PM
To: Victor Smootbank; gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Genealogy is a useless science!!!
I'll stick with genealogy, thank you very much. I do
find hidden treasures of knowledge. I also have the
richness of family history. the friends I have made in
this pursuit, and the satisfaction of completing the
chase. There is more of richness, than monetary gain,
even though I am certainly not adverse to monetary
gain.
Yours truly,
Kay Allen AG
--- Victor Smootbank <mean_prie...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Better go for archaeology, you could find hidden
treasures
and get rich!!!
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I concur. Archaeology never made me rich, either. So I stopped doing
that & went into writing poetry for the money. :\
-
simon fairthorne
Re: English currency
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:38:36 +0100 , "Chris Dickinson" <chris@dickinson.uk.net> wrote:
I have had suspicions that in several cases when large sums of money have been bequeathed in wills the testator did not have anything like that amount
In your case did the daughters suddenly buy farms? Suspect they finished up with £5 each or similar
cheers
Simon
?1000 to each of his daughters. That is a huge amount of money in 1649.
When my ancestor, William Dickinson, purchased his neighbour's (nowadays
about 70 acres) farm, he paid ?90 in 1647 and a further ?185 in 1654. So
each ?1000 would have bought 4 farms with 250 acres of good farmland.
[OK - so 250 acres ain't large by Australian standards, but substantial in
England!]
I have had suspicions that in several cases when large sums of money have been bequeathed in wills the testator did not have anything like that amount
In your case did the daughters suddenly buy farms? Suspect they finished up with £5 each or similar
cheers
Simon
-
Chris Dickinson
Re: English currency
Simon Fairthorne wrote:
Not my research - the OP may be able to give more information about the
future history of the girls concerned.
I only mentioned farms as that's a reasonable way to translate the value of
a seventeenth-century bequest into modern-day terms, certainly a much more
accurate method than using an RPI-based website calculator. The latter
always significantly underestimates values.
You're right to cast doubt on the actual cash! It's certainly the case in my
experience with rural yeoman wills that cash bequests of, say, £40 might
remain as a charge on the estate in later wills; or that, if the bequests
were paid out, the estate later suffered from a lack of cash for investment.
Sums of £1000 suggest, of course, that the testator had money from sources
other than land - government office, war profits, city trade, etc. - and so
obtainable quite quickly from the iron-clad chest under the bed or from a
quick sale of trading assets.
Chris
I have had suspicions that in several cases when large sums of money have
been bequeathed in wills the testator did not have anything like that
amount
In your case did the daughters suddenly buy farms? Suspect they finished
up with £5 each or similar
Not my research - the OP may be able to give more information about the
future history of the girls concerned.
I only mentioned farms as that's a reasonable way to translate the value of
a seventeenth-century bequest into modern-day terms, certainly a much more
accurate method than using an RPI-based website calculator. The latter
always significantly underestimates values.
You're right to cast doubt on the actual cash! It's certainly the case in my
experience with rural yeoman wills that cash bequests of, say, £40 might
remain as a charge on the estate in later wills; or that, if the bequests
were paid out, the estate later suffered from a lack of cash for investment.
Sums of £1000 suggest, of course, that the testator had money from sources
other than land - government office, war profits, city trade, etc. - and so
obtainable quite quickly from the iron-clad chest under the bed or from a
quick sale of trading assets.
Chris
-
Vivien Martin
Re: English currency
Dear Margaret
" "Leaving by his Will, 1000 (alongside the thousand there is then an
italics
L) to each of his daughters .... "
I have been searching the internet to find what the old currency of the
period might have been, but cannot see anything that satisfies my searching,
but am thinking it has something to do with how we used to say LSD for
pounds shillings and pence, but I am sure someone can set me straight."
The website Measuring Worth :
http://measuringworth.com/calculators/ppoweruk/, a usefull tool for those
curious, will provide your answer - *£86,219.31** - *using the retail price
index (CPI for those of us in the Americas) as the measure.
Cheers
Vivien
*
*
" "Leaving by his Will, 1000 (alongside the thousand there is then an
italics
L) to each of his daughters .... "
I have been searching the internet to find what the old currency of the
period might have been, but cannot see anything that satisfies my searching,
but am thinking it has something to do with how we used to say LSD for
pounds shillings and pence, but I am sure someone can set me straight."
The website Measuring Worth :
http://measuringworth.com/calculators/ppoweruk/, a usefull tool for those
curious, will provide your answer - *£86,219.31** - *using the retail price
index (CPI for those of us in the Americas) as the measure.
Cheers
Vivien
*
*
-
Gjest
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Maud Botetourt,
Dear Douglas,
I was not able to view the tomb of Henry Grey of
Wilton and am curious to know if the Botetourt or Talbot arms there given were in
any way differenced, For instance, does Butler impale Talbot ?
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
I was not able to view the tomb of Henry Grey of
Wilton and am curious to know if the Botetourt or Talbot arms there given were in
any way differenced, For instance, does Butler impale Talbot ?
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Gjest
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Maud Botetourt,
Dear Douglas,
The Link You suggested worked.
Thank
You
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
The Link You suggested worked.
Thank
You
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
David Hesketh
RE: Battle of Agincourt Roll of Honour - Regional Makeup
To Derek Howard and Nat (and anyone else interested),
I emailed Professor Curry about the new book she published on Agincourt.
Her response was as follows:
"In research for my book I collected all of the names of men at arms and
archers in the original documents relating to the Agincourt campaign in the
National Archives, Public Record Office Kew. The problem with the roll
printed in Nicolas, History of the Battle of Agincourt, which I imagine is
what you refer to as the roll of honour, is that it was taken from an early
seventeenth century transcript, with all the problems that later copies
raise, and did not include the archers. (There is more discussion of this in
my other book The Battle of Agincourt. Sources and Interpretations (Boydell,
2000)
Thansk to funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, I am now
directing a major project to list all of the soldiers (men at arms and
archers) serving in English armies between 1369 and 1453. The web site for
this is http://www.medievalsoldier.org, but as we are only just entering the second
year of the project we have yet to put searchable files there. We hope that
there will be some up by Christmas.
We are adding in the archers and also evidence from the period before 1415.
We are indeed exploring the regional dimension of recruitment and also the
links between the soldiers and the captains they were serving under."
David
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1056 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
18:12
I emailed Professor Curry about the new book she published on Agincourt.
Her response was as follows:
"In research for my book I collected all of the names of men at arms and
archers in the original documents relating to the Agincourt campaign in the
National Archives, Public Record Office Kew. The problem with the roll
printed in Nicolas, History of the Battle of Agincourt, which I imagine is
what you refer to as the roll of honour, is that it was taken from an early
seventeenth century transcript, with all the problems that later copies
raise, and did not include the archers. (There is more discussion of this in
my other book The Battle of Agincourt. Sources and Interpretations (Boydell,
2000)
Thansk to funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, I am now
directing a major project to list all of the soldiers (men at arms and
archers) serving in English armies between 1369 and 1453. The web site for
this is http://www.medievalsoldier.org, but as we are only just entering the second
year of the project we have yet to put searchable files there. We hope that
there will be some up by Christmas.
We are adding in the archers and also evidence from the period before 1415.
We are indeed exploring the regional dimension of recruitment and also the
links between the soldiers and the captains they were serving under."
David
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.4/1056 - Release Date: 07/10/2007
18:12
-
Gjest
Re: Genealogics: Giving some background to Charles Fleetwood
On Oct 6, 8:54 am, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Cromwell Fleetwood was indeed dsp. He left a notable cabinet to his
wife Elizabeth Neville who was the only daughter of George Neville and
his wife Elizabeth Trotter, she supposedly daughter of Sir Henry
Trotter and his wife Catherine Wytham from Skelton Castle in Yorks.
George Neville was b c 1622 in Essex and was 'a lawyer by profession
of Stapley Inn in London, of eminent skill in his business' according
to William Holman, in the Essex historian's original notes from around
the 1720s, now in the Essex Record Office. George Neville did indeed
move to Berkhampsted where he died in 1685. He was the eldest son of
Richard Neville and his wife Mary Simson who married around 1620 in
Halsted in Essex. Their other son John had a daughter Sarah who
married Thomas Burkitt in Shoreditch in London in 1683. Her cousin
Elizabeth left her the 'Fleetwood Cabinet' in her will and it passed
down through three generations of Burkitts before ending up in the
National Museum of Ireland. There is an article about this in the
Gentleman's Mag, unfortunately the reference in deep in my notes.
Richard Neville was, according to Holman, the only son of John Neville
and Margery Walford who married at Shalford in Essex in 1571.
John was the son of Thomas Neville and his wife Elizabeth and he was
the son of Thomas Neville and Mary Tey. The elder Thomas was the third
son of Sir Richard Neville, second Lord Latimer.
cp has both Thomas but does not give any descendants.
So Richard Neville m Anne Stafford
son Thomas m Mary Tey (thus far is well documented)
son Thomas m Elizabeth (his wife from feet of fines ERO)
son John m Margery Walford (only from Holman's account and parish
records)
son Richard d 1625 m Mary Simson
sons George and John
George, c 1622-1685 m Elizabeth Trotter
daughter Elizabeth m Cromwell Fleetwood
George's brother John m Jane Wade
daughter Sarah m Thomas Burkitt in 1683
Has anyone else come across this cadet branch of Latimer Nevilles?
Geoff V
Thank you Will for your excellent post. I fear your fat fingers were too slippery from stuffing your face with potato chips (or crisps in England) and you posted before you were through for you've left off two most excellent bullets points from that DNB article towit :
14 By his first wife, Frances Smith he had (1) Smith Fleetwood (1644-1709), who married Mary, daughter of Sir Edward Hartopp, their descendents became extinct in 1764; (2) Elizabeth, married Sir John Hartopp, third baronet, from whom the existing Cradock-Hartopp family is descended.
15 By Bridget Cromwell, Fleetwood was the father of (1) Cromwell Fleetwood, born about 1653, married in 1679 Elizabeth Nevill of Little Berkhampstead, Hertfordshire; administration of his goods was granted in Sep 1688; he seems to have died without issue. (2) Anne Fleetwood, buried in Westminster Abbey, and exhumed at the Restoration; (3) Mary, who married Nathaniel Carter (21 Feb 1678), and other children, most of whom died young, and none of whom left issue.
- courtesy of Will Johnson, wjhon...@aol.com, Professional Genealogist, extracted from the original page image on ancestry.com
Cromwell Fleetwood was indeed dsp. He left a notable cabinet to his
wife Elizabeth Neville who was the only daughter of George Neville and
his wife Elizabeth Trotter, she supposedly daughter of Sir Henry
Trotter and his wife Catherine Wytham from Skelton Castle in Yorks.
George Neville was b c 1622 in Essex and was 'a lawyer by profession
of Stapley Inn in London, of eminent skill in his business' according
to William Holman, in the Essex historian's original notes from around
the 1720s, now in the Essex Record Office. George Neville did indeed
move to Berkhampsted where he died in 1685. He was the eldest son of
Richard Neville and his wife Mary Simson who married around 1620 in
Halsted in Essex. Their other son John had a daughter Sarah who
married Thomas Burkitt in Shoreditch in London in 1683. Her cousin
Elizabeth left her the 'Fleetwood Cabinet' in her will and it passed
down through three generations of Burkitts before ending up in the
National Museum of Ireland. There is an article about this in the
Gentleman's Mag, unfortunately the reference in deep in my notes.
Richard Neville was, according to Holman, the only son of John Neville
and Margery Walford who married at Shalford in Essex in 1571.
John was the son of Thomas Neville and his wife Elizabeth and he was
the son of Thomas Neville and Mary Tey. The elder Thomas was the third
son of Sir Richard Neville, second Lord Latimer.
cp has both Thomas but does not give any descendants.
So Richard Neville m Anne Stafford
son Thomas m Mary Tey (thus far is well documented)
son Thomas m Elizabeth (his wife from feet of fines ERO)
son John m Margery Walford (only from Holman's account and parish
records)
son Richard d 1625 m Mary Simson
sons George and John
George, c 1622-1685 m Elizabeth Trotter
daughter Elizabeth m Cromwell Fleetwood
George's brother John m Jane Wade
daughter Sarah m Thomas Burkitt in 1683
Has anyone else come across this cadet branch of Latimer Nevilles?
Geoff V
-
WJhonson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Maud Botetourt,
<<In a message dated 10/08/07 10:05:32 Pacific Standard Time, royalancestry@msn.com writes:
Incidentally, it is thought that there was a second tomb at Shirland,
Derbyshire which Cox says Dr. Pegge thought commemorated a Reynold de
Grey, who died 1 Edward II, his wife, Maud, and their two children,
John and Joan. Either Cox or Pegge has the date wrong, as there was
only one Reynold de Grey in this family with a wife, Maud, which
individual was Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who died in
1370. >>
--------------------
That is provided we ignore Reginald (Reynold), 1st Lord Grey of Wilton who d 5 Apr 1308 and his wife Maud (Matilda) de Longchamp who d bef 21 Nov 1302
Will Johnson
Incidentally, it is thought that there was a second tomb at Shirland,
Derbyshire which Cox says Dr. Pegge thought commemorated a Reynold de
Grey, who died 1 Edward II, his wife, Maud, and their two children,
John and Joan. Either Cox or Pegge has the date wrong, as there was
only one Reynold de Grey in this family with a wife, Maud, which
individual was Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who died in
1370. >>
--------------------
That is provided we ignore Reginald (Reynold), 1st Lord Grey of Wilton who d 5 Apr 1308 and his wife Maud (Matilda) de Longchamp who d bef 21 Nov 1302
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Parentage of Millicent (Jekyll) (Heritage) Temple
<<In a message dated 10/08/07 13:40:26 Pacific Standard Time, starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:
http://books.google.com/books?id=hqwKAA ... #PPA428,M1 >>
--------------------------->>
Google bookophiles might be interested to examine the above link. As you read a Google Book, the PPA number changes while the PA number doesn't. You can however force the link to be shorter by merely removing everything from PA87 forward, and then replacing the PA87 with just PA428 as this link
http://books.google.com/books?id=hqwKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA428
I don't know why Google Books does it this way, its a bit annoying, the shorter link works just fine.
Will Johnson
http://books.google.com/books?id=hqwKAA ... #PPA428,M1 >>
--------------------------->>
Google bookophiles might be interested to examine the above link. As you read a Google Book, the PPA number changes while the PA number doesn't. You can however force the link to be shorter by merely removing everything from PA87 forward, and then replacing the PA87 with just PA428 as this link
http://books.google.com/books?id=hqwKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA428
I don't know why Google Books does it this way, its a bit annoying, the shorter link works just fine.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Margaret Wiseman m. (1) 1542 Thomas Everard; (2) 1559 Jo
<<In a message dated 10/08/07 14:25:23 Pacific Standard Time, starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:
Since John Church had married widow Margaret Everard in
1559, a scant nineteen years earlier, I conclude, reluctantly, that
Margaret could not have been the mother of Martha (Church) Reade,
ancestor of Epps, Lake, Cooke, etc. of New England. >>
----------------------
In my notes I have three links to things about this family/couple/ascent
http://kinnexions.com/smlawson/gallup.htm
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 0891703108
#1794 http://www.wargs.com/political/kerry.html
Will Johnson
Since John Church had married widow Margaret Everard in
1559, a scant nineteen years earlier, I conclude, reluctantly, that
Margaret could not have been the mother of Martha (Church) Reade,
ancestor of Epps, Lake, Cooke, etc. of New England. >>
----------------------
In my notes I have three links to things about this family/couple/ascent
http://kinnexions.com/smlawson/gallup.htm
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 0891703108
#1794 http://www.wargs.com/political/kerry.html
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Aguillon ancestry: Fulk de Beaufou
I'd suggest that "Ela" is the familiar form, at least at this time, for Isabella.
You can see how easy it is to make Isabella into Ela, just by taking the last syllable.
Will
You can see how easy it is to make Isabella into Ela, just by taking the last syllable.
Will
-
Christopher Ingham
Re: Message from Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr.
On Oct 9, 12:02 am, "vctin...@sbcglobal.net" <vctin...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
So, do you list any medieval genealogies with purportedly documented
descent
from ancient (before AD 500) lineages? If so, could you cite one or
two examples?
Christopher Ingham
wrote:
Message from Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr.
to Roy Stockdill and others
On Oct 6, 10:53 am, "Roy Stockdill" <roy.stockd...@btinternet.com
wrote:
My little joke was aimed at those Americans -
and you can't deny there are a fair number of
them around - who just love to claim they can
trace their ancestry back to 1,000 years before
William the Conqueror. and some even back
to Adam and Eve, when we all know that this
is just simply fantasy, wishful thinking and
absurd nonsense. Latching onto fanciful
biblical genealogies and tagging your own
family tree onto them is just a joke. You have
only to look at some of the absurd websites
to realise this is true - and the Tinney site is
one such example.
. . .
However, my relatives are sensible and realistic
people who look to me to tell them the truth
about their ancestry as far as I know it, not
to some pie-in-the-sky mythical links to
ancient history BC.
. . .
I suspect most of these would-be descendants
of Adam and Eve and the ancient world come
from the fundamentalist American bible belt
and, as far as I am concerned, they are indeed
very naïve and provincial people.
. . .
Roy Stockdill
Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies
Guild of One-Name Studies website:www.one-name.org
Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History:www.genuki.org.uk/gs/
Newbie.html
REPLY:
It is exceedingly unfortunate that someone
of your stature in genealogy and family history
research, should present false assertions, as
observed and studied truth, in any public forum,
such as soc.genealogy.britain You have degraded,
in a serious way, the profession that you represent.
I suggest that you learn to read before you write.
It would be most helpful. You asserted: "Latching
onto fanciful biblical genealogies and tagging your
own family tree onto them" is what you found out
in your personal evaluation of my web sites. Not.
A very thorough evaluation was made of Biblical
text and presented, along with other parallel
supporting records, of the ancient history of Man.
Alphabetic History of Civilization:
Ancient and Modern Genealogieshttp://www.academic-genealog ... logies.htm
This book evaluates historical knowledge
as it relates to ancient and modern
genealogies. Information gleaned from
social contexts, both secular and religious,
are reviewed, using modern genealogical
research specialist standards: to properly
reconstruct and correctly portray real
historical lives and family pedigrees.
Cultural, religious and family tradition,
(their stated facts and viewpoints), are
surveyed within given ancient contexts
of primary and secondary record sources,
as handed down for the benefit of our
modern generation. Modern claims of
genealogical attachment to biblical records
are noted, with remarks.
I also presented a study of
the BOOK [Stick] of JUDAHhttp://www.academic-genealogy.com/ ... yjudah.htm
You will note links, upon professional evaluation:
"WARNING: This pedigree is not CREDIBLE."
ALEX SHOUMATOFF, in his book,
"The Mountain of Names", incorrectly
notes: "Thomas Milton Tinney, a Mormon
who has traced his ancestry over a hundred
and fifty-two generations, right back to Adam,
explains . . . " Alex missed reading page 141,
among many other notes and references given,
in Ancient and Modern Genealogies with Temple
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)
Records; copyright 1973.
"It is apparent to the feel of the author of this
book, that some names have been added or
inserted into this pedigree to eliminate the Jewish
connection of the record, and years expanded to
unusual post-flood life spans, to make an improper
Biblical connection."http://www.dispatchesfromthevanishingworld.com/pastdispatches/mountai...
This is also clearly stated by others, at:
BIBLE - BIBLICAL RESOURCES: under
I Have a Question - Questions and Answers:http://www.academic-genealogy.com/worldancestry.htm#biblical
"Robert C. Gunderson, Senior Royalty
Research Specialist, Church Genealogical
Department. The simplest answer to both
questions is No. Let me explain. In thirty-five
years of genealogical research, I have yet to
see a pedigree back to Adam that can be
documented."
Nevertheless, your further compound your error
by stating: "Latching onto fanciful biblical genealogies",
which I find contradicted in MORMON records; RE:
Pearl of Great Price, Moses, Chapter 1, verse 8:
And it came to pass that Moses looked, and
beheld the world upon which he was created;
and Moses beheld the world and the ends
thereof, and all the children of men which are,
and which were created; of the same he greatly
marveled and wondered.
. . . Moses, Chapter 7, verse 67 And the Lord
showed Enoch all things, even unto the end of
the world; and he saw the day of the righteous,
the hour of their redemption, and received a
fulness of joy; . . .
D&C 107: 56 And Adam stood up in the midst
of the congregation; and, notwithstanding
he was bowed down with age, being full
of the Holy Ghost, predicted whatsoever
should befall his posterity unto the latest
generation.
These ancient intelligent individuals and seers,
are our true living ancestry, which make latching
onto fanciful DNA hypothetical genealogies an
absurd joke, even "wishful thinking and absurd
nonsense", as you so eloquently mention.
Cheers! and
Respectfully yours,
Tom Tinney, Sr.
Who's Who in America,
Millennium Edition [54th] through 2004
Who's Who In Genealogy and Heraldry, [both editions]
Family Genealogy & History Internet Education Directoryhttp://www.academic-genealogy.com/
So, do you list any medieval genealogies with purportedly documented
descent
from ancient (before AD 500) lineages? If so, could you cite one or
two examples?
Christopher Ingham
-
WJhonson
Re: Ida de Tosny
There is a third reason why Ida de Tosny was a daughter of Ralph, Lord of Flamstead by his wife Margaret de Beaumont, instead of a daughter of his son Roger.
Ida was a royal ward in 1181
Roger was very much alive and kicking, Ralph however was long dead.
Will Johnson
Ida was a royal ward in 1181
Roger was very much alive and kicking, Ralph however was long dead.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: The need for protecting your data in the Digital Age
<<In a message dated 10/08/07 22:50:11 Pacific Standard Time, katheryn.swynford@gmail.com writes:
http://waybackmachine.org
Enter the URL of the vanished website and waybackmachine will present
you with a series of digital snapshots of the site with working links,
images, etc.>>
-------------------
Sort-of.
The Way Back machine has proven that they are next to worthless by allowing individual site owners to "opt-out". So they aren't really "archiving the net" or whatever their original hype was.
In addition it appears they don't really archive *everything* even if you don't opt out.
I'm not happy with them.
Will
http://waybackmachine.org
Enter the URL of the vanished website and waybackmachine will present
you with a series of digital snapshots of the site with working links,
images, etc.>>
-------------------
Sort-of.
The Way Back machine has proven that they are next to worthless by allowing individual site owners to "opt-out". So they aren't really "archiving the net" or whatever their original hype was.
In addition it appears they don't really archive *everything* even if you don't opt out.
I'm not happy with them.
Will
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
<<In a message dated 10/06/07 10:34:33 Pacific Standard Time, ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(1) Nicholas Brome [031S1450] (<1448-1517 bur Baddesley) of manor of
Lapworth als Browmes and Baddesley, Shield, Sable a cheveron with three sprigs of
broom thereon; m1 Elizabth d of Renfrey Arundell of Lanheame »
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
----------------
No doubt there were two Thomas Marrows which are getting confused.
Thomas Marrow who's will was proven 10 Apr 1505 bequeths to both Sir Richard Throgmorton Knt, and also " to my nephews George and Richard Throckmorton...."
He seems a little old to be marrying the at-least-ten-if-not-thirty years younger Isabel Brome, so perhaps there was a Thomas Sr and a Thomas Jr running around? That would then explain the confusion on the name of his wife/widow.
Will Johnson
(1) Nicholas Brome [031S1450] (<1448-1517 bur Baddesley) of manor of
Lapworth als Browmes and Baddesley, Shield, Sable a cheveron with three sprigs of
broom thereon; m1 Elizabth d of Renfrey Arundell of Lanheame »
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
----------------
No doubt there were two Thomas Marrows which are getting confused.
Thomas Marrow who's will was proven 10 Apr 1505 bequeths to both Sir Richard Throgmorton Knt, and also " to my nephews George and Richard Throckmorton...."
He seems a little old to be marrying the at-least-ten-if-not-thirty years younger Isabel Brome, so perhaps there was a Thomas Sr and a Thomas Jr running around? That would then explain the confusion on the name of his wife/widow.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
<<In a message dated 10/06/07 10:34:33 Pacific Standard Time, ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
---------------------
I would suggest the death year 1551 is a merger with his son also Edward. The father is known to have a will dated 10 Jul 1535, and *if* he lived to 1551 would have been at least 83 and as much as 106.
It's not impossible he could have lived to 83, but we should examine the evidence on which Edward to which the 1551 date refers.
Will
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
---------------------
I would suggest the death year 1551 is a merger with his son also Edward. The father is known to have a will dated 10 Jul 1535, and *if* he lived to 1551 would have been at least 83 and as much as 106.
It's not impossible he could have lived to 83, but we should examine the evidence on which Edward to which the 1551 date refers.
Will
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"The will mentioned above for William Middleton is cited as being published
in 'Testamenta Eboracensia', 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...."
I am unfamiliar with the reference:
"Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...." Can you tell me what the source is,
and is there an URL for the online?
Secondly, descendants of Sir Peter Middleton=Eustacia Plumpton,
Thomas Middleton=Eliza Gramary,
Nicolas Middleton,b.c.1347,Yorkshire=Alice Stapleton,b.c.1347, Yorkshire
as corrected, in the Middleton lineage, has anyone got specifics on Nicolas
Middleton=Alice Stapleton family?
Bill
____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658
"The will mentioned above for William Middleton is cited as being published
in 'Testamenta Eboracensia', 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...."
I am unfamiliar with the reference:
"Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...." Can you tell me what the source is,
and is there an URL for the online?
Secondly, descendants of Sir Peter Middleton=Eustacia Plumpton,
Thomas Middleton=Eliza Gramary,
Nicolas Middleton,b.c.1347,Yorkshire=Alice Stapleton,b.c.1347, Yorkshire
as corrected, in the Middleton lineage, has anyone got specifics on Nicolas
Middleton=Alice Stapleton family?
Bill
____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Some More Visitations
Much thanks for the online heraldic visitations:
have you found "Tonge's Visitation" of 1530 online?
Bill
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/
have you found "Tonge's Visitation" of 1530 online?
Bill
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
Here are links to some more heraldic visitations available on Internet
Archive:
Visitation of The County of York in 1665-6, by William Dugdale
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 36surtuoft
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 00dugdrich
Visitations of The North (Part 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 00surtuoft
Visitation of the County of Worcester in 1569
http://www.archive.org/details/publicat ... 27harluoft
Visitation of Norfolk in 1563
http://www.archive.org/details/publicat ... 32harluoft
Visitation of Cheshire in 1613
http://www.archive.org/details/recordsociety58recouoft
Visitation of Huntingdon in 1613, by William Camden
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 00camduoft
Visitation of Berkshire in 1566, by William Harvey
http://www.archive.org/details/1566visi ... 00harvuoft
Visitation of Dorsetshire in 1565, by William Harvey
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 00harvuoft
Visitations of Suffolk in 1561, 1577 & 1612
http://www.archive.org/details/visitati ... 00harvuoft
I suspect there are a lot more that I haven't discovered yet.
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/
-
Gjest
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
<<In a message dated 10/06/07 10:34:33 Pacific Standard Time,
ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(1) Nicholas Brome [031S1450] (<1448-1517 bur Baddesley) of manor of
Lapworth als Browmes and Baddesley, Shield, Sable a cheveron with three
sprigs of
broom thereon; m1 Elizabth d of Renfrey Arundell of Lanheame »
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
----------------
Will Jhonson replied,
No doubt there were two Thomas Marrows which are getting confused.
Thomas Marrow who's will was proven 10 Apr 1505 bequeths to both Sir Richard
Throgmorton Knt, and also " to my nephews George and Richard Throckmorton...."
He seems a little old to be marrying the at-least-ten-if-not-thirty years
younger Isabel Brome, so perhaps there was a Thomas Sr and a Thomas Jr running
around? That would then explain the confusion on the name of his wife/widow.
<<<
Will,
Thanks for your message. Yes there is somthing wrong and I have Thomas
Marrows date of death wrong. I will look at this further and make another post.
(I think my construction agrees to 'Parishes: Baddesley Clinton', A History
of the County of Warwick: Volume 4: Hemlingford Hundred (1947), pp. 13-9, but
not to A2A Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office DR 3/464 and 3/294)
regards,
Adrian
ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(1) Nicholas Brome [031S1450] (<1448-1517 bur Baddesley) of manor of
Lapworth als Browmes and Baddesley, Shield, Sable a cheveron with three
sprigs of
broom thereon; m1 Elizabth d of Renfrey Arundell of Lanheame »
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
----------------
Will Jhonson replied,
No doubt there were two Thomas Marrows which are getting confused.
Thomas Marrow who's will was proven 10 Apr 1505 bequeths to both Sir Richard
Throgmorton Knt, and also " to my nephews George and Richard Throckmorton...."
He seems a little old to be marrying the at-least-ten-if-not-thirty years
younger Isabel Brome, so perhaps there was a Thomas Sr and a Thomas Jr running
around? That would then explain the confusion on the name of his wife/widow.
<<<
Will,
Thanks for your message. Yes there is somthing wrong and I have Thomas
Marrows date of death wrong. I will look at this further and make another post.
(I think my construction agrees to 'Parishes: Baddesley Clinton', A History
of the County of Warwick: Volume 4: Hemlingford Hundred (1947), pp. 13-9, but
not to A2A Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office DR 3/464 and 3/294)
regards,
Adrian
-
Gjest
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
In a message dated 09/10/2007 09:03:13 GMT Standard Time, wjhonson@aol.com
writes:
<<In a message dated 10/06/07 10:34:33 Pacific Standard Time,
ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
---------------------
Will replied.
I would suggest the death year 1551 is a merger with his son also Edward.
The father is known to have a will dated 10 Jul 1535, and *if* he lived to
1551 would have been at least 83 and as much as 106.
It's not impossible he could have lived to 83, but we should examine the
evidence on which Edward to which the 1551 date refers.
Will
-------------------------------
Opps, yet another error. He died 1535
Church of Baddesley Clinton:
"The chancel is said by Dugdale to have been lengthened 12 ft. in 1535, but
it was entirely rebuilt in 1634 by Edward Ferrers; as is recorded on a tablet
in the chancel. The 16th-century east window with its ancient glass was
retained in place, or re-set, as was also the tomb of Sir Edward Ferrers, who
died in 1535. The addition to the nave roof was probably also part of the same
work"
Adrian
writes:
<<In a message dated 10/06/07 10:34:33 Pacific Standard Time,
ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
(a) Isable Brome [Vis: calls her Margaret] m Thomas Marrow (-1537) serjeant
at law (» Dorothy (1530-) m Francis Cockayne) and
(b) Constance Brome (-1551) m» ?c1497 Sir Edward (-1551) s&h of Sir Henry
Ferrers knt >>
---------------------
Will replied.
I would suggest the death year 1551 is a merger with his son also Edward.
The father is known to have a will dated 10 Jul 1535, and *if* he lived to
1551 would have been at least 83 and as much as 106.
It's not impossible he could have lived to 83, but we should examine the
evidence on which Edward to which the 1551 date refers.
Will
-------------------------------
Opps, yet another error. He died 1535
Church of Baddesley Clinton:
"The chancel is said by Dugdale to have been lengthened 12 ft. in 1535, but
it was entirely rebuilt in 1634 by Edward Ferrers; as is recorded on a tablet
in the chancel. The 16th-century east window with its ancient glass was
retained in place, or re-set, as was also the tomb of Sir Edward Ferrers, who
died in 1535. The addition to the nave roof was probably also part of the same
work"
Adrian
-
Ken Ozanne
Re: Visitations
John,
I haven't got to your later message yet, but thanks for these. You seem
to have flip views which don't suit my browser, but searching for Chetham
and using your volume numbers allowed me to find and download them. There
are other interesting volumes as well, including ipm abstracts.
You seem to have missed Dugdale's visitation part 2, which is volume 85.
Best,
Ken
On 9/10/07 15:52, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
I haven't got to your later message yet, but thanks for these. You seem
to have flip views which don't suit my browser, but searching for Chetham
and using your volume numbers allowed me to find and download them. There
are other interesting volumes as well, including ipm abstracts.
You seem to have missed Dugdale's visitation part 2, which is volume 85.
Best,
Ken
On 9/10/07 15:52, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 04:42:51 -0000
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Visitations of Lancashire
The Internet Archive website offers a veritable treasure trove of old
books online. However, they are often difficult to find, because they
have been labelled with such unhelpful titles as "Publications".
Here are a few links that I have found recently, that may be of
interest. I'll post more as I find them.
Chetham Society Publications
Visitation of Lancashire and Part of Cheshire in 1533, by Thomas
Benalt
http://www.openlibrary.org/details/rema ... 98chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1567, by William
Flower
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 81chetuoft
Visitation of The County Palatine of Lancaster in 1613, by Richard St.
George
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 82chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part I
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 84chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part III
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 88chetuoft
Regards,
John
-
Gjest
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
In a message dated 10/9/2007 5:07:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am unfamiliar with the reference:
"Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...." Can you tell me what the source is,
and is there an URL for the online?>>>>>
------------------------------
_http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Testamenta+Eboracensia%22&rls=com.
microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG_
(http://www.google.com/search?q="Testamenta+Eboracensia"&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBo
x&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG)
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am unfamiliar with the reference:
"Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...." Can you tell me what the source is,
and is there an URL for the online?>>>>>
------------------------------
_http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Testamenta+Eboracensia%22&rls=com.
microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG_
(http://www.google.com/search?q="Testamenta+Eboracensia"&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBo
x&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG)
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Gjest
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
In a message dated 10/9/2007 8:09:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ADRIANCHANNING02@aol.com writes:
Thanks for Will Jhonston>>
----------------------
I know you're doing this just to test my nerves
Will JOHNSON (note my name is spelled completely normally)
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
ADRIANCHANNING02@aol.com writes:
Thanks for Will Jhonston>>
----------------------
I know you're doing this just to test my nerves
Will JOHNSON (note my name is spelled completely normally)
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 08:09:36 Pacific Daylight Time, ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
a) Isable Brome [Vis and Richardson’s PA calls her Margaret] m Thomas
Marrow (-1537) [rec s/b 5 Apr 1505] serjeant at law (» Dorothy (1530-) [rec
c1497-] m Francis Cockayne) and >>
--------------------------
I am still doubtful that it's well-founded that Isabel Brome "eldest daughter" who has to be born sometime between 1470 and 1491 was the wife of that Thomas Morrow, known to have died Apr 1505, son of a man known to have died between 8 Oct 1464 and 15 May 1466.
It is *possible*, but I have doubts that this has been properly connected. Instead I think it's much more likely that there is a Thomas Morrow Sr who had a Thomas Morrow Jr and that *this* Jr is the one who married Isabel Brome..
If anyone has documentation on this, I'd love to see it.
Will
a) Isable Brome [Vis and Richardson’s PA calls her Margaret] m Thomas
Marrow (-1537) [rec s/b 5 Apr 1505] serjeant at law (» Dorothy (1530-) [rec
c1497-] m Francis Cockayne) and >>
--------------------------
I am still doubtful that it's well-founded that Isabel Brome "eldest daughter" who has to be born sometime between 1470 and 1491 was the wife of that Thomas Morrow, known to have died Apr 1505, son of a man known to have died between 8 Oct 1464 and 15 May 1466.
It is *possible*, but I have doubts that this has been properly connected. Instead I think it's much more likely that there is a Thomas Morrow Sr who had a Thomas Morrow Jr and that *this* Jr is the one who married Isabel Brome..
If anyone has documentation on this, I'd love to see it.
Will
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
I'll go ahead and post one of the documents here so we can all see and discuss what it means and doesn't mean.
Will Johnson (aka Jhonson, Johnston, SonJon, Jill Wonson, Hill Bonson, Snill Snonson, etc.)
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
The contents of this catalogue are the copyright of Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office
Rights in the Access to Archives database are the property of the Crown, © 2001-2007
To find out more about the archives described below, contact Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s):
Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - HAMBLETON co. Rutland - ref. DR 3/287 - date: 5 December 1497; mid 17th century copy
[from Scope and Content] Indenture between Sir Henry Ferrers kt Edward his son & Thomas Marrow of London time of Hen VII
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON, TANWORTH, BELTLEY HEATH, SOLIHULL, KINGSFORD, KNOWLE, TEMPLE BALSALL, WARWICK, CLAVERDON, HONILEY, ELMDON co. Warwick, ?'CORVERS' near WISBECH, co. Cambridge, WATFORD, co. Hertford. 'PEKHAM' and PEPYNSTRAWE in HADLOW, TUDELEY, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, BRENCHLEY, PECKHAM, NETTLESTEAD, AYLESFORD, YALDING, DITTON, 'SYFFLYNGTON', 'BRAMPTON'. BADLESMERE, FROMONDES COPGRAVE, HADLOW in Kent, LONDON, HAMBLETON, co. Rutland. TAMWORTH, co.. Stafford - ref. DR 3/307 - date: 10 July 1535; 18 November 1535
[from Scope and Content] After the death of the said Constance the annual rent of 26s. 8d. from the Bell and Chequer in London was to pass to the parson of the parish church of Baddesley Clynton and to his successors in recompense for lands in Baddesley called the Foure fields held by the said Sir Edward, and the said annual rent of 20s. from tenements in Ball Alley in London after the death of the said Constance was also to pass to the said parson and his successors to be used to say an obit on the feast of St. Thomas at Christmas [21 December], a dirge the same evening, and for a mass the following day to be sung by eight priests, two clerks and two children for the souls of the said Sir Edward and Constance, Sir Edward Belknapp knt., Thomas Marrow late serjeant-at-law and Isabel his wife and for the souls of their fathers, mothers, friends, benefactors and all faithful souls. For this ceremony a herse was to be set up with two tapers of burning wax and the bells of the said church were to be rung during the said dirge and mass, the eight priests were to receive 8d. each, the two clerks 4d. each, the two children 2d. each, 4d. was to be given for light, 4d. for bells, 4d. to the churchwardens and the residue of the said 20s. rent was to pass to the said parson to pray for souls departed. The executors of the said will being charged to see that the said rents were paid, and all persons seised of these lands mentioned by the said Sir Edward were to stand seised of these lands to the uses of his will.
[from Scope and Content] The said executors were also to have the moiety of a tenement in London in Canwykstrete beside London ?Ston to sell the same upon the death of the said Sir Edward and to give £20 towards the building of a hospital for the diseased with 'the grett pokkes' according to the will of the said Thomas Marrow serjeant-at-law, and if the said executors could not trace a hospital being built in London for this purpose within seven years then the said £20 was to be bestowed in alms to the poor and in other deeds of charity for the souls of the said Thomas and Isabel, the said Sir Edward and all christian souls. The remainder of the said moiety was to be spent in the performance of his will.
[from Scope and Content] The said Constance, Sir Thomas Wylloughby knt. serjeant-at-law, Thomas Marrow and Thomas atte Holt esqs. were to be executors of the said will, and Constance was to be sole executrix while she remained unmarried, and if she died or married before the said will was performed the remaining executors were to perform the said will. The said Sir Thomas Wylloughby was to have 4 marks and the rest of the executors 40s. each. Master Doctor Sampson, Dean of the King's most Honourable Chapel and Roger Wygston esq. were to be overseers of the said will and were to receive 60s. and 4 marks respectively, and if they undertook any further work in the performance of the said will they were to be paid accordingly by the said Constance and the said executors. The said Constance was to be sole executrix while she remained a widow, but if she re-married the executors were to keep a strict account of their executorship in a separate book and to present their accounts yearly to the body of executors and overseers, each of whom attending such yearly meeting was to receive 10s.
[from Scope and Content] Witnesses: Roger Wygston esq., Thomas atte Holt esq., Robert Egeworthe, Florens' Semar prest. Codicil dated 24 August 27 Henry VIII [1535] made in the presence of the said Constance and Robert Egeworthe stated that after Ralph Brome had made a general release to the said Constance as approved by her learned counsel, she was to give the said Ralph such plate and household stuff as she thought fit. The said Constance was also to give one hundred sheep to Thomas Marrow cousin of the said Sir Edward, 40s. to Elizabeth wife of Thomas Hawe the younger, 40s. to George Clarke nephew of the said Sir Edward, 20s. to Thomas Clark servant of the said Sir Edward and 7s. 6d. to John Mountford.
Will Johnson (aka Jhonson, Johnston, SonJon, Jill Wonson, Hill Bonson, Snill Snonson, etc.)
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
The contents of this catalogue are the copyright of Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office
Rights in the Access to Archives database are the property of the Crown, © 2001-2007
To find out more about the archives described below, contact Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s):
Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - HAMBLETON co. Rutland - ref. DR 3/287 - date: 5 December 1497; mid 17th century copy
[from Scope and Content] Indenture between Sir Henry Ferrers kt Edward his son & Thomas Marrow of London time of Hen VII
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON, TANWORTH, BELTLEY HEATH, SOLIHULL, KINGSFORD, KNOWLE, TEMPLE BALSALL, WARWICK, CLAVERDON, HONILEY, ELMDON co. Warwick, ?'CORVERS' near WISBECH, co. Cambridge, WATFORD, co. Hertford. 'PEKHAM' and PEPYNSTRAWE in HADLOW, TUDELEY, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, BRENCHLEY, PECKHAM, NETTLESTEAD, AYLESFORD, YALDING, DITTON, 'SYFFLYNGTON', 'BRAMPTON'. BADLESMERE, FROMONDES COPGRAVE, HADLOW in Kent, LONDON, HAMBLETON, co. Rutland. TAMWORTH, co.. Stafford - ref. DR 3/307 - date: 10 July 1535; 18 November 1535
[from Scope and Content] After the death of the said Constance the annual rent of 26s. 8d. from the Bell and Chequer in London was to pass to the parson of the parish church of Baddesley Clynton and to his successors in recompense for lands in Baddesley called the Foure fields held by the said Sir Edward, and the said annual rent of 20s. from tenements in Ball Alley in London after the death of the said Constance was also to pass to the said parson and his successors to be used to say an obit on the feast of St. Thomas at Christmas [21 December], a dirge the same evening, and for a mass the following day to be sung by eight priests, two clerks and two children for the souls of the said Sir Edward and Constance, Sir Edward Belknapp knt., Thomas Marrow late serjeant-at-law and Isabel his wife and for the souls of their fathers, mothers, friends, benefactors and all faithful souls. For this ceremony a herse was to be set up with two tapers of burning wax and the bells of the said church were to be rung during the said dirge and mass, the eight priests were to receive 8d. each, the two clerks 4d. each, the two children 2d. each, 4d. was to be given for light, 4d. for bells, 4d. to the churchwardens and the residue of the said 20s. rent was to pass to the said parson to pray for souls departed. The executors of the said will being charged to see that the said rents were paid, and all persons seised of these lands mentioned by the said Sir Edward were to stand seised of these lands to the uses of his will.
[from Scope and Content] The said executors were also to have the moiety of a tenement in London in Canwykstrete beside London ?Ston to sell the same upon the death of the said Sir Edward and to give £20 towards the building of a hospital for the diseased with 'the grett pokkes' according to the will of the said Thomas Marrow serjeant-at-law, and if the said executors could not trace a hospital being built in London for this purpose within seven years then the said £20 was to be bestowed in alms to the poor and in other deeds of charity for the souls of the said Thomas and Isabel, the said Sir Edward and all christian souls. The remainder of the said moiety was to be spent in the performance of his will.
[from Scope and Content] The said Constance, Sir Thomas Wylloughby knt. serjeant-at-law, Thomas Marrow and Thomas atte Holt esqs. were to be executors of the said will, and Constance was to be sole executrix while she remained unmarried, and if she died or married before the said will was performed the remaining executors were to perform the said will. The said Sir Thomas Wylloughby was to have 4 marks and the rest of the executors 40s. each. Master Doctor Sampson, Dean of the King's most Honourable Chapel and Roger Wygston esq. were to be overseers of the said will and were to receive 60s. and 4 marks respectively, and if they undertook any further work in the performance of the said will they were to be paid accordingly by the said Constance and the said executors. The said Constance was to be sole executrix while she remained a widow, but if she re-married the executors were to keep a strict account of their executorship in a separate book and to present their accounts yearly to the body of executors and overseers, each of whom attending such yearly meeting was to receive 10s.
[from Scope and Content] Witnesses: Roger Wygston esq., Thomas atte Holt esq., Robert Egeworthe, Florens' Semar prest. Codicil dated 24 August 27 Henry VIII [1535] made in the presence of the said Constance and Robert Egeworthe stated that after Ralph Brome had made a general release to the said Constance as approved by her learned counsel, she was to give the said Ralph such plate and household stuff as she thought fit. The said Constance was also to give one hundred sheep to Thomas Marrow cousin of the said Sir Edward, 40s. to Elizabeth wife of Thomas Hawe the younger, 40s. to George Clarke nephew of the said Sir Edward, 20s. to Thomas Clark servant of the said Sir Edward and 7s. 6d. to John Mountford.
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
I'm not sure that we really have firm backup on which wifes of Nicholas Brome were the mothers of which children, so I was investigating that a bit.
I don't have a good marriage date for Nicholas to his first wife Elizabeth who has here been called Arundel, but in her marriage settlement she is called "Whyttington" evidently a previous husband.
Can I suggest that she is identical with that Elizabeth Arundel who married Edmund Stradling and also married William Whittington of Pauntley ?
At any rate, I now present that she married Nicholas Brome AFTER 20 Dec 1473 and was yet living on 16 Aug 1485. This severely restricts which children could be by her and which dates could apply to which children. Hopefully this can help us arrange them better.
Will Johnson
-----------
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s): Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON AND PACKINGTON, co. Warwick, HYDES PASTURES co. Leicester, NOTGROVE AND RODBOROUGH, co. Gloucester, AND cos. WARWICK AND NORTHAMPTON. - ref. DR 3/264 - date: 20 December 1473
[from Scope and Content] Settlement made between Master John Arundell clerk and William Ligon of co. Worcester esq. on the one hand and Beatrice Brome, widow of John Brome of co. Warrewik', and Nicholas Brome of Baddesley Clynton' esq., son and heir of the said Beatrice, previous to the marriage of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth Whyttyngton sister of the said John Arundell. The said marriage to take place before the feast of All Hallows, after which within four months the said Nicholas was to hold an estate of lands in the counties of Warrewik' and Northampton to the annual value of 40 marks, and also to be seised in fee simple of lands valuing £33. 6s. 8d., £20 in rent after the death of the said Beatrice, and £16 after the death of Jane Brome. The said Beatrice to release to the feoffees of the said John Brome all lands of the said John, except her rights in the manor of Baddesley Clynton' and lands in ...Pakkynton' and Hyde co. Warr' [Hydes Pastures co. Leicester].. The said John Arundell to make an estate to the said Elizabeth of lands in.... in co. Warrewik' and of the manors of Notgrove and Rodburgh [Rodborough] ...in co. Glouc'.
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON - ref. DR 3/274 - date: 16 August 1485
[from Scope and Content] Gift from John Beaufitz and John Archer esqs. and Thomas Ryton to Nicholas Brome esq. and Elizabeth his wife of the manor of Baddisley Clynton' with appurtenances, which the grantors held by the gift and feoffment of the said Nicholas. To hold the same for ever from the chief lords of the fee for due and customary service. Sealing clause.
[from Scope and Content] Feoff' Archer and other to Nicholas Brome of the maner of B
[from Scope and Content] John Beaufitz & others' feoffment of Baddesley to Nicholas Brome & Elizabeth his wife.
I don't have a good marriage date for Nicholas to his first wife Elizabeth who has here been called Arundel, but in her marriage settlement she is called "Whyttington" evidently a previous husband.
Can I suggest that she is identical with that Elizabeth Arundel who married Edmund Stradling and also married William Whittington of Pauntley ?
At any rate, I now present that she married Nicholas Brome AFTER 20 Dec 1473 and was yet living on 16 Aug 1485. This severely restricts which children could be by her and which dates could apply to which children. Hopefully this can help us arrange them better.
Will Johnson
-----------
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s): Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON AND PACKINGTON, co. Warwick, HYDES PASTURES co. Leicester, NOTGROVE AND RODBOROUGH, co. Gloucester, AND cos. WARWICK AND NORTHAMPTON. - ref. DR 3/264 - date: 20 December 1473
[from Scope and Content] Settlement made between Master John Arundell clerk and William Ligon of co. Worcester esq. on the one hand and Beatrice Brome, widow of John Brome of co. Warrewik', and Nicholas Brome of Baddesley Clynton' esq., son and heir of the said Beatrice, previous to the marriage of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth Whyttyngton sister of the said John Arundell. The said marriage to take place before the feast of All Hallows, after which within four months the said Nicholas was to hold an estate of lands in the counties of Warrewik' and Northampton to the annual value of 40 marks, and also to be seised in fee simple of lands valuing £33. 6s. 8d., £20 in rent after the death of the said Beatrice, and £16 after the death of Jane Brome. The said Beatrice to release to the feoffees of the said John Brome all lands of the said John, except her rights in the manor of Baddesley Clynton' and lands in ...Pakkynton' and Hyde co. Warr' [Hydes Pastures co. Leicester].. The said John Arundell to make an estate to the said Elizabeth of lands in.... in co. Warrewik' and of the manors of Notgrove and Rodburgh [Rodborough] ...in co. Glouc'.
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON - ref. DR 3/274 - date: 16 August 1485
[from Scope and Content] Gift from John Beaufitz and John Archer esqs. and Thomas Ryton to Nicholas Brome esq. and Elizabeth his wife of the manor of Baddisley Clynton' with appurtenances, which the grantors held by the gift and feoffment of the said Nicholas. To hold the same for ever from the chief lords of the fee for due and customary service. Sealing clause.
[from Scope and Content] Feoff' Archer and other to Nicholas Brome of the maner of B
[from Scope and Content] John Beaufitz & others' feoffment of Baddesley to Nicholas Brome & Elizabeth his wife.
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
Thank you Jill Whonson for that excellent Post.
Might I point out, that your find effectively crushes the contention that Elizabeth (Arundel) Whittington was *that* one who died in 1474 ?
Son WillJohn
Might I point out, that your find effectively crushes the contention that Elizabeth (Arundel) Whittington was *that* one who died in 1474 ?
Son WillJohn
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 13:28:36 Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson writes:
Can I suggest that she is identical with that Elizabeth Arundel who married Edmund Stradling and also married William Whittington of Pauntley ?
At any rate, I now present that she married Nicholas Brome AFTER 20 Dec 1473 and was yet living on 16 Aug 1485. This severely restricts which children could be by her and which dates could apply to which children. Hopefully this can help us arrange them better. >>
========
At the risk of the displeasure of some (who shall sulk in their corner), I shall now prove that Elizabeth (Arundel) (Whittington) Brome was yet living in 1494/5; that Isabel (Brome) Marrow was *not* heiress of her father as certain authors have stated (and shall now be flogged) and that Nicholas died shortly before 21 May 1517.
Voila
Will Johnson
----------
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s): Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON, WOODLOES, WOODCOTE, NORTON CURLIEU, OFFCHURCH, EATHORPE, WARWICK, SOLIHULL AND LYNDON END - ref. DR 3/294 - date: 21 May 1517; mid 17th century copy
[from Scope and Content] Mid 17th century attested copy of the Inquisition held at Warwicke 31 May 9 Henry VIII [1517] by Thomas Purfray esq. Escheator to the King for the county of Warwick, upon the death of Nicholas Brome esq. The jurors Rowland Stokes, Roger Harwell, John Brerely, George Wagstafe, Thomas Commander, John Wheeler, John Bull, William Smith, Thomas Lett, Richard Holte, John Smith and John Woode stated that Robert Throckmorton, Robert Brudenell, Edward Belknap, Edward Grevill, Andrew Windsore, John Archer, John Harwell, Hugh Sherly, Edward Rawley the younger, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton son of William Clopton, and Richard Throckmorton were seised of the manor of Baddesly Clynton with the advowson of the church, the park, 7 acres of meadow, 20 acres of pasture and 4 acres of wood with appurtenances in Baddesly Clynton to the use of the said Nicholas Brome.
[from Scope and Content] The said Nicholas Brome with the above feoffees then enfeoffed John Ferrers knt., Thomas Nevill esq., Thomas Commander and Robert Bromley with the manor of Baddesly Clynton and lands aforesaid to the use of the said Nicholas and his lawful heirs by Elizabeth his wife, or in default of such heirs, to the rightful heirs of the said Nicholas. The said John Ferrers then died but the said Thomas Nevill, Thomas Commander and Robert Bromley held the said manor, advowson and lands from Thomas Clynton for the rent of one penny per annum at Easter if demanded in lieu of all services, the value per annum being £20 and 1d.
[from Scope and Content] Lady Constance Ferrers and Dorothy Marrow were co-heirs of the said Nicholas Brome and Elizabeth, his wife; Lady Constance being daughter of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth, and Dorothy Marrow being daughter of Isabel Marrow, daughter of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth, Lady Constance being twenty-three years of age and Dorothy Marrow being twenty years of age.
[from Scope and Content] The jurors also stated that Richard Higham, Thomas Frowick, Robert Throckmorton, Edward Belknapp, John Harwell, Andrew Windsore, John Archer, Thomas Essex, Robert Brudenell, Hugh Sherley, Edward Rawley the younger, Edward Grevill, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton, John Denton, John Bradfield and Richard Throckmorton were seised of the manor Woodlow with appurtenances, 7 acres of land, 300 acres of pasture, 40 acres of wood, 40 acres of meadow in Woodlow, and of 5 tofts, 100 acres of land, 600 acres of pasture, 4 acres of wood, 40 acres of meadow and 2s. rent with appurtenances in Overwoodcott, Netherwoodcott and in Norton. Also one messuage, 40 acres of land, 10 acres of pasture and 5 acres of meadow in Offchurch and one acre of wood in Ethropp with appurtenances to the use of the said Nicholas Brome and his heirs. Richard Higham, Thomas Frowicke, John Harwell, Thomas Essex, Hugh Sherley, Edward Rawley the younger, John Denton, John Bradfield then died, but the said Robert Throckmorton, Edward Belknapp, Andrew Wyndsore, John Archer, Robert Brudenell, Edward Grevill, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton and Richard Throckmorton were living at the time of the death of the said Nicholas Brome, and among other transactions, took part in one between the said Nicholas Brome on the one hand, and Henry Ferrers knt. and Edward Ferrers knt. son and heir of the said Henry on the other concerning the manor of Woodlow and other lands in Overwoodcott, Netherwoodcott, Norton, Ethropp and Offchurch, by which if the said Nicholas Brome died without male heirs the said Richard Higham and Thomas Frowicke serjeants-at-law and the other feoffees were to stand seised of the manor of Woodlowe, Overwoodcote, Netherwoodcott with lands and appurtenances in Ethropp occupied by William Wesly and also of 14s. chief rent of the Gild in Warwicke to the use of the said Constance the youngest daughter of the said Nicholas and her lawful heirs, or in default, to the use of the said Isabel and her lawful heirs, or in default, to the use of the heirs of the said Nicholas. In his will the said Nicholas decreed that the feoffees of the manors of Woodlow, Overwoodcott and Netherwoodcott and those enfeoffed of lands which he purchased in Norton, Offchurch and Ethropp should stand seised of these during the minority of Edward son of the said Nicholas to take profits towards the marriage of the three daughters of the said Nicholas and the maintenance of his children in the meantime, and if the said Edward died while still a minor, then to stand seised until Ralph son of the said Nicholas should come of age, and then stand seised to him and his heirs. The manor of Woodlow, Overwoodcott, and Netherwoodcott being held of the King as of the Castle of Warwick for the annual rent of 7s. 8d. and one pair of gloves and one pepper in lieu of all services, the annual value being 20 marks, the said messuages and lands in Offchurch were held of the Prior of Coventry as of the manor of Ofchurchbury for the annual rent of 6s. in lieu of all services, the value being 13s. 4d., and the messuages and lands in Ethropp were held from the lord of Wappenbury for the annual rent of one clove of gillyflower, the value being 10s.
[from Scope and Content] The jurors also stated that Edward Grevill knt. Thomas Denton esq. and Robert Bankes clerk were seised at the death of the said Nicholas Brome of one messuage and 4 acres of pasture in Solihull and 2 acres of pasture in Nether Norton and of one messuage, 30 acres of pasture, 4 acres of meadow and one acre of moor with appurtenances in Lyndon to the use of the said Nicholas Brome during his life and after his death to the use of Elizabeth one of the daughters of the said Nicholas and her lawful heirs, or in default, to Katherine wife of the said Nicholas for the term of her life, and on her decease to the use of Constance Ferrers, another daughter of the said Nicholas for ever. The said messuage in Solihull being held from Thomas Duke of Norfolk for the rent of 2d. in lieu of service, the value being 12s. The said pasture in Nether Norton being held from the Dean and Chapter of the church of St. Mary's Warwick, but by what service they knew not, though the annual value was 2s. The lands in Lyndon were held from the Prior of St. John of Jerusalem and of the heirs of the Earl of Kildare, and their annual value was 20s.
[from Scope and Content] The said Nicholas Brome died on the 10th. day of October last past, and Edward Brome, his eldest son and heir was aged 8 years and more at the time of his father's death.
[from Scope and Content] The office found after the death of Nicholas Brome of his landes in Baddesly Clynton & Woodlowes or elsewhere
[from Scope and Content] Inquisition after the death of Nicholas Brome taken 31st May 9th Henry 8th.
Can I suggest that she is identical with that Elizabeth Arundel who married Edmund Stradling and also married William Whittington of Pauntley ?
At any rate, I now present that she married Nicholas Brome AFTER 20 Dec 1473 and was yet living on 16 Aug 1485. This severely restricts which children could be by her and which dates could apply to which children. Hopefully this can help us arrange them better. >>
========
At the risk of the displeasure of some (who shall sulk in their corner), I shall now prove that Elizabeth (Arundel) (Whittington) Brome was yet living in 1494/5; that Isabel (Brome) Marrow was *not* heiress of her father as certain authors have stated (and shall now be flogged) and that Nicholas died shortly before 21 May 1517.
Voila
Will Johnson
----------
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Records Office: Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton
FERRERS OF BADDESLEY CLINTON
Catalogue Ref. DR 3
Creator(s): Ferrers family of Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire
DOCUMENTS OF TITLE
Baddesley Clinton and other places in Worwickshire
FILE - BADDESLEY CLINTON, WOODLOES, WOODCOTE, NORTON CURLIEU, OFFCHURCH, EATHORPE, WARWICK, SOLIHULL AND LYNDON END - ref. DR 3/294 - date: 21 May 1517; mid 17th century copy
[from Scope and Content] Mid 17th century attested copy of the Inquisition held at Warwicke 31 May 9 Henry VIII [1517] by Thomas Purfray esq. Escheator to the King for the county of Warwick, upon the death of Nicholas Brome esq. The jurors Rowland Stokes, Roger Harwell, John Brerely, George Wagstafe, Thomas Commander, John Wheeler, John Bull, William Smith, Thomas Lett, Richard Holte, John Smith and John Woode stated that Robert Throckmorton, Robert Brudenell, Edward Belknap, Edward Grevill, Andrew Windsore, John Archer, John Harwell, Hugh Sherly, Edward Rawley the younger, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton son of William Clopton, and Richard Throckmorton were seised of the manor of Baddesly Clynton with the advowson of the church, the park, 7 acres of meadow, 20 acres of pasture and 4 acres of wood with appurtenances in Baddesly Clynton to the use of the said Nicholas Brome.
[from Scope and Content] The said Nicholas Brome with the above feoffees then enfeoffed John Ferrers knt., Thomas Nevill esq., Thomas Commander and Robert Bromley with the manor of Baddesly Clynton and lands aforesaid to the use of the said Nicholas and his lawful heirs by Elizabeth his wife, or in default of such heirs, to the rightful heirs of the said Nicholas. The said John Ferrers then died but the said Thomas Nevill, Thomas Commander and Robert Bromley held the said manor, advowson and lands from Thomas Clynton for the rent of one penny per annum at Easter if demanded in lieu of all services, the value per annum being £20 and 1d.
[from Scope and Content] Lady Constance Ferrers and Dorothy Marrow were co-heirs of the said Nicholas Brome and Elizabeth, his wife; Lady Constance being daughter of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth, and Dorothy Marrow being daughter of Isabel Marrow, daughter of the said Nicholas and Elizabeth, Lady Constance being twenty-three years of age and Dorothy Marrow being twenty years of age.
[from Scope and Content] The jurors also stated that Richard Higham, Thomas Frowick, Robert Throckmorton, Edward Belknapp, John Harwell, Andrew Windsore, John Archer, Thomas Essex, Robert Brudenell, Hugh Sherley, Edward Rawley the younger, Edward Grevill, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton, John Denton, John Bradfield and Richard Throckmorton were seised of the manor Woodlow with appurtenances, 7 acres of land, 300 acres of pasture, 40 acres of wood, 40 acres of meadow in Woodlow, and of 5 tofts, 100 acres of land, 600 acres of pasture, 4 acres of wood, 40 acres of meadow and 2s. rent with appurtenances in Overwoodcott, Netherwoodcott and in Norton. Also one messuage, 40 acres of land, 10 acres of pasture and 5 acres of meadow in Offchurch and one acre of wood in Ethropp with appurtenances to the use of the said Nicholas Brome and his heirs. Richard Higham, Thomas Frowicke, John Harwell, Thomas Essex, Hugh Sherley, Edward Rawley the younger, John Denton, John Bradfield then died, but the said Robert Throckmorton, Edward Belknapp, Andrew Wyndsore, John Archer, Robert Brudenell, Edward Grevill, Thomas Denton, John Archer the younger, John Clopton and Richard Throckmorton were living at the time of the death of the said Nicholas Brome, and among other transactions, took part in one between the said Nicholas Brome on the one hand, and Henry Ferrers knt. and Edward Ferrers knt. son and heir of the said Henry on the other concerning the manor of Woodlow and other lands in Overwoodcott, Netherwoodcott, Norton, Ethropp and Offchurch, by which if the said Nicholas Brome died without male heirs the said Richard Higham and Thomas Frowicke serjeants-at-law and the other feoffees were to stand seised of the manor of Woodlowe, Overwoodcote, Netherwoodcott with lands and appurtenances in Ethropp occupied by William Wesly and also of 14s. chief rent of the Gild in Warwicke to the use of the said Constance the youngest daughter of the said Nicholas and her lawful heirs, or in default, to the use of the said Isabel and her lawful heirs, or in default, to the use of the heirs of the said Nicholas. In his will the said Nicholas decreed that the feoffees of the manors of Woodlow, Overwoodcott and Netherwoodcott and those enfeoffed of lands which he purchased in Norton, Offchurch and Ethropp should stand seised of these during the minority of Edward son of the said Nicholas to take profits towards the marriage of the three daughters of the said Nicholas and the maintenance of his children in the meantime, and if the said Edward died while still a minor, then to stand seised until Ralph son of the said Nicholas should come of age, and then stand seised to him and his heirs. The manor of Woodlow, Overwoodcott, and Netherwoodcott being held of the King as of the Castle of Warwick for the annual rent of 7s. 8d. and one pair of gloves and one pepper in lieu of all services, the annual value being 20 marks, the said messuages and lands in Offchurch were held of the Prior of Coventry as of the manor of Ofchurchbury for the annual rent of 6s. in lieu of all services, the value being 13s. 4d., and the messuages and lands in Ethropp were held from the lord of Wappenbury for the annual rent of one clove of gillyflower, the value being 10s.
[from Scope and Content] The jurors also stated that Edward Grevill knt. Thomas Denton esq. and Robert Bankes clerk were seised at the death of the said Nicholas Brome of one messuage and 4 acres of pasture in Solihull and 2 acres of pasture in Nether Norton and of one messuage, 30 acres of pasture, 4 acres of meadow and one acre of moor with appurtenances in Lyndon to the use of the said Nicholas Brome during his life and after his death to the use of Elizabeth one of the daughters of the said Nicholas and her lawful heirs, or in default, to Katherine wife of the said Nicholas for the term of her life, and on her decease to the use of Constance Ferrers, another daughter of the said Nicholas for ever. The said messuage in Solihull being held from Thomas Duke of Norfolk for the rent of 2d. in lieu of service, the value being 12s. The said pasture in Nether Norton being held from the Dean and Chapter of the church of St. Mary's Warwick, but by what service they knew not, though the annual value was 2s. The lands in Lyndon were held from the Prior of St. John of Jerusalem and of the heirs of the Earl of Kildare, and their annual value was 20s.
[from Scope and Content] The said Nicholas Brome died on the 10th. day of October last past, and Edward Brome, his eldest son and heir was aged 8 years and more at the time of his father's death.
[from Scope and Content] The office found after the death of Nicholas Brome of his landes in Baddesly Clynton & Woodlowes or elsewhere
[from Scope and Content] Inquisition after the death of Nicholas Brome taken 31st May 9th Henry 8th.
-
John Watson
Re: Visitations
On Oct 10, 1:30 am, Ken Ozanne <kenoza...@bordernet.com.au> wrote:
Hi Ken,
There is a Volume 85 on the site, but it is mis-labelled, and does not
contain part 2 of the visitation. When I have time, I'll try to track
it down.
BTW - it's not my site.
Regards,
John
John,
I haven't got to your later message yet, but thanks for these. You seem
to have flip views which don't suit my browser, but searching for Chetham
and using your volume numbers allowed me to find and download them. There
are other interesting volumes as well, including ipm abstracts.
You seem to have missed Dugdale's visitation part 2, which is volume 85.
Best,
Ken
On 9/10/07 15:52, "gen-medieval-requ...@rootsweb.com"
gen-medieval-requ...@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: John Watson <WatsonJo...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 04:42:51 -0000
To: gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Visitations of Lancashire
The Internet Archive website offers a veritable treasure trove of old
books online. However, they are often difficult to find, because they
have been labelled with such unhelpful titles as "Publications".
Here are a few links that I have found recently, that may be of
interest. I'll post more as I find them.
Chetham Society Publications
Visitation of Lancashire and Part of Cheshire in 1533, by Thomas
Benalt
http://www.openlibrary.org/details/rema ... 98chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1567, by William
Flower
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 81chetuoft
Visitation of The County Palatine of Lancaster in 1613, by Richard St.
George
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 82chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part I
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 84chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part III
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 88chetuoft
Regards,
John
Hi Ken,
There is a Volume 85 on the site, but it is mis-labelled, and does not
contain part 2 of the visitation. When I have time, I'll try to track
it down.
BTW - it's not my site.
Regards,
John
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 13:23:07 Pacific Daylight Time, info@watercoloursfair.com writes:
Are the parents known of the Sir Peter Middleton of Stockeld whose daughter
is said by the 1563 and 1564 visitation to Yorkshire to have married John
Vavasour of Weston? >>
----------------------------------
Stirnet Middleton XA claims the parents of Sir Peter were William Middleton by his wife Agnes Boteler (dau of Sir Nigel)
They cite
Visitation (Foster 1875, Yorkshire, 1584/5+1612, Midelton of Stockeld)
Will Johnson (aka A.K.A.)
Are the parents known of the Sir Peter Middleton of Stockeld whose daughter
is said by the 1563 and 1564 visitation to Yorkshire to have married John
Vavasour of Weston? >>
----------------------------------
Stirnet Middleton XA claims the parents of Sir Peter were William Middleton by his wife Agnes Boteler (dau of Sir Nigel)
They cite
Visitation (Foster 1875, Yorkshire, 1584/5+1612, Midelton of Stockeld)
Will Johnson (aka A.K.A.)
-
WJhonson
Re: descents towards the present day from Elizabeth Gorges,
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 13:24:21 Pacific Daylight Time, qsj5@yahoo.com writes:
While it seems obvious to me that her second marriage
with her kinsman sir Ferdinando Gorges, of Maine, did
not produce issue (Elizabeth was almost fifty at the
time of that wedding), >>
------------------------------
Tudorplace.com.ar states that Elizabeth was born June 1578 and that the marriage to Ferdinando took place on 28 Sep 1629 so she was already into her 52nd year.
Will Johnson
While it seems obvious to me that her second marriage
with her kinsman sir Ferdinando Gorges, of Maine, did
not produce issue (Elizabeth was almost fifty at the
time of that wedding), >>
------------------------------
Tudorplace.com.ar states that Elizabeth was born June 1578 and that the marriage to Ferdinando took place on 28 Sep 1629 so she was already into her 52nd year.
Will Johnson
-
Ken Ozanne
Re: Visitations
On 10/10/07 7:35, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
John,
I wasn't in danger of thinking the site yours - I have been using it
for some time and have downloaded hundreds of volumes.
Among them was volume 85 above, and it starts at page 105 of Dugdale's
1664-5 Visitation. There is a bit of society bumpf ahead of that.
Best,
Ken
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:32:10 -0000
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Visitations
On Oct 10, 1:30 am, Ken Ozanne <kenoza...@bordernet.com.au> wrote:
John,
I haven't got to your later message yet, but thanks for these. You seem
to have flip views which don't suit my browser, but searching for Chetham
and using your volume numbers allowed me to find and download them. There
are other interesting volumes as well, including ipm abstracts.
You seem to have missed Dugdale's visitation part 2, which is volume 85.
Best,
Ken
On 9/10/07 15:52, "gen-medieval-requ...@rootsweb.com"
gen-medieval-requ...@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: John Watson <WatsonJo...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 04:42:51 -0000
To: gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Visitations of Lancashire
The Internet Archive website offers a veritable treasure trove of old
books online. However, they are often difficult to find, because they
have been labelled with such unhelpful titles as "Publications".
Here are a few links that I have found recently, that may be of
interest. I'll post more as I find them.
Chetham Society Publications
Visitation of Lancashire and Part of Cheshire in 1533, by Thomas
Benalt
http://www.openlibrary.org/details/rema ... 98chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1567, by William
Flower
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 81chetuoft
Visitation of The County Palatine of Lancaster in 1613, by Richard St.
George
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 82chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part I
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 84chetuoft
Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster in 1664-5, by Sir
William Dugdale, Part III
http://www.archive.org/details/remainsh ... 88chetuoft
Regards,
John
Hi Ken,
There is a Volume 85 on the site, but it is mis-labelled, and does not
contain part 2 of the visitation. When I have time, I'll try to track
it down.
BTW - it's not my site.
Regards,
John
John,
I wasn't in danger of thinking the site yours - I have been using it
for some time and have downloaded hundreds of volumes.
Among them was volume 85 above, and it starts at page 105 of Dugdale's
1664-5 Visitation. There is a bit of society bumpf ahead of that.
Best,
Ken
-
WJhonson
Re: descents towards the present day from Elizabeth Gorges,
You asked for additions and corrections to the tree you found online.
For one thing they do not comment on Mary Smith, the daughter of Hugh Smith of Long Ashton by his wife Elizabeth Gorges.
This Mary Smith married Thomas Smith of Hatherton, Mayor of Chester, Sheriff of Cheshire son of Lawrence Smith by his wife Anne Mainwaring and thus having many royal lines.
Thomas Smith and Mary Smith had at least or exactly two children Thomas Smith 1st Bart of Hatherton, Cheshire who m Abigail Pate
And also a daughter Mary Smith who m1 George Cotton (d.v.p.s.p.s.) and m2 Robert Holte, 2nd Bart of Aston
So that's an addition.
Will Johnson
For one thing they do not comment on Mary Smith, the daughter of Hugh Smith of Long Ashton by his wife Elizabeth Gorges.
This Mary Smith married Thomas Smith of Hatherton, Mayor of Chester, Sheriff of Cheshire son of Lawrence Smith by his wife Anne Mainwaring and thus having many royal lines.
Thomas Smith and Mary Smith had at least or exactly two children Thomas Smith 1st Bart of Hatherton, Cheshire who m Abigail Pate
And also a daughter Mary Smith who m1 George Cotton (d.v.p.s.p.s.) and m2 Robert Holte, 2nd Bart of Aston
So that's an addition.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
This might suggest a *tentative* dating for his second marriage to Lettice Catesby
Will Johnson
Birmingham City Archives: Documents from the collection of Sir Thomas Phillips
Reference Code: MS 3525
Documents from the collection of Sir Thomas Phillipps
Creation dates: c 1230 - c 1850
Creator(s): Phillipps, Sir, Thomas, 1792-1872, 1st baronet, antiquary and bibliophile
Reference: MS 3525/ACC 1935-043/437896
Indenture between George Catesby, esq., and Nicholas Brome otherwise called Nicholas Broune of Baddesley, co. War., esq., concerning the manor place of Brome with lands and appurtenances in the parish of Lapwurth [Lapworth], co. War.
Creation dates: 21 January 16 Hen VII [1500-01]
Will Johnson
Birmingham City Archives: Documents from the collection of Sir Thomas Phillips
Reference Code: MS 3525
Documents from the collection of Sir Thomas Phillipps
Creation dates: c 1230 - c 1850
Creator(s): Phillipps, Sir, Thomas, 1792-1872, 1st baronet, antiquary and bibliophile
Reference: MS 3525/ACC 1935-043/437896
Indenture between George Catesby, esq., and Nicholas Brome otherwise called Nicholas Broune of Baddesley, co. War., esq., concerning the manor place of Brome with lands and appurtenances in the parish of Lapwurth [Lapworth], co. War.
Creation dates: 21 January 16 Hen VII [1500-01]
-
Todd Carnes
RE: Help. I need an e-book
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Jason" <pj@jostle.com>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,soc.genealogy.medieval,talk.origins
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: Help. I need an e-book.
Yes, it's here...
http://books.google.com/books?id=YY4EAAAAYAAJ
From: "Peter Jason" <pj@jostle.com>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,soc.genealogy.medieval,talk.origins
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: Help. I need an e-book.
Does Darwin's "Origin of Species" come in
e-book form?
Please help.
Yes, it's here...
http://books.google.com/books?id=YY4EAAAAYAAJ
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 16:20:44 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
In an Inquisition post Mortem, York, 28 Aug 1518, 10 Henry VIII, I find, in part:
participants:
"William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton, his son and heir, William
Thwaites, Esq., of Marston, and others..."
I conclude this William Middleton,b.c.1456, Knight and son Thomas, was probably
the William Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton,b.c.1447,>>
---------------------------
Except William was already dead.
Will dated 18 June 1474, proved 2 Dec 1474
In an Inquisition post Mortem, York, 28 Aug 1518, 10 Henry VIII, I find, in part:
participants:
"William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton, his son and heir, William
Thwaites, Esq., of Marston, and others..."
I conclude this William Middleton,b.c.1456, Knight and son Thomas, was probably
the William Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton,b.c.1447,>>
---------------------------
Except William was already dead.
Will dated 18 June 1474, proved 2 Dec 1474
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
In an Inquisition post Mortem, York, 28 Aug 1518, 10 Henry VIII, I find, in part:
participants:
"William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton, his son and heir, William
Thwaites, Esq., of Marston, and others..."
I conclude this William Middleton,b.c.1456, Knight and son Thomas, was probably
the William Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton,b.c.1447, and was the son
of Sir John Middleton,b.c.1471, who married Alice Maulereverer. I have several
sources alleging Thwaites/Thwaytes married into this Middleton line. I am not sure
this William Middleton, Knight, who had a son Thomas Middleton, his son and heir,
was the Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton. Who was this William Thwaites,
Esq., of Marston, party to the Inquisition?
Given the date of the Inquisition, can anyone confirm this association of Thwaites as
related by marriage or blood to William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton,
his son and heir, and confirm that this William Middleton was the one who married
Margaret Hamerton?
Bill
************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gam ... olyherenow
participants:
"William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton, his son and heir, William
Thwaites, Esq., of Marston, and others..."
I conclude this William Middleton,b.c.1456, Knight and son Thomas, was probably
the William Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton,b.c.1447, and was the son
of Sir John Middleton,b.c.1471, who married Alice Maulereverer. I have several
sources alleging Thwaites/Thwaytes married into this Middleton line. I am not sure
this William Middleton, Knight, who had a son Thomas Middleton, his son and heir,
was the Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton. Who was this William Thwaites,
Esq., of Marston, party to the Inquisition?
Given the date of the Inquisition, can anyone confirm this association of Thwaites as
related by marriage or blood to William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton,
his son and heir, and confirm that this William Middleton was the one who married
Margaret Hamerton?
Bill
************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/09/07 13:23:07 Pacific Daylight Time, info@watercoloursfair.com writes:
Are the parents known of the Sir Peter Middleton of Stockeld whose daughter
is said by the 1563 and 1564 visitation to Yorkshire to have married John
Vavasour of Weston?
----------------------------------
Stirnet Middleton XA claims the parents of Sir Peter were William Middleton by his wife Agnes
Boteler (dau of Sir Nigel)
They cite
Visitation (Foster 1875, Yorkshire, 1584/5+1612, Midelton of Stockeld)
Will Johnson (aka A.K.A.)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gam ... olyherenow
-
Todd Carnes
RE: Help. I need an e-book
----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Carnes" <toddcarnes@gmail.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:15 PM
Subject: RE: Help. I need an e-book
It's also here...
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/2009 (search under "Darwin")
From: "Todd Carnes" <toddcarnes@gmail.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:15 PM
Subject: RE: Help. I need an e-book
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Jason" <pj@jostle.com
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,soc.genealogy.medieval,talk.origins
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: Help. I need an e-book.
Does Darwin's "Origin of Species" come in
e-book form?
Please help.
Yes, it's here...
http://books.google.com/books?id=YY4EAAAAYAAJ
It's also here...
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/2009 (search under "Darwin")
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
Thanks Adrian, after I'd posted the question I then found the IPM for Nicholas.
Interesting large gap between the two co-heiresses Isabella and Constance Brome.
Isabella was somewhere between 11 and TWENTY years older than her sister.
And the documents make it clear, in a sea of confusion that they were not co-heiresses of their father, nor of their mother, nor of their brother. They were co-heiresses of the UNION of their parents as the properties were settled on the heirs of this union strictly and barring that to the right heirs of Nicholas.
This might be a typical arrangement, but it's certainly confusing when a man has living sons and yet his daughters are called "co-heiresses" without qualifying that it was because the properties were settled on this union, not other unions of the father.
Did you happen to notice that Thomas Marrow, at least *some* Thomas was yet living, quite a ways past 1505? Curious. I wish I could find that one document which would *contemporaneously* call his wife Isabel instead of in retrospect, and be after 1505....
Will
Interesting large gap between the two co-heiresses Isabella and Constance Brome.
Isabella was somewhere between 11 and TWENTY years older than her sister.
And the documents make it clear, in a sea of confusion that they were not co-heiresses of their father, nor of their mother, nor of their brother. They were co-heiresses of the UNION of their parents as the properties were settled on the heirs of this union strictly and barring that to the right heirs of Nicholas.
This might be a typical arrangement, but it's certainly confusing when a man has living sons and yet his daughters are called "co-heiresses" without qualifying that it was because the properties were settled on this union, not other unions of the father.
Did you happen to notice that Thomas Marrow, at least *some* Thomas was yet living, quite a ways past 1505? Curious. I wish I could find that one document which would *contemporaneously* call his wife Isabel instead of in retrospect, and be after 1505....
Will
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesely Clinton and Holton CORRECTION
Ok I'm ready to concede that that Thomas Marrow (aka Marowe), serjeant-at-law who died 5 Apr 1505 is the same one who married Isabel Brome (prenuptial settlement dated 8 Jan 1490/1), negotiating his own marriage settlement with his prospective father-in-law Nicholas Brome.
They then had a single surviving daughter Dorothy about 1496-1498 "aged 7" in 1505, "aged 20" in 1517", heiress of her father, co-heiress with her aunt of the union of Nicholas Brome and Elizabeth Arundel.
Isabella Brome died before 21 May 1517 (d.v.p.) when her daughter was found co-heir with her sister to their father in an IPM at which time Dorothy is called Dorothy Marow (not yet Cokayne)
Interesting both her mother Isabella, and her aunt Constance were children at their marriages or settlements, while Dorothy held out until she was 21 to 23 and then apparently had just a single child? (I'm not sure) Sir Thomas Cokayne Knt 1544 of Ashbourne bur 15 Nov 1592 at Ashbourne who married Dorothy Ferrers, his step-sister.
It's sort of bizarre how often step-siblings married, today we'd think that was sort-of odd I think.
Will Johnson
They then had a single surviving daughter Dorothy about 1496-1498 "aged 7" in 1505, "aged 20" in 1517", heiress of her father, co-heiress with her aunt of the union of Nicholas Brome and Elizabeth Arundel.
Isabella Brome died before 21 May 1517 (d.v.p.) when her daughter was found co-heir with her sister to their father in an IPM at which time Dorothy is called Dorothy Marow (not yet Cokayne)
Interesting both her mother Isabella, and her aunt Constance were children at their marriages or settlements, while Dorothy held out until she was 21 to 23 and then apparently had just a single child? (I'm not sure) Sir Thomas Cokayne Knt 1544 of Ashbourne bur 15 Nov 1592 at Ashbourne who married Dorothy Ferrers, his step-sister.
It's sort of bizarre how often step-siblings married, today we'd think that was sort-of odd I think.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: parentage of Ida de Tosny
<<In a message dated 10/09/07 13:25:23 Pacific Daylight Time, qsj5@yahoo.com writes:
Thus, if in a bigger brood of
children, name of any grandparent seems to be lacking,
it usually was because that grandparent's namesake
baby died without having a lasting record >>
-------------------------------
But we must reject this form of logic as it is not falsifiable, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. Let me explain. If I say they DID name a child after each grandparent you say "See my point is proven". If I say they did NOT name a child after each grandparent you say "The child left no lasting record."
So not matter what, you would be able to say you were right, never able to be proven wrong. That is what it means to have a theory be falsifiable.
Will Johnson
Thus, if in a bigger brood of
children, name of any grandparent seems to be lacking,
it usually was because that grandparent's namesake
baby died without having a lasting record >>
-------------------------------
But we must reject this form of logic as it is not falsifiable, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. Let me explain. If I say they DID name a child after each grandparent you say "See my point is proven". If I say they did NOT name a child after each grandparent you say "The child left no lasting record."
So not matter what, you would be able to say you were right, never able to be proven wrong. That is what it means to have a theory be falsifiable.
Will Johnson
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
Much thanks again. How does one solve the index problem,
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
*********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
*********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
Today's harvest from the Internet Archive website is for wills, etc.
mainly from Yorkshire. For completeness I have also included links to
where some of these documents, and others, can be downloaded in pdf
format from Prof. Boynton's University of Iowa website, but beware,
some of these are large downloads.
Internet Archive:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 2)
http://www.archive.org/details/testamen ... 30surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 4)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications53surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 5)
http://www.archive.org/details/selectio ... 05surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 6)
http://www.archive.org/details/aselecti ... 06surtuoft
Wills & Administrations from The Knaresborough Court Rolls (Vol 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications104surtuoft
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/northcou ... 00surtuoft
Wills and Inventories from the Registry at Durham (Part 3)
http://www.archive.org/details/willsinv ... 00surtuoft
University of Iowa:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Parts 1 & 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... rktext.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 16text.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 21text.pdf
Wills and Inventories of the Northern Counties of England (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... ndtext.pdf
Wills and Inventories from the Registry of the Archdeaconry of
Richmond
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... ndtext.pdf
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
-
Renia
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
Bill Arnold wrote:
When you do a search, search for the word "index". Then flick through
the index for what you want. Note the little yellow slips to the side.
Much thanks again. How does one solve the index problem,
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
When you do a search, search for the word "index". Then flick through
the index for what you want. Note the little yellow slips to the side.
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: descents towards the present day from Elizabeth Gorges,
Dear Will,
It is a pity you do not seem to have access to the Complete Baronetage as
Volume III page 112 starts the baronial Smith family with some startling
details.
Sir Thomas Smith, 1st Baronet, of Hatherton, was one of the _21_ children of
Sir Thomas Smith, Mayor of Chester, and Mary daughter of Sir Hugh Smith of
Ashton.
This 1st Baronet when he became a Baronet made two of his brothers entitled
to his baronetcy in case he died without a son. These two brothers were
Lawrence and Francis. Sir Thomas died without sons, as Lawrence had
predeceased him, it was Lawrence's son who became Sir Thomas Smith 2nd
Baronet, he _probably_ died unmarried. And as no more Smith Baronet's are
mentioned it looks as though his uncle Francis had died before him also
without sons (if married at all).
Now we have the names of three sons and one daughter, still 17 children to
go (sigh).
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: descents towards the present day from Elizabeth Gorges,eldest
daughter of the Marchioness of Northampton (Helena Snakenborg)
It is a pity you do not seem to have access to the Complete Baronetage as
Volume III page 112 starts the baronial Smith family with some startling
details.
Sir Thomas Smith, 1st Baronet, of Hatherton, was one of the _21_ children of
Sir Thomas Smith, Mayor of Chester, and Mary daughter of Sir Hugh Smith of
Ashton.
This 1st Baronet when he became a Baronet made two of his brothers entitled
to his baronetcy in case he died without a son. These two brothers were
Lawrence and Francis. Sir Thomas died without sons, as Lawrence had
predeceased him, it was Lawrence's son who became Sir Thomas Smith 2nd
Baronet, he _probably_ died unmarried. And as no more Smith Baronet's are
mentioned it looks as though his uncle Francis had died before him also
without sons (if married at all).
Now we have the names of three sons and one daughter, still 17 children to
go (sigh).
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: descents towards the present day from Elizabeth Gorges,eldest
daughter of the Marchioness of Northampton (Helena Snakenborg)
You asked for additions and corrections to the tree you found online.
For one thing they do not comment on Mary Smith, the daughter of Hugh
Smith of Long Ashton by his wife Elizabeth Gorges.
This Mary Smith married Thomas Smith of Hatherton, Mayor of Chester,
Sheriff of Cheshire son of Lawrence Smith by his wife Anne Mainwaring and
thus having many royal lines.
Thomas Smith and Mary Smith had at least or exactly two children Thomas
Smith 1st Bart of Hatherton, Cheshire who m Abigail Pate
And also a daughter Mary Smith who m1 George Cotton (d.v.p.s.p.s.) and m2
Robert Holte, 2nd Bart of Aston
So that's an addition.
Will Johnson
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
The Hodgson's ancestor se
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Are the parents known of the Sir Peter Middleton of Stockeld whose daughter
is said by the 1563 and 1564 visitation to Yorkshire to have married John
Vavasour of Weston?
Richard Hodgson
Database of 48,230 of my children¹s ancestors (20,203 of their father¹s
ancestors, and 46,952 of their mother¹s ancestors. 18,925 of the individuals
are ancestors of both their father and mother.)
http://www.ancestorsearch.co.uk
On 6/10/07 23:53, "WJhonson@aol.com" <WJhonson@aol.com> wrote:
is said by the 1563 and 1564 visitation to Yorkshire to have married John
Vavasour of Weston?
Richard Hodgson
Database of 48,230 of my children¹s ancestors (20,203 of their father¹s
ancestors, and 46,952 of their mother¹s ancestors. 18,925 of the individuals
are ancestors of both their father and mother.)
http://www.ancestorsearch.co.uk
On 6/10/07 23:53, "WJhonson@aol.com" <WJhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:21:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's edition of
Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was
published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new series]", and Clay's edition
of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume set. I
have no idea whether either of these is availble on-line (e.g., Google Books),
but the FHL has both versions and may have them available on film.
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
Much thanks. Then it was a son of his and grandson,
who appears in the pedigree, and I believe the son or
grandson was married to a Maud Thwaites. I have sent through interlibrary
loan for the Middleton pedigree, but it will take 4 to 6 weeks for it
to arrive.
Would Maud Thwaites have had a brother or father or uncle
named William Thwaites, Esq., of Marston?
Bill
*********************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
who appears in the pedigree, and I believe the son or
grandson was married to a Maud Thwaites. I have sent through interlibrary
loan for the Middleton pedigree, but it will take 4 to 6 weeks for it
to arrive.
Would Maud Thwaites have had a brother or father or uncle
named William Thwaites, Esq., of Marston?
Bill
*********************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/09/07 16:20:44 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
In an Inquisition post Mortem, York, 28 Aug 1518, 10 Henry VIII, I find, in part:
participants:
"William Middleton, Knight, with Thomas Middleton, his son and heir, William
Thwaites, Esq., of Marston, and others..."
I conclude this William Middleton,b.c.1456, Knight and son Thomas, was probably
the William Middleton who married Margaret Hamerton,b.c.1447,
---------------------------
Except William was already dead.
Will dated 18 June 1474, proved 2 Dec 1474
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
-
Ian Wallace
Re: Help. I need an e-book
There is a great deal of Darwin's material now available at
http://darwin-online.org.uk/majorworks.html .
This includes his journals. One entry I found especially interesting
was an early comment on the Giant Galapagos Tortoise "...delicious,
especially in soups..."
Ian.
http://darwin-online.org.uk/majorworks.html .
This includes his journals. One entry I found especially interesting
was an early comment on the Giant Galapagos Tortoise "...delicious,
especially in soups..."
Ian.
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
I assume you mean in the back of the downloaded Visitation?
Are there indexes external to the download?
Bill
**************************
--- Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
Are there indexes external to the download?
Bill
**************************
--- Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote:
Bill Arnold wrote:
Much thanks again. How does one solve the index problem,
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
When you do a search, search for the word "index". Then flick through
the index for what you want. Note the little yellow slips to the side.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"But the most extensive pedigree I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's
edition of Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new
series]", and Clay's edition of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. "
I called The Genealogist and they could not find the particular Middleton segment in vol. 18.
Can someone assist with more detail so I can find it? I can order a back issue. I need to know
what the
name of the article was, what year, whether spring or fall issue.
Are we referring to the same journal, published in America?
Bill
**********************************************
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search
that gives answers, not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onese ... fer=1ONXIC
"But the most extensive pedigree I've found for the Middletons of Stockeld appears in Clay's
edition of Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new
series]", and Clay's edition of the entire visitation was published separately as a three-volume
set. "
I called The Genealogist and they could not find the particular Middleton segment in vol. 18.
Can someone assist with more detail so I can find it? I can order a back issue. I need to know
what the
name of the article was, what year, whether spring or fall issue.
Are we referring to the same journal, published in America?
Bill
**********************************************
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search
that gives answers, not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onese ... fer=1ONXIC
-
Chris Dickinson
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
Bill wrote:
You can use the flip book option.
This enables you to flip through the book online without downloading. I'm
not sure, frankly, how useful this is to you, as I'm on a broadband and
can't judge how long each page flip takes. I don't think you can skim to any
index at the end [?].
Chris
I have, unfortunately, dial-up service. So, before I download
a huge file, I want to check an index of what is in the particular
Visitation. Is there an index to these Visitations, prior to a
download of each one?
You can use the flip book option.
This enables you to flip through the book online without downloading. I'm
not sure, frankly, how useful this is to you, as I'm on a broadband and
can't judge how long each page flip takes. I don't think you can skim to any
index at the end [?].
Chris
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
I have, unfortunately, dial-up service. So, before I download
a huge file, I want to check an index of what is in the particular
Visitation. Is there an index to these Visitations, prior to a
download of each one?
Bill
***********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
a huge file, I want to check an index of what is in the particular
Visitation. Is there an index to these Visitations, prior to a
download of each one?
Bill
***********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 10, 7:55 am, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Much thanks again. How does one solve the index problem,
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
*********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Today's harvest from the Internet Archive website is for wills, etc.
mainly from Yorkshire. For completeness I have also included links to
where some of these documents, and others, can be downloaded in pdf
format from Prof. Boynton's University of Iowa website, but beware,
some of these are large downloads.
Internet Archive:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 2)
http://www.archive.org/details/testamen ... 30surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 4)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications53surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 5)
http://www.archive.org/details/selectio ... 05surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Part 6)
http://www.archive.org/details/aselecti ... 06surtuoft
Wills & Administrations from The Knaresborough Court Rolls (Vol 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications104surtuoft
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/northcou ... 00surtuoft
Wills and Inventories from the Registry at Durham (Part 3)
http://www.archive.org/details/willsinv ... 00surtuoft
University of Iowa:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York
(Parts 1 & 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... rktext.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 16text.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 21text.pdf
Wills and Inventories of the Northern Counties of England (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... landtext...
Wills and Inventories from the Registry of the Archdeaconry of
Richmond
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... ndtext.pdf
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with
the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on
us.http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
Hi Bill,
Not sure what you mean by the "index problem".
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
-
Volucris
Re: parentage of Ida de Tosny
On 10 okt, 03:23, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
The only thing that can not be proven is the moment that - later
attested - naming customs started. Customs do start sometime. If there
are later examples within the same family were it can be proven, one
might easily assume that the naming customs might have been in action
a or a few generation(s) earlier. It is true that those naming customs
in those elder generations can not be proven scientifically with the
preserved/known records but it does not mean that therefore something
did not exist.
But then again it is your impression of the facts and need not be true
in every case. The records in medieval time are scarse and one deduces
what one can from what one finds. A elder son - because no record of
another elder son can be found or is preserved - need not be truely
the ELDER son. It is safer to assume that in many cases the elder
known son MIGHT as well have been just the eldest surviving son. There
are 13th-14th examples of a father being accompanied with his elder
son. The son dies and at a later point in time the same father names a
accompanying younger son his 'eldest' son.
One can find fault with this opinion but do not let be misunderstood
or my words misconstrued. I do not claim that it should be the guiding
line in every case but I do would like to point out that there is more
to life then painting a situation black or white.
One can subject a theory to hypercriticism to find a fault but one
should apply this criticism to all assumptions, also ones own. After
all the available records are scarcer when one reaches back in time.
On the basis of the (to that moment) known facts one might assume this
or that and be dogmatic about it. Later facts brought to light might
bring new insides and rethinking of the previous known 'facts'.
Heretical thoughts from the dogmatic past might then just provide the
answer one seeks to explain the details. This newsgroup is full of
known facts and thoughts, new research, discussion and reconstruction.
Therefore it is safer to adapt a position of 'this is the picture on
the basis of the present known facts' then to reject something
because it does not fits your frame of mind.
Hans Vogels
On 10 okt, 03:23, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/09/07 13:25:23 Pacific Daylight Time, q...@yahoo.com writes:
Thus, if in a bigger brood of
children, name of any grandparent seems to be lacking,
it usually was because that grandparent's namesake
baby died without having a lasting record
-------------------------------
But we must reject this form of logic as it is not falsifiable, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven scientifically.
The only thing that can not be proven is the moment that - later
attested - naming customs started. Customs do start sometime. If there
are later examples within the same family were it can be proven, one
might easily assume that the naming customs might have been in action
a or a few generation(s) earlier. It is true that those naming customs
in those elder generations can not be proven scientifically with the
preserved/known records but it does not mean that therefore something
did not exist.
Let me explain. If I say they DID name a child after each grandparent you say "See my point is proven".
If I say they did NOT name a child after each grandparent you say "The child left no lasting record."
But then again it is your impression of the facts and need not be true
in every case. The records in medieval time are scarse and one deduces
what one can from what one finds. A elder son - because no record of
another elder son can be found or is preserved - need not be truely
the ELDER son. It is safer to assume that in many cases the elder
known son MIGHT as well have been just the eldest surviving son. There
are 13th-14th examples of a father being accompanied with his elder
son. The son dies and at a later point in time the same father names a
accompanying younger son his 'eldest' son.
One can find fault with this opinion but do not let be misunderstood
or my words misconstrued. I do not claim that it should be the guiding
line in every case but I do would like to point out that there is more
to life then painting a situation black or white.
So not matter what, you would be able to say you were right, never able to be proven wrong.
That is what it means to have a theory be falsifiable.
Will Johnson
One can subject a theory to hypercriticism to find a fault but one
should apply this criticism to all assumptions, also ones own. After
all the available records are scarcer when one reaches back in time.
On the basis of the (to that moment) known facts one might assume this
or that and be dogmatic about it. Later facts brought to light might
bring new insides and rethinking of the previous known 'facts'.
Heretical thoughts from the dogmatic past might then just provide the
answer one seeks to explain the details. This newsgroup is full of
known facts and thoughts, new research, discussion and reconstruction.
Therefore it is safer to adapt a position of 'this is the picture on
the basis of the present known facts' then to reject something
because it does not fits your frame of mind.
Hans Vogels
On 10 okt, 03:23, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/09/07 13:25:23 Pacific Daylight Time, q...@yahoo.com writes:
Thus, if in a bigger brood of
children, name of any grandparent seems to be lacking,
it usually was because that grandparent's namesake
baby died without having a lasting record
-------------------------------
But we must reject this form of logic as it is not falsifiable, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. Let me explain. If I say they DID name a child after each grandparent you say "See my point is proven". If I say they did NOT name a child after each grandparent you say "The child left no lasting record."
So not matter what, you would be able to say you were right, never able to be proven wrong. That is what it means to have a theory be falsifiable.
Will Johnson
-
John Higgins
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
I wasn't referring to the current American publication titled The
Genealogist, but rather to the British publication of the same name
published in the late 19th and early 20th century (until 1922 I believe).
There were two series of this publication - the later (and longer) series is
known as the "new series".
For information on this and other useful 19th-century British genealogical
periodicals, see Anthony Wagner's book "English Genealogy', pp. 393ff. They
are available in the FHL and probably in other libraries with large
genealogical collections, possibly on microfilm or microfiche.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
________
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Genealogist, but rather to the British publication of the same name
published in the late 19th and early 20th century (until 1922 I believe).
There were two series of this publication - the later (and longer) series is
known as the "new series".
For information on this and other useful 19th-century British genealogical
periodicals, see Anthony Wagner's book "English Genealogy', pp. 393ff. They
are available in the FHL and probably in other libraries with large
genealogical collections, possibly on microfilm or microfiche.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Middleton 1100-1600
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"But the most extensive pedigree I've found for the Middletons of
Stockeld appears in Clay's
edition of Dugdale's 1664-65 visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton
segment was published in
8-10 pages in vol. 18 of "The Genealogist [new
series]", and Clay's edition of the entire visitation was published
separately as a three-volume
set. "
I called The Genealogist and they could not find the particular Middleton
segment in vol. 18.
Can someone assist with more detail so I can find it? I can order a back
issue. I need to know
what the
name of the article was, what year, whether spring or fall issue.
Are we referring to the same journal, published in America?
Bill
**********************************************
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search
that gives answers, not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onese ... fer=1ONXIC
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
John Higgins
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
The published visitations, along with many, many other sources of
information on specific surnames, are indexed in G. W. Marshall's
"Genealogist's Guide" (1903) and its successor J. B. Whitmore's
"Genealogical Guide" (1953), both of which should be available in many
libraries. [There is also a successor to Whitmore, Geoffrey Barrows'
"Genealogist's Guide" (1977), but it's much shorter and has little
visitation material]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
________
________
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
information on specific surnames, are indexed in G. W. Marshall's
"Genealogist's Guide" (1903) and its successor J. B. Whitmore's
"Genealogical Guide" (1953), both of which should be available in many
libraries. [There is also a successor to Whitmore, Geoffrey Barrows'
"Genealogist's Guide" (1977), but it's much shorter and has little
visitation material]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Arnold" <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
I have, unfortunately, dial-up service. So, before I download
a huge file, I want to check an index of what is in the particular
Visitation. Is there an index to these Visitations, prior to a
download of each one?
Bill
***********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJohnM@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 10, 7:55 am, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Much thanks again. How does one solve the index problem,
so one can do selective downloads?
Bill
*********************************
--- John Watson <WatsonJo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Today's harvest from the Internet Archive website is for wills, etc.
mainly from Yorkshire. For completeness I have also included links
to
where some of these documents, and others, can be downloaded in pdf
format from Prof. Boynton's University of Iowa website, but beware,
some of these are large downloads.
Internet Archive:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at
York
(Part 2)
http://www.archive.org/details/testamen ... 30surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at
York
(Part 4)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications53surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at
York
(Part 5)
http://www.archive.org/details/selectio ... 05surtuoft
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at
York
(Part 6)
http://www.archive.org/details/aselecti ... 06surtuoft
Wills & Administrations from The Knaresborough Court Rolls (Vol 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/publications104surtuoft
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.archive.org/details/northcou ... 00surtuoft
Wills and Inventories from the Registry at Durham (Part 3)
http://www.archive.org/details/willsinv ... 00surtuoft
University of Iowa:
Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at
York
(Parts 1 & 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... rktext.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 16text.pdf
North Country Wills (Part 2)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... 21text.pdf
Wills and Inventories of the Northern Counties of England (Part 1)
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... landtext...
Wills and Inventories from the Registry of the Archdeaconry of
Richmond
http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030149a/northern ... ndtext.pdf
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with
the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user
panel and lay it on
us.http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_ ... te.asp?a=7
Hi Bill,
Not sure what you mean by the "index problem".
Regards,
John
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the
message
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who
knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Ian Goddard
Re: Middleton 1100-1600
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
See also John Watson's very useful Northern Wills & Inventories thread.
--
Ian
Hotmail is for spammers. Real mail address is igoddard
at nildram co uk
In a message dated 10/9/2007 5:07:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
I am unfamiliar with the reference:
"Testamenta Eboracensia", 3:209, which I think is available on-line -
might be worth checking...." Can you tell me what the source is,
and is there an URL for the online?
------------------------------
_http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Testamenta+Eboracensia%22&rls=com.
microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG_
(http://www.google.com/search?q="Testamenta+Eboracensia"&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBo
x&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLG)
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
See also John Watson's very useful Northern Wills & Inventories thread.
--
Ian
Hotmail is for spammers. Real mail address is igoddard
at nildram co uk
-
WJhonson
Re: parentage of Ida de Tosny
<<In a message dated 10/10/07 12:20:47 Pacific Daylight Time, volucris@kpnplanet.nl writes:
The only thing that can not be proven is the moment that - later
attested - naming customs started. Customs do start sometime.>>
------------------------------
Your contention is that there was a time at which naming customs started.
Mine is that there are and were no such naming customs and they are merely the modern-day creations of people trying to make them work.
No amount of argument on either side will convince those who are firmly entrenched in their view. If you have a *statistical study* based on a comprehensive sweep of all records of a certain type, time, or place that can show from a scientific point-of-view that such naming customs existed, somewhere, sometime, then present it.
I don't know of any such study that's ever been done, but I could be wrong. I'd like someone to prove me wrong. No amount of off-the-cuff statements are going to do that. It can only be done with a firmly-based study.
Will Johnson
The only thing that can not be proven is the moment that - later
attested - naming customs started. Customs do start sometime.>>
------------------------------
Your contention is that there was a time at which naming customs started.
Mine is that there are and were no such naming customs and they are merely the modern-day creations of people trying to make them work.
No amount of argument on either side will convince those who are firmly entrenched in their view. If you have a *statistical study* based on a comprehensive sweep of all records of a certain type, time, or place that can show from a scientific point-of-view that such naming customs existed, somewhere, sometime, then present it.
I don't know of any such study that's ever been done, but I could be wrong. I'd like someone to prove me wrong. No amount of off-the-cuff statements are going to do that. It can only be done with a firmly-based study.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
Re Indexes of the Visitations. They are all complete evidently.
If you go to my jumppage here.
http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources
Closer to the bottom fourth or so, you will find this link Visitation Index
It is, in fact, a Visitation Index. Evidently to all of them.
Try it. Let me know if it appears to be incomplete. I'd like to know.
Will Johnson
If you go to my jumppage here.
http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources
Closer to the bottom fourth or so, you will find this link Visitation Index
It is, in fact, a Visitation Index. Evidently to all of them.
Try it. Let me know if it appears to be incomplete. I'd like to know.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
<<In a message dated 10/10/07 09:26:51 Pacific Daylight Time, starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:
http://books.google.com/books?id=kR4tAA ... +in&pgis=1 >>
======================
But this is fabulous. Now I can connect the family!
http://books.google.com/books?id=kR4tAA ... +in&pgis=1
"John Machell (age 13 in 1593), married firstly at Seale, Surrey, 2 Dec 1599 Jane Woodroffe, (baptised 4 May 1572 St Andrew Undershaft, London), daughter of Sir Nicholas..."
CF. for WHO Sir Nicholas was....
http://books.google.com/books?id=85MNAA ... 1#PPA84,M1
Will Johnson
http://books.google.com/books?id=kR4tAA ... +in&pgis=1 >>
======================
But this is fabulous. Now I can connect the family!
http://books.google.com/books?id=kR4tAA ... +in&pgis=1
"John Machell (age 13 in 1593), married firstly at Seale, Surrey, 2 Dec 1599 Jane Woodroffe, (baptised 4 May 1572 St Andrew Undershaft, London), daughter of Sir Nicholas..."
CF. for WHO Sir Nicholas was....
http://books.google.com/books?id=85MNAA ... 1#PPA84,M1
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
Will thank you for your excellent post.
Please also note that, as third husband, that Elizabeth Woodruff, sister to Nicholas Woodruff, Lord Mayor of London, married that same Richard Kingsmill of High Clere, who by his prior wife Alice Fauconer was the progenitor of a vast brood including, for example Cecil Bishopp, 6th Bart of Parham (d 1778)
Who just happens to descend to inter alia that Marygold Mills whose grandson reads this list.
Lots of interesting connections in all that.
Please also note that, as third husband, that Elizabeth Woodruff, sister to Nicholas Woodruff, Lord Mayor of London, married that same Richard Kingsmill of High Clere, who by his prior wife Alice Fauconer was the progenitor of a vast brood including, for example Cecil Bishopp, 6th Bart of Parham (d 1778)
Who just happens to descend to inter alia that Marygold Mills whose grandson reads this list.
Lots of interesting connections in all that.
-
WJhonson
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
Will, although you may be justifiably excited about linking the Woodruff family into other lines through Elizabeth Woodruff's marriage to Richard Kingsmill, may I direct your attention to something of potentially even *more* interest.
Her sister Margaret Woodruff as her second husband took a man with the very interesting name of Edward Greville. I would suggest there might be something very useful about exploring his family with the intent of finding out its connections.
CF
http://books.google.com/books?id=85MNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA125
Will Johnson
Her sister Margaret Woodruff as her second husband took a man with the very interesting name of Edward Greville. I would suggest there might be something very useful about exploring his family with the intent of finding out its connections.
CF
http://books.google.com/books?id=85MNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA125
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: parentage of Ida de Tosny
On Oct 10, 4:09 pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Such a study would not have to be done using all records of a type,
but it would have to be done with a statistically relevant proportion
of the records, those records must be representative of the class of
people they are being used to characterize, and they must be
systematically (randomly) selected. You are likely to see the same
pattern in 400 records as would be revealed by looking at 100 of them,
randomly chosen. Such studies have been done (I believe one such was
done on names in Anglo-Saxon wills), but it requires a good bit of
work to perform, and a good bit more to convince others that the
criteria have truly been met.
taf
No amount of argument on either side will convince those who are firmly entrenched in their view. If you have a *statistical study* based on a comprehensive sweep of all records of a certain type, time, or place that can show from a scientific point-of-view that such naming customs existed, somewhere, sometime, then present it.
Such a study would not have to be done using all records of a type,
but it would have to be done with a statistically relevant proportion
of the records, those records must be representative of the class of
people they are being used to characterize, and they must be
systematically (randomly) selected. You are likely to see the same
pattern in 400 records as would be revealed by looking at 100 of them,
randomly chosen. Such studies have been done (I believe one such was
done on names in Anglo-Saxon wills), but it requires a good bit of
work to perform, and a good bit more to convince others that the
criteria have truly been met.
taf
-
WJhonson
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
Will thank you for your excellent post.
Might I point out, that since your last post showed us how the Woodruff family links into that White family, children of Sir John White Lord Mayor of London in 1563
How I might now show how this White family links into that of Sir George Wrottesley and also Sir Robert Gorges.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mfUGAA ... eMqC3nEPlE
Will Johnson
Might I point out, that since your last post showed us how the Woodruff family links into that White family, children of Sir John White Lord Mayor of London in 1563
How I might now show how this White family links into that of Sir George Wrottesley and also Sir Robert Gorges.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mfUGAA ... eMqC3nEPlE
Will Johnson
-
John H
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
Edward Greville of Charlton Kings GLS Greville family.
I also show wife Margaret as being called Anthonia Woodruff
(Source is IPM on death of her father... of 25 Jun 1563)
although I cant see where I got the IPM from)
Edward Greville was a son of Francis Greville and Mary Rainsford.
His grandparents were Robert Greville and Margaret Arle
His Great grandparents were Richard Greville and Eleanor Herbert
His Great Great grandparents were John Greville and unknown
His Great Great Great grandparents were Ludovic (Lewis) Greville and Dame
Margaret Arden.
regards
John H
"WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.3558.1192064712.7287.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
I also show wife Margaret as being called Anthonia Woodruff
(Source is IPM on death of her father... of 25 Jun 1563)
although I cant see where I got the IPM from)
Edward Greville was a son of Francis Greville and Mary Rainsford.
His grandparents were Robert Greville and Margaret Arle
His Great grandparents were Richard Greville and Eleanor Herbert
His Great Great grandparents were John Greville and unknown
His Great Great Great grandparents were Ludovic (Lewis) Greville and Dame
Margaret Arden.
regards
John H
"WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.3558.1192064712.7287.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
Will, although you may be justifiably excited about linking the Woodruff
family into other lines through Elizabeth Woodruff's marriage to Richard
Kingsmill, may I direct your attention to something of potentially even
*more* interest.
Her sister Margaret Woodruff as her second husband took a man with the
very interesting name of Edward Greville. I would suggest there might be
something very useful about exploring his family with the intent of
finding out its connections.
CF
http://books.google.com/books?id=85MNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA125
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Jane Machell m. Cudworth
Thanks John, I've been buried for the past two hours in Wrottesley's and hadn't gotten back to the Greville line. Interesting that his wife was Mary Raynsford, I wonder if she could be related to that Julian Raynsford who m William Waldegrave. Somewhere when I was meandering through these connections I saw Smallbridge mentioned. But now it's lost in the past 
Will
Will
-
Ken Ozanne
Re: Visitation Index
Will,
This is a pay-per-view site, asking £15 for a first trial (they will
let you know if you get change or a bill).
I tried Vavas as a prefix and they came up with 6 pedigrees for Vavasor,
2 of them previously unknown to me. Only the places, no actual information.
I have Sims, which would have found at least one of the ones I didn't know
if only I had known which county to look at. I foolishly failed to remember
the location of the other unknown (to me) line. (The one I did remember was
Northants.)
I've said previously that a comprehensive index to the Visitations would
be a useful tool. (Sims might do if I lived in London.) Is anyone interested
in a collaborative effort?
Best,
Ken
On 11/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
This is a pay-per-view site, asking £15 for a first trial (they will
let you know if you get change or a bill).
I tried Vavas as a prefix and they came up with 6 pedigrees for Vavasor,
2 of them previously unknown to me. Only the places, no actual information.
I have Sims, which would have found at least one of the ones I didn't know
if only I had known which county to look at. I foolishly failed to remember
the location of the other unknown (to me) line. (The one I did remember was
Northants.)
I've said previously that a comprehensive index to the Visitations would
be a useful tool. (Sims might do if I lived in London.) Is anyone interested
in a collaborative effort?
Best,
Ken
On 11/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:19:37 -0700
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Northern Wills & Inventories
Re Indexes of the Visitations. They are all complete evidently.
If you go to my jumppage here.
http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... hp/Sources
Closer to the bottom fourth or so, you will find this link Visitation Index
It is, in fact, a Visitation Index. Evidently to all of them.
Try it. Let me know if it appears to be incomplete. I'd like to know.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Visitation Index
<<In a message dated 10/11/07 00:57:13 Pacific Daylight Time, kenozanne@bordernet.com.au writes:
I've said previously that a comprehensive index to the Visitations would
be a useful tool. (Sims might do if I lived in London.) Is anyone interested
in a collaborative effort? >>
----------------------
Yes Ken, it's an index. The purpose of this FREE index is only to tell you which Visitations a particular surname is within. *Then* you use the other part of my site to jump directly to that Visitation if it exists in Google Books.
Chris Phillips has a few more links to Vis' that I haven't gotten around to adding to my site, but the general idea is, if you have no idea which county to look in, you use the free index to tell you the county. Then you check to see if that Vis is listed on my site, or Chris' site.
It would be a bit of re-creating the wheel to do that all over again.
Will Johnson
I've said previously that a comprehensive index to the Visitations would
be a useful tool. (Sims might do if I lived in London.) Is anyone interested
in a collaborative effort? >>
----------------------
Yes Ken, it's an index. The purpose of this FREE index is only to tell you which Visitations a particular surname is within. *Then* you use the other part of my site to jump directly to that Visitation if it exists in Google Books.
Chris Phillips has a few more links to Vis' that I haven't gotten around to adding to my site, but the general idea is, if you have no idea which county to look in, you use the free index to tell you the county. Then you check to see if that Vis is listed on my site, or Chris' site.
It would be a bit of re-creating the wheel to do that all over again.
Will Johnson
-
Ian Fettes
Re: Help. I need an e-book
Ah, but if you have actually seen one you might consider not following his
example.
Ian Fettes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Wallace" <shrowl@hotmail.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: Help. I need an e-book
example.
Ian Fettes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Wallace" <shrowl@hotmail.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: Help. I need an e-book
There is a great deal of Darwin's material now available at
http://darwin-online.org.uk/majorworks.html .
This includes his journals. One entry I found especially interesting
was an early comment on the Giant Galapagos Tortoise "...delicious,
especially in soups..."
Ian.
-
Gjest
Re: Visitation Index
Hello Ken,
Yes, I would volunteer my services. I have (not all years) Kent, Norfolk,
Suffolk, Essex and London (1568) on CD disks and I am a good quick typist.
I'd be quite happy to copy type the Index for each of them.
Kind Regards,
Rose
Surrey / UK
Researching in Pembrokeshire: DAVIES (of St. Ishmael's/Talbenny), FEILD,
FERRIOR, ELLIOT (of Steynton/Amroth), THOMAS (of Marloes/Llanstadwell), CORNOCK,
HIER, ROWE (of Penally) and far too many others to list.
Researching in Ireland : Wexford - Ballycanew area: CRANWILL / CRANWELL,
KEEGAN, CONNORS / CONNOR.
Researching in Ireland : ST. LEGER & HEVENINGHAM
Yes, I would volunteer my services. I have (not all years) Kent, Norfolk,
Suffolk, Essex and London (1568) on CD disks and I am a good quick typist.
I'd be quite happy to copy type the Index for each of them.
Kind Regards,
Rose
Surrey / UK
Researching in Pembrokeshire: DAVIES (of St. Ishmael's/Talbenny), FEILD,
FERRIOR, ELLIOT (of Steynton/Amroth), THOMAS (of Marloes/Llanstadwell), CORNOCK,
HIER, ROWE (of Penally) and far too many others to list.
Researching in Ireland : Wexford - Ballycanew area: CRANWILL / CRANWELL,
KEEGAN, CONNORS / CONNOR.
Researching in Ireland : ST. LEGER & HEVENINGHAM