Blount-Ayala
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
WJhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
<<<In a message dated 10/14/07 18:37:38 Pacific Daylight Time, Jwc1870 writes:
Thank You very much. The website I saw the information on
was one of Rootsweb.com which can occasionally serve as a outline to follow.
Richard de Emildon`s wife was given as Christiana de Mowbray whose parents are
given there as Roger de Mowbray, 1st Baron Mowbray of Thirsk and Rohese de
Vere. >>>>
===================
I think we have to say Rohese de CLARE, dau of Sir Richard de Clare by his wife Maud de Lacy.
I'd still prefer her one generation forward. I suppose we need to find some better documentation on the life of Christiana (Mowbray) Plumpton, or even better dating on the births of her children.
Roger, 1st Lord Mowbray was dead between 1295 and 1297 which puts a final date on when she could have been born if she really does fit here.
Will Johnson
Thank You very much. The website I saw the information on
was one of Rootsweb.com which can occasionally serve as a outline to follow.
Richard de Emildon`s wife was given as Christiana de Mowbray whose parents are
given there as Roger de Mowbray, 1st Baron Mowbray of Thirsk and Rohese de
Vere. >>>>
===================
I think we have to say Rohese de CLARE, dau of Sir Richard de Clare by his wife Maud de Lacy.
I'd still prefer her one generation forward. I suppose we need to find some better documentation on the life of Christiana (Mowbray) Plumpton, or even better dating on the births of her children.
Roger, 1st Lord Mowbray was dead between 1295 and 1297 which puts a final date on when she could have been born if she really does fit here.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
I had said earlier that Peter de Middleton was living as late as 1328. Actually he was living in 1333-4 when he was Sheriff of Yorkshire.
Will Johnson
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
Somewhere in this long thread is a statement that William de Middleton will proved 11 Mar 1552 married "Jane DUDLEY".
In actuality, his wife is called "Jane, dau of Edward Lord Dudley"
Her surname was Sutton, the Lord's Dudley at this time were Suttons, not Dudleys.
Will Johnson
In actuality, his wife is called "Jane, dau of Edward Lord Dudley"
Her surname was Sutton, the Lord's Dudley at this time were Suttons, not Dudleys.
Will Johnson
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
Re: remarks by John Higgins below, to this thread:
Has anyone got a Visitation which covers Sir John Leeke,
whose daughter married Henry Peck, and whose son Robert
he called his grandson in his will? I would appreciate any input
about the next two descendants which are the possible problem
alluded to by John in the proposed pedigree of my ancestors?
I agree with John that the Middleton segment appears not to
be the problem. I also am not interested in the alleged problem
of the Peck pedigree of the ancestors of Richard Peck who married
Alice Middleton, at this time. I wish to restrict the discussion to
the possible problem alluded to by John Higgins.
Bill
****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs
_____________________________________
Joseph Peck, Gateway=Rebecca Clark
ancestor to America,arrived 1638
b.30 Apr 1587
_____________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433
Has anyone got a Visitation which covers Sir John Leeke,
whose daughter married Henry Peck, and whose son Robert
he called his grandson in his will? I would appreciate any input
about the next two descendants which are the possible problem
alluded to by John in the proposed pedigree of my ancestors?
I agree with John that the Middleton segment appears not to
be the problem. I also am not interested in the alleged problem
of the Peck pedigree of the ancestors of Richard Peck who married
Alice Middleton, at this time. I wish to restrict the discussion to
the possible problem alluded to by John Higgins.
Bill
****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs
_____________________________________
Joseph Peck, Gateway=Rebecca Clark
ancestor to America,arrived 1638
b.30 Apr 1587
_____________________________________
I'm as bewildered as Bill Arnold by Will Johnson's mention of Isabel
Plumpton, dau. of Sir William Plumpton and his 1st wife Elizabeth
Stapleton - especially since I can find no reference to Alice Plumpton in
any of Bill Arnold's posts. The only Plumpton that Bill mentioned is
Eustacia, several generations earlier. There may in fact be a problem in
the proposed pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem.
As I underestand it, Bill is trying to place Alice Middleton, wife of
Richard Peck. She is in fact mentioned in Clay's edition [with additions]
of Dugdale's 1664-5 Visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton of Stockeld
pedigree going back from her is, per Clay:
Sir Peter Middleton (d. ca. 1499), m. Anne, dau. of Sir Henry Vavasour of
Hazlewood
Sir John Middleton, m. Matilda, dau. of Sir John Thwaites of Lofthouse
William Middleton (will 1474), m. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen Hamerton of
Wigglesworth
Sir John Middleton, m. Alice, dau. of Sir Peter Mauleverer of Beamsley
Sir Nicholas Middleton; m. (2 of 3) Avice, dau. of Sir Gilbert Stapleton
Sir Thomas Middleton (prob. d. before March 1393), m. Eliza, dau. of Sir
Henry Gramary
Sir Peter Middleton, m. Eustacia, dau. of Sir Robert Plumpton
[and five more generations before this]
Alice Plumpton gets into this through the Hamerton marriage. Margaret
Hamerton who mar. William Middleton (d. 1474) is identified in Dugdale's
Middleton pedigree as daughter of Sir Steven Hamerton. In pedigrees of the
Hamerton family in visitations and other sources (e.g., Thomas Dunham
Whitaker's "Deanery of Craven"), Margaret is said to be a dau. of Sir
Stephen by his wife Isabel Plumpton - yes, THAT Isabel. The problem is that
Sir Stephen is said to have died 1500/1 per his IPM. Although this likely
presents no problems with the Plumpton chronology that Will mentions below,
it is problematic to give Sir Stephen a son-in-law who died 27 years before
him, as the pedigrees indicate. It seems possible that Margaret Hamerton
was in fact a sister, rather than daughter, of Sir Stephen Hamerton - but
this is only a guess.
Since Will has introduced Isabel Plumpton into the picture, does this help
to clarify things a bit and put her in a proper context?
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Alice Middleton, died aft.1491
Bill the full line, as presented, is not possible.
In particular its highly unlikely that Isabel Plumpton, daughter of Sir
William Plumpton "eldest son" by his wife Elizabeth Stapleton figures in the
line in the way you have described.
For Alice to be married and active on deeds in the 1490s, she has to be
too old to be in this descent. Sir William Plumpton is known to have been
born on 7 Oct 1404 and died on 15 Oct 1480, his Stapleton wife was dead by
1450.
If you calculate approximate years backward yourself you will see that
there is a problem.
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
-------------------------------
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 Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
Didn't Douglas Hickling resolve a lot of these questions?
Bill
*************************************************************************
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.]"
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
Bill
*************************************************************************
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.]"
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/14/07 18:37:38 Pacific Daylight Time, Jwc1870 writes:
Thank You very much. The website I saw the information on
was one of Rootsweb.com which can occasionally serve as a outline to follow.
Richard de Emildon`s wife was given as Christiana de Mowbray whose parents are
given there as Roger de Mowbray, 1st Baron Mowbray of Thirsk and Rohese de
Vere.
===================
I think we have to say Rohese de CLARE, dau of Sir Richard de Clare by his wife Maud de Lacy.
I'd still prefer her one generation forward. I suppose we need to find some better
documentation on the life of Christiana (Mowbray) Plumpton, or even better dating on the
births
of her children.
Roger, 1st Lord Mowbray was dead between 1295 and 1297 which puts a final date on when she
could
have been born if she really does fit here.
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
____________________________________________________________________________________
Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
Didn't Douglas Hickling resolve a lot of these questions?
Bill
*************************************************
************************
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.]"
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
Bill
*************************************************
************************
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.]"
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/14/07 18:37:38 Pacific Daylight Time, Jwc1870 writes:
Thank You very much. The website I saw the information on
was one of Rootsweb.com which can occasionally serve as a outline to follow.
Richard de Emildon`s wife was given as Christiana de Mowbray whose parents are
given there as Roger de Mowbray, 1st Baron Mowbray of Thirsk and Rohese de
Vere.
===================
I think we have to say Rohese de CLARE, dau of Sir Richard de Clare by his wife Maud de Lacy.
I'd still prefer her one generation forward. I suppose we need to find some better
documentation on the life of Christiana (Mowbray) Plumpton, or even better dating on the births
of her children.
Roger, 1st Lord Mowbray was dead between 1295 and 1297 which puts a final date on when she could
have been born if she really does fit here.
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
____________________________________________________________________________________
Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Dear Will, Nancy, et al.,
Sir Baldwin le Tyes (or Tyas, &c.) was in fact living
in 1235, as evidenced by the following record of a fine
dated 20 Hen. III (1235):
' Between Roger de Notton compl't & Baldwin le Teys &
Margery his wife deforc of 2 carucates of land with the
appurtenances in Wodehuse, & of 2 bovates of land in
Farlegh which tenem'ts the said Baldwin & Margery his
wife held in dower of the said Margery of the guift of
Gilbert de Notton, the late husband of the said Margery,
father of this Roger, whose heire he is, the right of
Roger for ever.' [ Ellis, Wapentake of Agbrigg (YAJ
VII:131-2]
This, together with other evidence in hand, gives us
the following relationships, incl. the Mitton connection
you noted earlier:
Hugh de Eland
d. bef 1193
___________I__________
I I
Richard de Eland Wymarca = Jordan
I de Mitton
I
I
Hugh de Eland = NN Gilbert de = 1) NN
d. ca. 1230 I Notton I d. bef
I I 1203
_____________________I____ ____I
I I I I
Richard John Margery = 1) Gilbert = 2) Sir
(dvp) = Alice ________I de Notton I Baldwin
I I d. ca. I le Tyas
I I 1220 I d. aft
I I I 1234
V I ___________I______
I I I
Roger Sir Francis Joan
de Notton (Franco) = 1) Sir
d. 1241 le Tyas Robert de
I d. aft 1265 Hoyland
I I = 2) Sir
I I John de Byron
I I I
Christiana Richard I
= William = Ellen V
Heron de Nevill
I I
V V
Among the descendants of Hugh de Eland (d. ca. 1230)
we find the Wentworths (Elmsall et al.), Rockleys of
Rockley, Longford of Longford (Derbyshire), not to mention
Savile of Eland, etc. etc. Leo and Ian can probably tell
us how many descents Prince William has from Hugh,
assuming the computer doesn't burn out in the process...
Cheers,
John
On Oct 15, 4:58?pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Sir Baldwin le Tyes (or Tyas, &c.) was in fact living
in 1235, as evidenced by the following record of a fine
dated 20 Hen. III (1235):
' Between Roger de Notton compl't & Baldwin le Teys &
Margery his wife deforc of 2 carucates of land with the
appurtenances in Wodehuse, & of 2 bovates of land in
Farlegh which tenem'ts the said Baldwin & Margery his
wife held in dower of the said Margery of the guift of
Gilbert de Notton, the late husband of the said Margery,
father of this Roger, whose heire he is, the right of
Roger for ever.' [ Ellis, Wapentake of Agbrigg (YAJ
VII:131-2]
This, together with other evidence in hand, gives us
the following relationships, incl. the Mitton connection
you noted earlier:
Hugh de Eland
d. bef 1193
___________I__________
I I
Richard de Eland Wymarca = Jordan
I de Mitton
I
I
Hugh de Eland = NN Gilbert de = 1) NN
d. ca. 1230 I Notton I d. bef
I I 1203
_____________________I____ ____I
I I I I
Richard John Margery = 1) Gilbert = 2) Sir
(dvp) = Alice ________I de Notton I Baldwin
I I d. ca. I le Tyas
I I 1220 I d. aft
I I I 1234
V I ___________I______
I I I
Roger Sir Francis Joan
de Notton (Franco) = 1) Sir
d. 1241 le Tyas Robert de
I d. aft 1265 Hoyland
I I = 2) Sir
I I John de Byron
I I I
Christiana Richard I
= William = Ellen V
Heron de Nevill
I I
V V
Among the descendants of Hugh de Eland (d. ca. 1230)
we find the Wentworths (Elmsall et al.), Rockleys of
Rockley, Longford of Longford (Derbyshire), not to mention
Savile of Eland, etc. etc. Leo and Ian can probably tell
us how many descents Prince William has from Hugh,
assuming the computer doesn't burn out in the process...
Cheers,
John
On Oct 15, 4:58?pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Will thank you for your excellent post(s).
There is a slight discrepancy in this account.
To wit: it states that Gilbert de Notton was a son by his father's first (or prior) wife who had died in 1203 and who is not named, that that father, also named Gilbert married secondly by 1202 to Edith de Barton.
But then it states that Gilbert de Notton, the son, who died in 1241, released his lands to Baldwin le Tyes "who had married his mother".
Unless Gilbert Sr and his first wife were divorced, Baldwin could not have married his mother and yet be living into Gilbert Jr's time period. So perhaps they mean that Baldwin married Edith de Barton ?
Will Johnson
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Dear Will, Nancy, et al.,
Sir Baldwin le Tyes (or Tyas, &c.) was in fact living
in 1235, as evidenced by the following record of a fine
dated 20 Hen. III (1235):
' Between Roger de Notton compl't & Baldwin le Teys &
Margery his wife deforc of 2 carucates of land with the
appurtenances in Wodehuse, & of 2 bovates of land in
Farlegh which tenem'ts the said Baldwin & Margery his
wife held in dower of the said Margery of the guift of
Gilbert de Notton, the late husband of the said Margery,
father of this Roger, whose heire he is, the right of
Roger for ever.' [ Ellis, Wapentake of Agbrigg (YAJ
VII:131-2]
This, together with other evidence in hand, gives us
the following relationships, incl. the Mitton connection
you noted earlier:
Hugh de Eland
d. bef 1193
___________I__________
I I
Richard de Eland Wymarca = Jordan
I de Mitton
I
I
Hugh de Eland = NN Gilbert de = 1) NN
d. ca. 1230 I Notton I d. bef
I I 1203
_____________________I____ ____I
I I I I
Richard John Margery = 1) Gilbert = 2) Sir
(dvp) = Alice ________I de Notton I Baldwin
I I d. ca. I le Tyas
I I 1220 I d. aft
I I I 1234
V I ___________I______
I I I
Roger Sir Francis Joan
de Notton (Franco) = 1) Sir
d. 1241 le Tyas Robert de
I d. aft 1265 Hoyland
I I = 2) Sir
I I John de Byron
I I I
Christiana Richard I
= William = Ellen V
Heron de Nevill
I I
V V
Among the descendants of Hugh de Eland (d. ca. 1230)
we find the Wentworths (Elmsall et al.), Rockleys of
Rockley, Longford of Longford (Derbyshire), not to mention
Savile of Eland, etc. etc. Leo and Ian can probably tell
us how many descents Prince William has from Hugh,
assuming the computer doesn't burn out in the process...
Cheers,
John
On Oct 15, 4:44?pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Sir Baldwin le Tyes (or Tyas, &c.) was in fact living
in 1235, as evidenced by the following record of a fine
dated 20 Hen. III (1235):
' Between Roger de Notton compl't & Baldwin le Teys &
Margery his wife deforc of 2 carucates of land with the
appurtenances in Wodehuse, & of 2 bovates of land in
Farlegh which tenem'ts the said Baldwin & Margery his
wife held in dower of the said Margery of the guift of
Gilbert de Notton, the late husband of the said Margery,
father of this Roger, whose heire he is, the right of
Roger for ever.' [ Ellis, Wapentake of Agbrigg (YAJ
VII:131-2]
This, together with other evidence in hand, gives us
the following relationships, incl. the Mitton connection
you noted earlier:
Hugh de Eland
d. bef 1193
___________I__________
I I
Richard de Eland Wymarca = Jordan
I de Mitton
I
I
Hugh de Eland = NN Gilbert de = 1) NN
d. ca. 1230 I Notton I d. bef
I I 1203
_____________________I____ ____I
I I I I
Richard John Margery = 1) Gilbert = 2) Sir
(dvp) = Alice ________I de Notton I Baldwin
I I d. ca. I le Tyas
I I 1220 I d. aft
I I I 1234
V I ___________I______
I I I
Roger Sir Francis Joan
de Notton (Franco) = 1) Sir
d. 1241 le Tyas Robert de
I d. aft 1265 Hoyland
I I = 2) Sir
I I John de Byron
I I I
Christiana Richard I
= William = Ellen V
Heron de Nevill
I I
V V
Among the descendants of Hugh de Eland (d. ca. 1230)
we find the Wentworths (Elmsall et al.), Rockleys of
Rockley, Longford of Longford (Derbyshire), not to mention
Savile of Eland, etc. etc. Leo and Ian can probably tell
us how many descents Prince William has from Hugh,
assuming the computer doesn't burn out in the process...
Cheers,
John
On Oct 15, 4:44?pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
http://books.google.com/books?id=HMgCAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA728
"The Chartulary of Cockersand Abbey of the Premonstratensian Order", by Cockersand Abbey, William Farrer"
pg 728 footnote : "Gilbert de Notton (2), eldest son of Gilbert, the Seneschal, married Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland of Eland and Rochdale, who gave the said Gilbert in frank marriage with his daughter, certain lands in Naden in Spotland (Whalley Coucher, p 640). The said Gilbert also purchased from Robert de Mitton certain lands which had been bestowed upon Jordan de Mitton (the said Robert's grandfather), early in the reign of Henry II, by Hugh de Eland, in frank marriage with his daughter Wymark, viz, two oxgangs of land in Wardleworth, and two oxgangs in Heley (Whalley Coucher, pp 623, 627). This land afterwards became the nucleus of the Byron estates in the lordship of Rochdale. Gilbert de Notton, jun, by his said wife had issue a son, Roger, who succeeded to his father's Yorkshire estate in Silkstone, Farnley Tias, and Woodsome, of which the former estate passed by the marriage of his daughter and heir, Christiana, to William Heron, and so to the family of John, !
Lord Darcy (Hunter's Deanery of Doncaster, passim). The said Roger was the grantor in Charter No 2. Having released his estates in Farnley and Woodsome, co York and in Rochdale, co Lanc. to Baldwin le Tyas or Tyes (Teutonicus), who had married his mother, he died in 1241 (Yorks. Arch. Journal, vol vii, pp 131, 132 n; Black Book of Clayton, (Towneley's MS.); Fine Roll, 25 Hen III m 14). Joan, daughter of the said Baldwin le Tyas, married firstly, Sir Robert de Hoyland, Knt of High Hoyland, in the Wapentake of Staincross, co York (Hunter's Deanery of Doncaster, Vol II, p 263), to whom her father conveyed in frank marriage with his said daughter Joan, all his lands in Rochdale, viz, in Butterworth, Clegg, Gartside, Ogden, Hollingworth, and Haugh (Black Book of Clayton, no 71); and, secondly , Sir John de Byron, Knt, of Clayton in Salfordshire."
- transcribed courtesy of Will Johnson, wjhon...@aol.com, Professional Genealogist, from the original image in Google Books
-
Gjest
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
No, for several reasons. Garcia Jimenez was never king of Pamplona.
He was king of "some other part" of the realm, and (it is speculated,
although without much foundation) that he was regent of the entire
kingdom (as far as I can tell, this is speculated based on two things
- the king was a captive, so someone must have been regent, and
Garcia's sons were able to wrest control, so maybe they had a head
start).
Second, the title King of Pamplona (or at least king in Pamplona) was
still in use much later. I know Sancho Abarca used this title (he is
Sancho II), and I think even Garcia Sanchez III, son of Sancho el
Mayor was still using it. It may not have been until Garcia Ramirez
elevated himself - I will have to check.
This looks like a mess. They rarely used double names, and I know of
no member of the royal family named Jimena Sancha. Given the date
however, this would clearly be a daughter of Sancho el Mayor. However,
his daughter Jimena married Vermudo III of Leon, while I don't recall
a daughter Sancha. As to Garde Lope, Vizconde de Baigorri, I am at a
loss. Baigorri looks like Bigorre, but the Count of Bigorre at the
time had no such name. Likewise, Garde Lope is not the same as Garcia
Lopez, and further a Garcia Lopez would be son of a Lope, not son of
an Inigo. I think the lord of Maranon at this time was a Fortun (I
don't recall the patronymic).
taf
I understand that the kings of Pamplona are the origins of the kings of Navarre. But when was the last king of Pamplona? Was it Garcia II Jimenez who married about 860 and 864 (ES Volume II Tafel 54)?
No, for several reasons. Garcia Jimenez was never king of Pamplona.
He was king of "some other part" of the realm, and (it is speculated,
although without much foundation) that he was regent of the entire
kingdom (as far as I can tell, this is speculated based on two things
- the king was a captive, so someone must have been regent, and
Garcia's sons were able to wrest control, so maybe they had a head
start).
Second, the title King of Pamplona (or at least king in Pamplona) was
still in use much later. I know Sancho Abarca used this title (he is
Sancho II), and I think even Garcia Sanchez III, son of Sancho el
Mayor was still using it. It may not have been until Garcia Ramirez
elevated himself - I will have to check.
I found a family tree which is confusing.
Inigo Lopez, Senor de Maranon
/
Garde Lupo (or Garcia Lopez) 1.Vizconde de Baigorri (1033)
married Dona Jimena Sancha, Infanta de Pamplona (=Navarra)
Would anyone know how this Jimena Sancha is part of the family of the kings of Pamplona and Navarra?
This looks like a mess. They rarely used double names, and I know of
no member of the royal family named Jimena Sancha. Given the date
however, this would clearly be a daughter of Sancho el Mayor. However,
his daughter Jimena married Vermudo III of Leon, while I don't recall
a daughter Sancha. As to Garde Lope, Vizconde de Baigorri, I am at a
loss. Baigorri looks like Bigorre, but the Count of Bigorre at the
time had no such name. Likewise, Garde Lope is not the same as Garcia
Lopez, and further a Garcia Lopez would be son of a Lope, not son of
an Inigo. I think the lord of Maranon at this time was a Fortun (I
don't recall the patronymic).
taf
-
Gjest
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On Oct 15, 5:55 pm, t...@clearwire.net wrote:
I see that the Spanish Wikipedia page for Garcia Ramirez makes exactly
this claim - that he was the "Primer rey que abandona definitivamente
el título de Rey de Pamplona." Unfortunately no source is given.
This is perhaps imprecise, as he didn't abandon the old title, he
simply, as count of Monzon, proclaimed himself King of Navarre (and
found enough support both from his nobleman and from his neighbor
Alfonso VII to make it stick). I just read an interesting article
that compares his self elevation with that of his contemporary,
Affonso I of Portugal.
taf
On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
I understand that the kings of Pamplona are the origins of the kings of Navarre. But when was the last king of Pamplona? Was it Garcia II Jimenez who married about 860 and 864 (ES Volume II Tafel 54)?
No, for several reasons. Garcia Jimenez was never king of Pamplona.
He was king of "some other part" of the realm, and (it is speculated,
although without much foundation) that he was regent of the entire
kingdom (as far as I can tell, this is speculated based on two things
- the king was a captive, so someone must have been regent, and
Garcia's sons were able to wrest control, so maybe they had a head
start).
Second, the title King of Pamplona (or at least king in Pamplona) was
still in use much later. I know Sancho Abarca used this title (he is
Sancho II), and I think even Garcia Sanchez III, son of Sancho el
Mayor was still using it. It may not have been until Garcia Ramirez
elevated himself - I will have to check.
I see that the Spanish Wikipedia page for Garcia Ramirez makes exactly
this claim - that he was the "Primer rey que abandona definitivamente
el título de Rey de Pamplona." Unfortunately no source is given.
This is perhaps imprecise, as he didn't abandon the old title, he
simply, as count of Monzon, proclaimed himself King of Navarre (and
found enough support both from his nobleman and from his neighbor
Alfonso VII to make it stick). I just read an interesting article
that compares his self elevation with that of his contemporary,
Affonso I of Portugal.
taf
-
Gjest
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
Dear Bill, Will and others,
Bill`s correct in stating Hickling
seems to have resolved Christiana de Mowbray`s father could not be Roger de
Mowbray, 1st Lord Mowbray as He says She was probably born in 1305 based on there
being no issue from her 1320 marriage to John Scot who died bef 1324 when She
married Richard Emildon of Newcastle who died at the Battle of Halidon Hill in
1333 and had her 1st child Jacoba in 1325.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Bill`s correct in stating Hickling
seems to have resolved Christiana de Mowbray`s father could not be Roger de
Mowbray, 1st Lord Mowbray as He says She was probably born in 1305 based on there
being no issue from her 1320 marriage to John Scot who died bef 1324 when She
married Richard Emildon of Newcastle who died at the Battle of Halidon Hill in
1333 and had her 1st child Jacoba in 1325.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
M.Sjostrom
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
--- Leo van de Pas <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
Subject: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
"I understand that the kings of Pamplona are the
origins of the kings of Navarre. But when was the last
king of Pamplona? Was it Garcia II Jimenez who
married about 860 and 864 (ES Volume II Tafel 54)? "
There was no such thing that the name of the said
kingdom were officially changed. It just was called
something. For a long time, it was called by two
different names.
As Pamplona, because that was its seat (capital) and
the kings had started as lords of that town.
As Navarra, more like the name of that region, and
(according to most etymologists) appellation in the
Basque language, in fact. That name consists of two
words, referring to "land/people of <something like
upper plains>"
king Sancho II Garces, nicknamed Abarca, was the first
monarch of that country to style himself in documents
occasionally as of Navarre. We do not however know
whether the name were in some use already in earlier
generations.
However, it seems that the name Pamplona, name of the
capital, was used as the only or main name of the
kingdom until the period of the dominion of Aragón
(1076-1134).
When the country regained its independence, from 1134
onwards, the name Navarre appears to have been the
main designation of the kingdom.
In my genealogical and historical notes, I have made a
demarcation that I usually mention Garcia V (accessed
in 1035) and his successors as kings of Navarre;
the Aragonese triple however as kings of Aragon and
Pamplona;
and all kings until Sancho III as kings of Pamplona.
This coincides with branching of the old dynasty.
This genealogical musing leads me to another, related
point: is something known definitely about the order
of seniority between legitimate sons of Sancho III the
Great ?
In some genealogy, IIRC in some of these "standard
works", Fernando of Castile is even mentioned a few
years older than Garcia of Najera.
It is not inconceivable that nucleus of ancestral
lands were left to younger son in a division, as a
maternal inheritance fairly often needs a male ruler
before the paternal land.
How is it? Is there any primary document which would
explicitly tell the seniority order, or indicate in a
plausible way that matter by, say, a listing of
children in a conjunction where seniority order is
expected, or explicitly say those birth years.
____________________________________________________________________________________
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
Subject: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
"I understand that the kings of Pamplona are the
origins of the kings of Navarre. But when was the last
king of Pamplona? Was it Garcia II Jimenez who
married about 860 and 864 (ES Volume II Tafel 54)? "
There was no such thing that the name of the said
kingdom were officially changed. It just was called
something. For a long time, it was called by two
different names.
As Pamplona, because that was its seat (capital) and
the kings had started as lords of that town.
As Navarra, more like the name of that region, and
(according to most etymologists) appellation in the
Basque language, in fact. That name consists of two
words, referring to "land/people of <something like
upper plains>"
king Sancho II Garces, nicknamed Abarca, was the first
monarch of that country to style himself in documents
occasionally as of Navarre. We do not however know
whether the name were in some use already in earlier
generations.
However, it seems that the name Pamplona, name of the
capital, was used as the only or main name of the
kingdom until the period of the dominion of Aragón
(1076-1134).
When the country regained its independence, from 1134
onwards, the name Navarre appears to have been the
main designation of the kingdom.
In my genealogical and historical notes, I have made a
demarcation that I usually mention Garcia V (accessed
in 1035) and his successors as kings of Navarre;
the Aragonese triple however as kings of Aragon and
Pamplona;
and all kings until Sancho III as kings of Pamplona.
This coincides with branching of the old dynasty.
This genealogical musing leads me to another, related
point: is something known definitely about the order
of seniority between legitimate sons of Sancho III the
Great ?
In some genealogy, IIRC in some of these "standard
works", Fernando of Castile is even mentioned a few
years older than Garcia of Najera.
It is not inconceivable that nucleus of ancestral
lands were left to younger son in a division, as a
maternal inheritance fairly often needs a male ruler
before the paternal land.
How is it? Is there any primary document which would
explicitly tell the seniority order, or indicate in a
plausible way that matter by, say, a listing of
children in a conjunction where seniority order is
expected, or explicitly say those birth years.
____________________________________________________________________________________
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
-
Gjest
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On Oct 15, 5:10 pm, "M.Sjostrom" <q...@yahoo.com> wrote:
There seems near-universal agreement among Spanish authors that the
order is Garcia, Fernando, Gonzalo, Bernardo. (Also, there appears to
have been a son Ramiro who d.v.p., distinct from the illegitimate
brother of the same name, but I don't recall where he falls.)
Unfortunately, I don't think I have any good source that provides
primary documentation of this but I have never seen it questioned in
an informed source, and those that make Fernando eldest seem to be
basing this on the later dominance of the Leon/Castile kingdom that
could not have been anticipated prior to the death of Vermudo III, a
couple of years after the division.
taf
This genealogical musing leads me to another, related
point: is something known definitely about the order
of seniority between legitimate sons of Sancho III the
Great ?
In some genealogy, IIRC in some of these "standard
works", Fernando of Castile is even mentioned a few
years older than Garcia of Najera.
It is not inconceivable that nucleus of ancestral
lands were left to younger son in a division, as a
maternal inheritance fairly often needs a male ruler
before the paternal land.
How is it? Is there any primary document which would
explicitly tell the seniority order, or indicate in a
plausible way that matter by, say, a listing of
children in a conjunction where seniority order is
expected, or explicitly say those birth years.
There seems near-universal agreement among Spanish authors that the
order is Garcia, Fernando, Gonzalo, Bernardo. (Also, there appears to
have been a son Ramiro who d.v.p., distinct from the illegitimate
brother of the same name, but I don't recall where he falls.)
Unfortunately, I don't think I have any good source that provides
primary documentation of this but I have never seen it questioned in
an informed source, and those that make Fernando eldest seem to be
basing this on the later dominance of the Leon/Castile kingdom that
could not have been anticipated prior to the death of Vermudo III, a
couple of years after the division.
taf
-
WJhonson
Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)
yes Roger the source for Helias, count of Maine's second marriage is Ordericus Vitalis
See here where an editor supplies the correction
http://books.google.com/books?id=NsdJge ... maine+1109
See here where an editor supplies the correction
http://books.google.com/books?id=NsdJge ... maine+1109
-
WJhonson
Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)
Tod could you explain more why there is a problem in accepting Orderic's statement in a straightforward why? The editor of the link I posted, stated that Agnes was not actually the widow of Alphonse, that they had been divorced in 1080.
Will Johnson
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
Yes I already had Christiana Mowbray as a daughter of John, 2nd Lord Mowbray by his wife Aline (Aliva) de Braose.
I have to say however, that using an argument based on when her first child was born is not a very convincing one. We have many cases where a woman was married first with no offspring, even though she was fertile, and secondly suddenly starting having offspring.
It would be far more convincing if they had followed the property.
Will
I have to say however, that using an argument based on when her first child was born is not a very convincing one. We have many cases where a woman was married first with no offspring, even though she was fertile, and secondly suddenly starting having offspring.
It would be far more convincing if they had followed the property.
Will
-
WJhonson
Re: Account of Sir William de Morley, 3rd Lord Morley, Marsh
<<In a message dated 10/15/07 14:15:16 Pacific Daylight Time, royalancestry@msn.com writes:
for the term of the life of Cecily, land totalling £100
per annum, to revert after her death to Robert and his heirs, and by
way of surety Sir Robert made a bond to Sir Thomas Bardolf, father of
Cecily, of £2,000. >>
================Actually this tells us something more.
It tells us that the marriage agreement was made within the lifetime of Thomas Bardolf. Until viewing this document I only had that they were married "bef 7 Jan 1344/5", obviously they were married, or agreed-to-be-married by 15 Dec 1328 when Thomas died.
Will Johnson
for the term of the life of Cecily, land totalling £100
per annum, to revert after her death to Robert and his heirs, and by
way of surety Sir Robert made a bond to Sir Thomas Bardolf, father of
Cecily, of £2,000. >>
================Actually this tells us something more.
It tells us that the marriage agreement was made within the lifetime of Thomas Bardolf. Until viewing this document I only had that they were married "bef 7 Jan 1344/5", obviously they were married, or agreed-to-be-married by 15 Dec 1328 when Thomas died.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Account of Sir William de Morley, 3rd Lord Morley, Marsh
Oops I see I *did* have the marriage contract date, just buried in my notes, as 8 Dec 1326 ...
-
WJhonson
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
<<In a message dated 10/13/07 06:06:43 Pacific Daylight Time, jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
There is a record that he married his wife Margaret
(nee Offley) in 1521in Staffordshire, and that their first two
children, twins, were born at Hillfarance, Somerset, in 1523. >>
=================
Could you cite your source on this?
I do not believe it. Margaret Offley was previously married to John Nicholls, merchant taylor of London. He died on 16 Dec 1530 and has an IPM 24 May 23H8. He is buried at St Andrew's Undershaft.
She could not have married Stephen Kirton until at least 1531.
Will Johnson
There is a record that he married his wife Margaret
(nee Offley) in 1521in Staffordshire, and that their first two
children, twins, were born at Hillfarance, Somerset, in 1523. >>
=================
Could you cite your source on this?
I do not believe it. Margaret Offley was previously married to John Nicholls, merchant taylor of London. He died on 16 Dec 1530 and has an IPM 24 May 23H8. He is buried at St Andrew's Undershaft.
She could not have married Stephen Kirton until at least 1531.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
<<In a message dated 10/13/07 06:06:43 Pacific Daylight Time, jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
Thomas (2) Kirton, born:- (Richardson says about 1537 (Magna Carta
Ancestry, p.475 item 14)).>>
===================
He was "aged 16" in a document dated 1 and 2 P and M
Thomas (2) Kirton, born:- (Richardson says about 1537 (Magna Carta
Ancestry, p.475 item 14)).>>
===================
He was "aged 16" in a document dated 1 and 2 P and M
-
WJhonson
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
I have to challenge you again on your statement that John Kirton was the "elder brother" of Thomas Kirton. What's the source for that ?
Thanks
Will
Thanks
Will
-
Nancy L. Allen
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
John, I couldn't follow your chart very well because it lost its spacing so I'm trying a different format. Please let me know if you see any errors.
Nancy
1 Gilbert de Notton I
+ 1st Juliana
2 Reginald de Notton
2 Gilbert de Notton II
+ Margery, dau. of Hugh de Eland
3 Roger de Notton d. 1241
4 Christiana de Notton
+ William Heron
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton
1 Gilbert de Notton I
+ 2nd Edith, widow of Augustine de Barton
1 Baldwin de Tyes
+ Margery dau. of Hugh de Eland, widow of Gilbert de Notton II
2 Sir Francis Tyes
2 Sir John Tyes
2 Sir Everard Tyes
2 Joan/Joanna Tyes
+ 1st Sir Robert Holland of High Holland
+ 2nd Sir John de Byron, Lord of Clayton
3 Sir John de Byron, Lord of Clayton, d. 1318
+ Alice, cousin & heir of Robert Banastre of Hyndeley
4 Sir Richard de Byron, Knight, of Cadenay, & lord of Clayton
+ Agnes
3 Margery Byron
+ 1st Sir John de Assheton
+ 2nd Sir Edmund Talbot de Bashall
----- Original Message -----
From: "John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Nancy
1 Gilbert de Notton I
+ 1st Juliana
2 Reginald de Notton
2 Gilbert de Notton II
+ Margery, dau. of Hugh de Eland
3 Roger de Notton d. 1241
4 Christiana de Notton
+ William Heron
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton
1 Gilbert de Notton I
+ 2nd Edith, widow of Augustine de Barton
1 Baldwin de Tyes
+ Margery dau. of Hugh de Eland, widow of Gilbert de Notton II
2 Sir Francis Tyes
2 Sir John Tyes
2 Sir Everard Tyes
2 Joan/Joanna Tyes
+ 1st Sir Robert Holland of High Holland
+ 2nd Sir John de Byron, Lord of Clayton
3 Sir John de Byron, Lord of Clayton, d. 1318
+ Alice, cousin & heir of Robert Banastre of Hyndeley
4 Sir Richard de Byron, Knight, of Cadenay, & lord of Clayton
+ Agnes
3 Margery Byron
+ 1st Sir John de Assheton
+ 2nd Sir Edmund Talbot de Bashall
----- Original Message -----
From: "John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Dear Will, Nancy, et al.,
Sir Baldwin le Tyes (or Tyas, &c.) was in fact living
in 1235, as evidenced by the following record of a fine
dated 20 Hen. III (1235):
' Between Roger de Notton compl't & Baldwin le Teys &
Margery his wife deforc of 2 carucates of land with the
appurtenances in Wodehuse, & of 2 bovates of land in
Farlegh which tenem'ts the said Baldwin & Margery his
wife held in dower of the said Margery of the guift of
Gilbert de Notton, the late husband of the said Margery,
father of this Roger, whose heire he is, the right of
Roger for ever.' [ Ellis, Wapentake of Agbrigg (YAJ
VII:131-2]
This, together with other evidence in hand, gives us
the following relationships, incl. the Mitton connection
you noted earlier:
Hugh de Eland
d. bef 1193
___________I__________
I I
Richard de Eland Wymarca = Jordan
I de Mitton
I
I
Hugh de Eland = NN Gilbert de = 1) NN
d. ca. 1230 I Notton I d. bef
I I 1203
_____________________I____ ____I
I I I I
Richard John Margery = 1) Gilbert = 2) Sir
(dvp) = Alice ________I de Notton I Baldwin
I I d. ca. I le Tyas
I I 1220 I d. aft
I I I 1234
V I ___________I______
I I I
Roger Sir Francis Joan
de Notton (Franco) = 1) Sir
d. 1241 le Tyas Robert de
I d. aft 1265 Hoyland
I I = 2) Sir
I I John de Byron
I I I
Christiana Richard I
= William = Ellen V
Heron de Nevill
I I
V V
Among the descendants of Hugh de Eland (d. ca. 1230)
we find the Wentworths (Elmsall et al.), Rockleys of
Rockley, Longford of Longford (Derbyshire), not to mention
Savile of Eland, etc. etc. Leo and Ian can probably tell
us how many descents Prince William has from Hugh,
assuming the computer doesn't burn out in the process...
Cheers,
John
On Oct 15, 4:58?pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Will thank you for your excellent post(s).
There is a slight discrepancy in this account.
To wit: it states that Gilbert de Notton was a son by his father's first (or prior) wife who had died in 1203 and who is not named, that that father, also named Gilbert married secondly by 1202 to Edith de Barton.
But then it states that Gilbert de Notton, the son, who died in 1241, released his lands to Baldwin le Tyes "who had married his mother".
Unless Gilbert Sr and his first wife were divorced, Baldwin could not have married his mother and yet be living into Gilbert Jr's time period. So perhaps they mean that Baldwin married Edith de Barton ?
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
-
WJhonson
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
<<In a message dated 10/15/07 21:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time, allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
William died exactly between 1212 and 1220.
He is named as the Lord of Breightment in the Inquest of co Lancaster in 1212
But he was dead by 16 Oct 1220 when his heir is granted.
Will Johnson
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
-----------------------
William died exactly between 1212 and 1220.
He is named as the Lord of Breightment in the Inquest of co Lancaster in 1212
But he was dead by 16 Oct 1220 when his heir is granted.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
<<In a message dated 10/15/07 21:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time, allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton >>
------------------
We know that Gilbert was born exactly from 1198 to 1201
He is under age in 1220 when he is granted as the heir, and yet he had livery in 1222.
Will Johnson
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton >>
------------------
We know that Gilbert was born exactly from 1198 to 1201
He is under age in 1220 when he is granted as the heir, and yet he had livery in 1222.
Will Johnson
-
Ken Ozanne
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 16/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband‹by whom she had no issue‹was Gilbert de Notton, probably
a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,‹"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
. The early
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:33:14 -0700
To: "Nancy L. Allen" <allennl@sbcglobal.net>, gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Cc: "John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
In a message dated 10/15/07 21:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time,
allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton
------------------
We know that Gilbert was born exactly from 1198 to 1201
He is under age in 1220 when he is granted as the heir, and yet he had livery
in 1222.
Will Johnson
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband‹by whom she had no issue‹was Gilbert de Notton, probably
a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,‹"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
-
Francisco Tavares de Alme
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On 16 Out, 01:55, t...@clearwire.net wrote:
Gárcia Lupo was the 1. vizconde de Baigorri, lord of Marañon, Azagra
and Ruesta, already mentioned 1025 but I could not find any
information about a wife. M. de Jaurgain makes Iñigo López his son by
an unknown mother.
(A Fortún was the vizconde de Arberoa a nearby lordship)
« Enciclopedía General Ilustrada del País Vasco, de la editorial
AUÑAMENDI (ISBN 84-7025-147-3) en el artículo dedicado a este rey dice
"vizcondados de Baztán, Lapurdi, Arberoa y Zuberoa. En la
reorganozación del reino, Sancho el Mayor erigió, además de los
condados, arios vizcondados y señioríos.
Sancho el Mayor créo hacia 1025 el vizcondado de Baztán a favor de
Ximeno I Ochoániz, que tenía en honor del rey a Lizarra, cerca de
Estella; por esa fechas se suele citar a Lupo Sancho como primer
vizconde de Lapurdi con residencia en Bayona; al mismo tiempo cita
Jaurgain a fort I Fortún como vizconde de Arberoa; a Gárcia Lupo como
vizconde de Baigorri y señor de marañón, Azagra y Ruesta;" »
[Citation from a discussion about the Basque primitive territorial
limits]
Best regards,
Francisco
On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
I found a family tree which is confusing.
Inigo Lopez, Senor de Maranon
/
Garde Lupo (or Garcia Lopez) 1.Vizconde de Baigorri (1033)
married Dona Jimena Sancha, Infanta de Pamplona (=Navarra)
Would anyone know how this Jimena Sancha is part of the
family of the kings of Pamplona and Navarra?
This looks like a mess. They rarely used double names, and I
know of no member of the royal family named Jimena Sancha. Given > the date however, this would clearly be a daughter of Sancho el
Mayor. However, his daughter Jimena married Vermudo III of Leon, > while I don't recall a daughter Sancha. As to Garde Lope,
Vizconde de Baigorri, I am at a
loss. Baigorri looks like Bigorre, but the Count of Bigorre at
the time had no such name. Likewise, Garde Lope is not the same
as Garcia Lopez, and further a Garcia Lopez would be son of a
Lope, not son of an Inigo. I think the lord of Maranon at this
time was a Fortun (I don't recall the patronymic).
taf
Gárcia Lupo was the 1. vizconde de Baigorri, lord of Marañon, Azagra
and Ruesta, already mentioned 1025 but I could not find any
information about a wife. M. de Jaurgain makes Iñigo López his son by
an unknown mother.
(A Fortún was the vizconde de Arberoa a nearby lordship)
« Enciclopedía General Ilustrada del País Vasco, de la editorial
AUÑAMENDI (ISBN 84-7025-147-3) en el artículo dedicado a este rey dice
"vizcondados de Baztán, Lapurdi, Arberoa y Zuberoa. En la
reorganozación del reino, Sancho el Mayor erigió, además de los
condados, arios vizcondados y señioríos.
Sancho el Mayor créo hacia 1025 el vizcondado de Baztán a favor de
Ximeno I Ochoániz, que tenía en honor del rey a Lizarra, cerca de
Estella; por esa fechas se suele citar a Lupo Sancho como primer
vizconde de Lapurdi con residencia en Bayona; al mismo tiempo cita
Jaurgain a fort I Fortún como vizconde de Arberoa; a Gárcia Lupo como
vizconde de Baigorri y señor de marañón, Azagra y Ruesta;" »
[Citation from a discussion about the Basque primitive territorial
limits]
Best regards,
Francisco
-
Nancy L. Allen
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Will, thanks for adding the dates.
Ken, I haven't studied the Notton family much. I got to them because I was researching the ancestry of Margery Byron who married Sir John de Assheton. I will review the information you sent. It doesn't seem to agree with the following source.
I found the name Augustine de Barton in William Farrer, ed., Early Yorkshire Charters, Volume III (Edinburgh: Ballantyne, Hanson & Co., 1916), pp. 351-353; at books.google.com. I placed his footnotes in parentheses:
"Gilbert de Notton was twice married. By Juliana his first wife he had issue: Reginald, Gilbert II and William. His second wife, by whom he had no issue, was Edith, lady of Barton-by-Eccles, co. Lanc., who had issue by her first husband, Augustine de Barton, a son John, who died in his mother's lifetime, and a daughter, Cecily, heir to her mother, who married William son of Gilbert de Notton, named above. (V.C. H. Lans., vols. iv and v, passim) This William was sometime constable to John de Lascy, constable of Chester, (Chartul. Of Pontefract, 146) and his son Gilbert III, upon succeeding to the Lancashire estate of his mother's mother upon her death in 1220 took the name of Barton. (R. Litt. Claus., i, 438b; Excerpt. e R. Fin., I, 78.) Gilbert I, the elder, was seneschal to John de Lascy about 1220-1230. His Lancashire estates are described in the Inquest of Service taken in 1212. (Inquests and Extents, Lancs. And Chesh. Rec. Soc., pt. i, passim.)"
"Gilbert de Notion II, eldest surviving son of Gilbert the elder, married Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland, by whom he had issue Roger de Notton; but he died in his father's lifetime."
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Ozanne" <kenozanne@bordernet.com.au>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 16/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,<"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
. The early
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
-------------------------------
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
Ken, I haven't studied the Notton family much. I got to them because I was researching the ancestry of Margery Byron who married Sir John de Assheton. I will review the information you sent. It doesn't seem to agree with the following source.
I found the name Augustine de Barton in William Farrer, ed., Early Yorkshire Charters, Volume III (Edinburgh: Ballantyne, Hanson & Co., 1916), pp. 351-353; at books.google.com. I placed his footnotes in parentheses:
"Gilbert de Notton was twice married. By Juliana his first wife he had issue: Reginald, Gilbert II and William. His second wife, by whom he had no issue, was Edith, lady of Barton-by-Eccles, co. Lanc., who had issue by her first husband, Augustine de Barton, a son John, who died in his mother's lifetime, and a daughter, Cecily, heir to her mother, who married William son of Gilbert de Notton, named above. (V.C. H. Lans., vols. iv and v, passim) This William was sometime constable to John de Lascy, constable of Chester, (Chartul. Of Pontefract, 146) and his son Gilbert III, upon succeeding to the Lancashire estate of his mother's mother upon her death in 1220 took the name of Barton. (R. Litt. Claus., i, 438b; Excerpt. e R. Fin., I, 78.) Gilbert I, the elder, was seneschal to John de Lascy about 1220-1230. His Lancashire estates are described in the Inquest of Service taken in 1212. (Inquests and Extents, Lancs. And Chesh. Rec. Soc., pt. i, passim.)"
"Gilbert de Notion II, eldest surviving son of Gilbert the elder, married Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland, by whom he had issue Roger de Notton; but he died in his father's lifetime."
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Ozanne" <kenozanne@bordernet.com.au>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 16/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:33:14 -0700
To: "Nancy L. Allen" <allennl@sbcglobal.net>, gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Cc: "John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
In a message dated 10/15/07 21:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time,
allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton
------------------
We know that Gilbert was born exactly from 1198 to 1201
He is under age in 1220 when he is granted as the heir, and yet he had livery
in 1222.
Will Johnson
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,<"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
-------------------------------
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
-
Francisco Tavares de Alme
Re: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On 15 Out, 22:09, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
......
I found in an ahnentafel Ortiz de Piñedo-Fernández:
« 3353352192. Vizconde De Baigorri Garcia Lopez Y, hijo de Lope
Iñiguez Y y Desconocido .
N.A.G.N. Tomo III, pagina 64. Hijo tercero de Lope Iñiguez Señor de
Marañon, del que habla también Oihenarto, llamándole botiller del Rey
de Pamplona, fue creado Vizconde de Baigorri por el Rey D. Sancho el
Mayor, cuyos estados de gran extensión, sobre todo habida cuenta de la
época, exigían para estar bien defendidos el perfeccionamiento del
sistema feudal, ya establecido en el reino pirenaico desde sus
orígenes. El territorio que comprendía el nuevo Vizcondado formaba el
valle de Baigorri, perte neciente al Ducado de Gascuña y lindante con
el valle de Baztán.
D. Sancho el Mayor es bien sabido que a la muerte del duque Sancho
Guillermo, pariente y vasallo suyo, al que ayudó eficazmente en sus
guerras con los Condes de Tolosa y Carcasona, entró en posesión
directa de toda la Gascuña y la dividió en gobiernos feudales,
alterando un tanto su primitiva constitución. Los valles de Baigorri,
Oses y Cisa, con los territorios de Mixa y Ostabares, formaron la que
se llamó Gascuña Menor, y fueron dados en feudo a diferentes Barones,
todos de su misma sangre. Así apareció también en la historia el
Vizcondado de Labourd, creado en 1023 para López Sánchez, y el Condado
de Vizcaya concedido a Iñigo López en 1033, hermano éste del primer
vizconde de Baigorri, el cual fue investido de esta dignidad el año
1033, según Jaurgain.
Enciclopedia Heráldica y Genealogica, Tomo XXVIII, pág.43.
Garcia se casó con Jimena Sanchez Y . Jimena
Los hijos de este matrimonio fueron:
i. Ii Vizconde De Baigorri Lope Garcia Y Sanchez. »
And Jimena Sanchez is identified as daughter of
Rey De Navarra Sancho Garces III Nabarra Y Fernandez y Goya Gascogne
Y .
Sources:
N.A.G.N. Tomo III, pagina 64
I do not know what is N.A.G.N. nor if the above Enciclopedia Heráldica
y Genealogica can be trusted but I am sure Todd will know about it.
Anyway Jimena Sanchez married Vermudo as Todd said so the whole is
confusing an least.
Best regards,
Francisco
......
I found a family tree which is confusing.
Inigo Lopez, Senor de Maranon
/
Garde Lupo (or Garcia Lopez) 1.Vizconde de Baigorri (1033)
married Dona Jimena Sancha, Infanta de Pamplona (=Navarra)
Would anyone know how this Jimena Sancha is part of the family of the kings of Pamplona and Navarra?
Many thanks
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
I found in an ahnentafel Ortiz de Piñedo-Fernández:
« 3353352192. Vizconde De Baigorri Garcia Lopez Y, hijo de Lope
Iñiguez Y y Desconocido .
N.A.G.N. Tomo III, pagina 64. Hijo tercero de Lope Iñiguez Señor de
Marañon, del que habla también Oihenarto, llamándole botiller del Rey
de Pamplona, fue creado Vizconde de Baigorri por el Rey D. Sancho el
Mayor, cuyos estados de gran extensión, sobre todo habida cuenta de la
época, exigían para estar bien defendidos el perfeccionamiento del
sistema feudal, ya establecido en el reino pirenaico desde sus
orígenes. El territorio que comprendía el nuevo Vizcondado formaba el
valle de Baigorri, perte neciente al Ducado de Gascuña y lindante con
el valle de Baztán.
D. Sancho el Mayor es bien sabido que a la muerte del duque Sancho
Guillermo, pariente y vasallo suyo, al que ayudó eficazmente en sus
guerras con los Condes de Tolosa y Carcasona, entró en posesión
directa de toda la Gascuña y la dividió en gobiernos feudales,
alterando un tanto su primitiva constitución. Los valles de Baigorri,
Oses y Cisa, con los territorios de Mixa y Ostabares, formaron la que
se llamó Gascuña Menor, y fueron dados en feudo a diferentes Barones,
todos de su misma sangre. Así apareció también en la historia el
Vizcondado de Labourd, creado en 1023 para López Sánchez, y el Condado
de Vizcaya concedido a Iñigo López en 1033, hermano éste del primer
vizconde de Baigorri, el cual fue investido de esta dignidad el año
1033, según Jaurgain.
Enciclopedia Heráldica y Genealogica, Tomo XXVIII, pág.43.
Garcia se casó con Jimena Sanchez Y . Jimena
Los hijos de este matrimonio fueron:
i. Ii Vizconde De Baigorri Lope Garcia Y Sanchez. »
And Jimena Sanchez is identified as daughter of
Rey De Navarra Sancho Garces III Nabarra Y Fernandez y Goya Gascogne
Y .
Sources:
N.A.G.N. Tomo III, pagina 64
I do not know what is N.A.G.N. nor if the above Enciclopedia Heráldica
y Genealogica can be trusted but I am sure Todd will know about it.
Anyway Jimena Sanchez married Vermudo as Todd said so the whole is
confusing an least.
Best regards,
Francisco
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
So noted: and thanks, John.
Would I put his wife after the =
"Jane, dau of Edward Lord Dudley"
or
Jane Sutton
?
Bill
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Would I put his wife after the =
"Jane, dau of Edward Lord Dudley"
or
Jane Sutton
?
Bill
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
Somewhere in this long thread is a statement that William de Middleton will proved 11 Mar 1552
married "Jane DUDLEY".
In actuality, his wife is called "Jane, dau of Edward Lord Dudley"
Her surname was Sutton, the Lord's Dudley at this time were Suttons, not Dudleys.
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
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
-
Nancy L. Allen
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
I summarized the information which Ken sent from Lancashire Feet of Fines,
Vol 1, p. 93, footnote 33:
1 --- Barton
2 Edith de Barton
+ 1st ---
3 John de Barton
3 daughter
2 Edith de Barton
+ 2nd --- a Lincolnshire man
1 Gilbert de Notton
+ 1st ---
2 William de Notton
+ dau. of Edith de Barton & 1st husband
3 Gilbert de Notton/de Barton
+ 1st Margery, dau. of Hugh de Eland
4 Henry
3 Gilbert de Notton/de Barton
+ 2nd Cecilia, possibly dau. of Jorwerth de Hulton
3 Matthew de Notton
2 Roger de Notton
2 John de Notton/de Bromyhurst
Then I found the following in Volumes I and II of the Chartulary of Whalley
Abbey. It agrees with what is stated in Feet of Fines above.
The Coucher Book, or Chartulary, of Whalley Abbey, Vol. I (Printed for the
Chetham Society, 1847), pp. 45-46, footnote; at books.google.com.
"I. William de Notton, the first on record of this family. His son,
II. Gilbert de Notton, married Editha, "domina de Barton," circa 1190, and
assumed the name of Barton. He had three sons,
1. William de Notton.
2. Roger de Notton.
3. John de Bromyhurst.
He was succeeded by his son,
III. William de Notton, who had two sons,
1. Gilbert
2. Matthew, who had a daughter, Matilda.
William de Notton was succeeded by his son,
IV. Gilbert, who assumed the name of Barton, and was seneschal to John de
Lascy, eighth baron of Halton. he married twice; first, Margery, daughter of
John de Elond; and secondly, Cecilia, living 1277, the mother of
1. John de Barton.
2. Agnes.
Gilbert de Barton died ante 1277.
This family becoming extinct in the direct male line, the inheritance passed
to the Booths of Barton, the heiress having married John del Bothe.
The Coucher Book, or Chartulary, of Whalley Abbey, Vol. II (Printed for the
Chetham Society, 1847), pp. 623 and 626, footnotes; at books.google.com:
"Gilbert de Barton settled lands in Barton, by deed s.d., to take effect
from the feast of St. Martin in winter, 16 Edward II., on his son Robert,
for the term of his life, paying two marks of silver annually to the said
Gilbert during his life, and after his death, one rose on the feast of St.
John the Baptist to his heirs. - Lanc. MSS. vol. xxiv. p. 2. This son is not
named in the Barton pedigree, pp. 45-6.
Sir John de Byron died in 1309.
Sic - Gilberto de Notton et heredibus suis, omitted.
In the Eland pedigree, Wymark, daughter of Sir Hugh de Eland and his wife
Joan, daughter and coheiress of Sir Richard de Tankersley, is stated to have
married Jordan de Mitton. See deed xlvi., p. 623."
As stated above, Gilbert de Notton, the son of William, married first
Margery de Eland and second Cecilia. I don't understand how Margery, the
former wife of Gilbert de Notton, could have married second BALDWIN LE TYES
if Gilbert had a second wife. The extract below states that the second
husband of Roger de Notton's mother, Margery de Eland, was Baldwin le Tyes
and says that Gilbert was the son of Gilbert instead of William. It also
says that Edith was the daughter of Matthew de Barton!
William Farrer, transcriber and editor, The Cartulary of Cockersand Abbey of
the Premonstratensian Order, Vol.. II. Part II (Printed for The Chetham
Society, 1900), pp. 727-728, footnote; at books.google.com:
"GILBERT DE NOTTON (I) held this estate, and the not far distant estate of
Chadderton, by the feoffment of Adam fitz Swain to his ancestor, and not as
in the case of Barton cum membris in right of his wife, Lady Edith de
Barton. The earliest mention that I have found of Gilbert de Notton occurs
in the Sheriff's account of co. Lancaster at Michaelmas, 1185, when the
latter rendered account at the Treasury of one mark from Gilbert de Noton
and Richard de Heland for licence to make an agreement touching some suit
which they had been litigating in the King's Court (Lancashire Pipe Rolls,
p. 55). He was Seneschal to John de Lacy, Constable of Chester sometime
between 1213 and 1220. By his first wife, who died before 1203, he appears
to have had issue at least two sons, viz., Gilbert and William. By his
second wife, Edith, lady of Barton in her own right, daughter of Matthew de
Barton, whom he married shortly before 1203, he had no issue; but the said
Edith by her first husband, whose name has not been preserved, had issue a
son, John, who died young and unmarried, and a daughter, Cecily, her heir,
of whom presently.
GILBERT DE NOTTON (2), eldest son of Gilbert, the Seneschal, married
Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland of Eland and Rochdale, who gave the said
Gilbert in frank marriage with his daughter, certain lands in Naden in
Spotland Whalley Coucher, p. 640). The said Gilbert also purchased from
Robert de Mitton certain lands which had been bestowed upon Jordan de Mitton
(the said Robert's grandfather), early in the reign of Henry II., by Hugh de
Eland, in frank marriage with his daughter Wymark, viz., two oxgangs of land
in Wardleworth, and two oxgangs in Heley (Whalley Coucher, pp. 623, 627).
This land afterwards became the nucleus of the Byron estates in the lordship
of Rochdale. Gilbert de Notton, jun., by his said wife had issue a son,
Roger, who succeeded to his father's Yorkshire estates in Silkstone, Farnley
Tias, and Woodsome, of which the former estate passed by the marriage of his
daughter and heir, Christiana, to William Heron, and so to the family of
John, Lord Darcy (Hunter's Deanery of Doncaster, passim). The said Roger was
the grantor in Charter No. 2. Having released his estates in Farnley and
Woodsome, co. York, and in Rochdale, co. Lanc., to Baldwin le Tyas or Tyes
(Teutonicus), who had married his mother, he died in 1241 (Yorks. Arch.
Journal, vol. vii., pp. 131, 132 n; Black Book of Clayton, (Towneley's MS.);
Fine Roll, 25 Hen. III. m. 14)."
That Roger was the son of Gilbert de Notton and Margery de Eland is further
supported by the following from Dodsworth's Yorkshire Notes, The Wapentake
of Agbrigg, p. 40, footnote, reprinted from The Yorkshire Archaeological
Journal, Vol. VII, p. 132; at books.google.com:
Between 1232 and 1251, John de Lacy, Constable and Earl of Lincoln,
witnessed the charter of Roger de Notton, who "granted all his lands of
Farnley and Woodsome to Balwinus Teutonicus, who had married Margery his
mother, relict of Gilbert de Notton, doing the forinsic service which
belonged to 2 carucates where twelve made a Knight's fee, and the homage and
service of Wm. de Ruelay and his heirs, receiving a rent of three
shillings." For this grant, Baldwin and Margery released "the lands of
Silkstone which she held in dower, she was to enjoy for life and at her
death Farnley and Woodhus were to go to the heirs of Baldwin."
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Ozanne" <kenozanne@bordernet.com.au>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 16/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert
had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,<"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
. The early
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
-------------------------------
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
Vol 1, p. 93, footnote 33:
1 --- Barton
2 Edith de Barton
+ 1st ---
3 John de Barton
3 daughter
2 Edith de Barton
+ 2nd --- a Lincolnshire man
1 Gilbert de Notton
+ 1st ---
2 William de Notton
+ dau. of Edith de Barton & 1st husband
3 Gilbert de Notton/de Barton
+ 1st Margery, dau. of Hugh de Eland
4 Henry
3 Gilbert de Notton/de Barton
+ 2nd Cecilia, possibly dau. of Jorwerth de Hulton
3 Matthew de Notton
2 Roger de Notton
2 John de Notton/de Bromyhurst
Then I found the following in Volumes I and II of the Chartulary of Whalley
Abbey. It agrees with what is stated in Feet of Fines above.
The Coucher Book, or Chartulary, of Whalley Abbey, Vol. I (Printed for the
Chetham Society, 1847), pp. 45-46, footnote; at books.google.com.
"I. William de Notton, the first on record of this family. His son,
II. Gilbert de Notton, married Editha, "domina de Barton," circa 1190, and
assumed the name of Barton. He had three sons,
1. William de Notton.
2. Roger de Notton.
3. John de Bromyhurst.
He was succeeded by his son,
III. William de Notton, who had two sons,
1. Gilbert
2. Matthew, who had a daughter, Matilda.
William de Notton was succeeded by his son,
IV. Gilbert, who assumed the name of Barton, and was seneschal to John de
Lascy, eighth baron of Halton. he married twice; first, Margery, daughter of
John de Elond; and secondly, Cecilia, living 1277, the mother of
1. John de Barton.
2. Agnes.
From Cuerden's Abttracts of Deeds, it appears that he sold the wardship of
his daughter Agnes to John de Blackburne, who sold it to Thomas de Grelley.
Gilbert de Barton died ante 1277.
This family becoming extinct in the direct male line, the inheritance passed
to the Booths of Barton, the heiress having married John del Bothe.
The Coucher Book, or Chartulary, of Whalley Abbey, Vol. II (Printed for the
Chetham Society, 1847), pp. 623 and 626, footnotes; at books.google.com:
"Gilbert de Barton settled lands in Barton, by deed s.d., to take effect
from the feast of St. Martin in winter, 16 Edward II., on his son Robert,
for the term of his life, paying two marks of silver annually to the said
Gilbert during his life, and after his death, one rose on the feast of St.
John the Baptist to his heirs. - Lanc. MSS. vol. xxiv. p. 2. This son is not
named in the Barton pedigree, pp. 45-6.
Sir John de Byron died in 1309.
Sic - Gilberto de Notton et heredibus suis, omitted.
In the Eland pedigree, Wymark, daughter of Sir Hugh de Eland and his wife
Joan, daughter and coheiress of Sir Richard de Tankersley, is stated to have
married Jordan de Mitton. See deed xlvi., p. 623."
As stated above, Gilbert de Notton, the son of William, married first
Margery de Eland and second Cecilia. I don't understand how Margery, the
former wife of Gilbert de Notton, could have married second BALDWIN LE TYES
if Gilbert had a second wife. The extract below states that the second
husband of Roger de Notton's mother, Margery de Eland, was Baldwin le Tyes
and says that Gilbert was the son of Gilbert instead of William. It also
says that Edith was the daughter of Matthew de Barton!
William Farrer, transcriber and editor, The Cartulary of Cockersand Abbey of
the Premonstratensian Order, Vol.. II. Part II (Printed for The Chetham
Society, 1900), pp. 727-728, footnote; at books.google.com:
"GILBERT DE NOTTON (I) held this estate, and the not far distant estate of
Chadderton, by the feoffment of Adam fitz Swain to his ancestor, and not as
in the case of Barton cum membris in right of his wife, Lady Edith de
Barton. The earliest mention that I have found of Gilbert de Notton occurs
in the Sheriff's account of co. Lancaster at Michaelmas, 1185, when the
latter rendered account at the Treasury of one mark from Gilbert de Noton
and Richard de Heland for licence to make an agreement touching some suit
which they had been litigating in the King's Court (Lancashire Pipe Rolls,
p. 55). He was Seneschal to John de Lacy, Constable of Chester sometime
between 1213 and 1220. By his first wife, who died before 1203, he appears
to have had issue at least two sons, viz., Gilbert and William. By his
second wife, Edith, lady of Barton in her own right, daughter of Matthew de
Barton, whom he married shortly before 1203, he had no issue; but the said
Edith by her first husband, whose name has not been preserved, had issue a
son, John, who died young and unmarried, and a daughter, Cecily, her heir,
of whom presently.
GILBERT DE NOTTON (2), eldest son of Gilbert, the Seneschal, married
Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland of Eland and Rochdale, who gave the said
Gilbert in frank marriage with his daughter, certain lands in Naden in
Spotland Whalley Coucher, p. 640). The said Gilbert also purchased from
Robert de Mitton certain lands which had been bestowed upon Jordan de Mitton
(the said Robert's grandfather), early in the reign of Henry II., by Hugh de
Eland, in frank marriage with his daughter Wymark, viz., two oxgangs of land
in Wardleworth, and two oxgangs in Heley (Whalley Coucher, pp. 623, 627).
This land afterwards became the nucleus of the Byron estates in the lordship
of Rochdale. Gilbert de Notton, jun., by his said wife had issue a son,
Roger, who succeeded to his father's Yorkshire estates in Silkstone, Farnley
Tias, and Woodsome, of which the former estate passed by the marriage of his
daughter and heir, Christiana, to William Heron, and so to the family of
John, Lord Darcy (Hunter's Deanery of Doncaster, passim). The said Roger was
the grantor in Charter No. 2. Having released his estates in Farnley and
Woodsome, co. York, and in Rochdale, co. Lanc., to Baldwin le Tyas or Tyes
(Teutonicus), who had married his mother, he died in 1241 (Yorks. Arch.
Journal, vol. vii., pp. 131, 132 n; Black Book of Clayton, (Towneley's MS.);
Fine Roll, 25 Hen. III. m. 14)."
That Roger was the son of Gilbert de Notton and Margery de Eland is further
supported by the following from Dodsworth's Yorkshire Notes, The Wapentake
of Agbrigg, p. 40, footnote, reprinted from The Yorkshire Archaeological
Journal, Vol. VII, p. 132; at books.google.com:
Between 1232 and 1251, John de Lacy, Constable and Earl of Lincoln,
witnessed the charter of Roger de Notton, who "granted all his lands of
Farnley and Woodsome to Balwinus Teutonicus, who had married Margery his
mother, relict of Gilbert de Notton, doing the forinsic service which
belonged to 2 carucates where twelve made a Knight's fee, and the homage and
service of Wm. de Ruelay and his heirs, receiving a rent of three
shillings." For this grant, Baldwin and Margery released "the lands of
Silkstone which she held in dower, she was to enjoy for life and at her
death Farnley and Woodhus were to go to the heirs of Baldwin."
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Ozanne" <kenozanne@bordernet.com.au>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 16/10/07 17:00, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:33:14 -0700
To: "Nancy L. Allen" <allennl@sbcglobal.net>, gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Cc: "John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
In a message dated 10/15/07 21:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time,
allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
2 William de Notton
+ Cecily, dau. of Augustine de Barton & Edith
3 Gilbert, assumed the name Barton
------------------
We know that Gilbert was born exactly from 1198 to 1201
He is under age in 1220 when he is granted as the heir, and yet he had
livery
in 1222.
Will Johnson
I've come into this late and have no idea whether the following extract from
Lancashire Feet of Fines vol 1 footnote 33 p 93 has been introduced into the
evidence as yet. Apologies if it has.
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own
right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The
printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in
giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The
correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband,
whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter.
Her second husband a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert
had three sons,
William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de
Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first
husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The
last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had
livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by
writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the
original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton."
That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close
Roll,<"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and
faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife
of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in
Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have
wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors,
and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter
of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for
that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that
which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without
authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight
and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels
which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to
immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do
so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause
why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster,
16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional
proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de
Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the
health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of
her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the
blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset
[Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213,
when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the
style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p.
521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his
grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter
of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery,
who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was
probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth
de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that
vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son,
John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest
that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She
married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together
with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord
with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase
in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m.
references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not
assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and
No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Best,
Ken
-------------------------------
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: Pamplona - Navarre puzzle
On Oct 16, 3:05 am, Francisco Tavares de Almeida
<francisco.tavaresdealme...@gmail.com> wrote:
I was thinking of a different man - the supposed father-in-law of
Sancho Garces Maceratiz, lord of Marañon, but I see now he would be a
generation after the people we are talking about.
taf
<francisco.tavaresdealme...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 16 Out, 01:55, t...@clearwire.net wrote:
Lope, not son of an Inigo. I think the lord of Maranon at this
time was a Fortun (I don't recall the patronymic).
Gárcia Lupo was the 1. vizconde de Baigorri, lord of Marañon, Azagra
and Ruesta, already mentioned 1025 but I could not find any
information about a wife. M. de Jaurgain makes Iñigo López his son by
an unknown mother.
(A Fortún was the vizconde de Arberoa a nearby lordship)
« Enciclopedía General Ilustrada del País Vasco, de la editorial
AUÑAMENDI (ISBN 84-7025-147-3) en el artículo dedicado a este rey dice
"vizcondados de Baztán, Lapurdi, Arberoa y Zuberoa. En la
reorganozación del reino, Sancho el Mayor erigió, además de los
condados, arios vizcondados y señioríos.
Sancho el Mayor créo hacia 1025 el vizcondado de Baztán a favor de
Ximeno I Ochoániz, que tenía en honor del rey a Lizarra, cerca de
Estella; por esa fechas se suele citar a Lupo Sancho como primer
vizconde de Lapurdi con residencia en Bayona; al mismo tiempo cita
Jaurgain a fort I Fortún como vizconde de Arberoa; a Gárcia Lupo como
vizconde de Baigorri y señor de marañón, Azagra y Ruesta;" »
I was thinking of a different man - the supposed father-in-law of
Sancho Garces Maceratiz, lord of Marañon, but I see now he would be a
generation after the people we are talking about.
taf
-
wjhonson
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Ken thank you for typing all of that out. I assume the entire extract
should be quoted, that is, none is it is *your* writing, its all one
large extract?
Can you tell us who the editor was?
I don't find it compelling that your editor claims that Gilbert de
Notton, by his first wife had three sons William, Roger and John,
while Farrar claims that the two sons were Gilbert and William.
It sounds like neither editor had hard facts in front of them, and is
merely trying to create a family by sticking the pieces where they
might fit. In addition to which one puts Margaret de Eland a
generation higher than the other one.
Sounds like we need some primary quotes to back up those claims, since
these two secondary footsnotes, conflict.
Will Johnson
should be quoted, that is, none is it is *your* writing, its all one
large extract?
Can you tell us who the editor was?
I don't find it compelling that your editor claims that Gilbert de
Notton, by his first wife had three sons William, Roger and John,
while Farrar claims that the two sons were Gilbert and William.
It sounds like neither editor had hard facts in front of them, and is
merely trying to create a family by sticking the pieces where they
might fit. In addition to which one puts Margaret de Eland a
generation higher than the other one.
Sounds like we need some primary quotes to back up those claims, since
these two secondary footsnotes, conflict.
Will Johnson
-
wjhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strivelyn
On Oct 16, 4:56 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
--------------------
Stirnet's underlying and SOLE source for the entire multi-generational
Swinburne pedigree is
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Atlantis/8805/
that's it. That's their source.
Will
Dear Will, Bill, Kay and others,
I found some interesting
things concerning Barbara ( de Swinburne) de Strivelyn on the Rootsweb.com site "
Ancestors of a Modern British Family" by Richard Hodgson who based most of his
information on Sirnet.com. She is said to have been born in 1293 to Sir Adam
de Swinburne died 1318, somettime Sheriff of Northumberland who was married
as his 2nd wife between 1274-1279 Idonea de Graham born abt 1242, daughter of
Sir Henry de Graham,kt. of Dalkeith and his wife a daughter and heiress of Sir
Roger Avenel. Henry was one of the Magnates who swore to make King Alexander
III of the Scots grandaughter Margaret of Norway Queen. The Grahams had been in
the Comyn following since the early thirteenth century and when John Baliol
was deposed by King Edward I of England, Adam invaded Northumberland with
them, burning most of it, including his father John Swinburne`s village of East
Swinburne. He was captured and sent to Berwick Castle as a prisoner by King
Edward I who later pardoned him with the rest of Comyn`s followers.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com
--------------------
Stirnet's underlying and SOLE source for the entire multi-generational
Swinburne pedigree is
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Atlantis/8805/
that's it. That's their source.
Will
-
wjhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strivelyn
On Oct 16, 5:31 pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
------------------
P.S. Barbara Swinburne was not dead in 1363, she was *living* in 1363.
We don't know when she died.
Will
On Oct 16, 4:56 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
Dear Will, Bill, Kay and others,
I found some interesting
things concerning Barbara ( de Swinburne) de Strivelyn on the Rootsweb.com site "
Ancestors of a Modern British Family" by Richard Hodgson who based most of his
information on Sirnet.com. She is said to have been born in 1293 to Sir Adam
de Swinburne died 1318, somettime Sheriff of Northumberland who was married
as his 2nd wife between 1274-1279 Idonea de Graham born abt 1242, daughter of
Sir Henry de Graham,kt. of Dalkeith and his wife a daughter and heiress of Sir
Roger Avenel. Henry was one of the Magnates who swore to make King Alexander
III of the Scots grandaughter Margaret of Norway Queen. The Grahams had been in
the Comyn following since the early thirteenth century and when John Baliol
was deposed by King Edward I of England, Adam invaded Northumberland with
them, burning most of it, including his father John Swinburne`s village of East
Swinburne. He was captured and sent to Berwick Castle as a prisoner by King
Edward I who later pardoned him with the rest of Comyn`s followers.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com
--------------------
Stirnet's underlying and SOLE source for the entire multi-generational
Swinburne pedigree iswww.geocities.com/Athens/Atlantis/8805/
that's it. That's their source.
Will- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
------------------
P.S. Barbara Swinburne was not dead in 1363, she was *living* in 1363.
We don't know when she died.
Will
-
wjhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strivelyn
On Oct 16, 5:34 pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
-----------------
Thank you Will for your excellent post pointing out that even Stirnet
can make the colossal mistake of sourcing a multi-generational family
descent to a single website.
If you go *to* that website, they in a quite silly fashion, name one
of *their* sources as "The IGI". Is it even possible to name a source
in a more useless fashion? "The IGI" as if that, in any way, allows a
person to verify the details.
On the other hand, they do mention an actual *useful* source citation
of "The History of Northumberland" by Hodgson. Which happens to be
online here
http://books.google.com/books?id=wEEJAA ... #PPA299,M1
So anyone interested in this line, should skip all the intervening
interpretations, glosses, and misplaced members, and go straight to
the fundamental source. Where we will likely see, that many
assumptions have been made anyway.
Will
On Oct 16, 5:31 pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
On Oct 16, 4:56 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
Dear Will, Bill, Kay and others,
I found some interesting
things concerning Barbara ( de Swinburne) de Strivelyn on the Rootsweb.com site "
Ancestors of a Modern British Family" by Richard Hodgson who based most of his
information on Sirnet.com. She is said to have been born in 1293 to Sir Adam
de Swinburne died 1318, somettime Sheriff of Northumberland who was married
as his 2nd wife between 1274-1279 Idonea de Graham born abt 1242, daughter of
Sir Henry de Graham,kt. of Dalkeith and his wife a daughter and heiress of Sir
Roger Avenel. Henry was one of the Magnates who swore to make King Alexander
III of the Scots grandaughter Margaret of Norway Queen. The Grahams had been in
the Comyn following since the early thirteenth century and when John Baliol
was deposed by King Edward I of England, Adam invaded Northumberland with
them, burning most of it, including his father John Swinburne`s village of East
Swinburne. He was captured and sent to Berwick Castle as a prisoner by King
Edward I who later pardoned him with the rest of Comyn`s followers.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com
--------------------
Stirnet's underlying and SOLE source for the entire multi-generational
Swinburne pedigree iswww.geocities.com/Athens/Atlantis/8805/
that's it. That's their source.
Will- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
------------------
P.S. Barbara Swinburne was not dead in 1363, she was *living* in 1363.
We don't know when she died.
Will- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------
Thank you Will for your excellent post pointing out that even Stirnet
can make the colossal mistake of sourcing a multi-generational family
descent to a single website.
If you go *to* that website, they in a quite silly fashion, name one
of *their* sources as "The IGI". Is it even possible to name a source
in a more useless fashion? "The IGI" as if that, in any way, allows a
person to verify the details.
On the other hand, they do mention an actual *useful* source citation
of "The History of Northumberland" by Hodgson. Which happens to be
online here
http://books.google.com/books?id=wEEJAA ... #PPA299,M1
So anyone interested in this line, should skip all the intervening
interpretations, glosses, and misplaced members, and go straight to
the fundamental source. Where we will likely see, that many
assumptions have been made anyway.
Will
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
I searched both the 1575 Visitations of the North
by Wm Flower and the 1665 Visitations of Yorke
by Dugdale and found no Peck pedigrees and
no Leake/Leeke pedigrees.
In the 1563-64 Visitation of Yorkshire by Wm Flower
I found no Leake/Leeke pedigrees but a substantial
Peck pedigree, pages 236-237.
Of the Peck pedigree, re: my proposed Peck pedigree
based on ALL sources, including the 1563-64 Flower,
wills, chancery records, et al., I find confirmation of the
following [using current spelling]:
_________________________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice, dau. of Middleton of Stockeld
son& heir
_________________________________________________
thence [not part of my proposed pedigree]
John Peck=Jane, dau. of John Anne of Frickley
son&heir
also: four dau's: Isabel, Joan, Margaret, and Elizabeth
___________________________________________________
[Note: missing from this Peck pedigree segment is another
son, referred to in wills, chancery records, church records,
et al., namely:
Henry Peck=Margery, dau. of John Leeke
and their issue:
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters:
end of Note]
___________________________________________________
QUESTION: Are there other *Visitations* I should be
aware of that have a Peck/Leeke/Leake pedigree with this segment
expanded: particularly into descendants?
Bill
*****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters
_____________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
by Wm Flower and the 1665 Visitations of Yorke
by Dugdale and found no Peck pedigrees and
no Leake/Leeke pedigrees.
In the 1563-64 Visitation of Yorkshire by Wm Flower
I found no Leake/Leeke pedigrees but a substantial
Peck pedigree, pages 236-237.
Of the Peck pedigree, re: my proposed Peck pedigree
based on ALL sources, including the 1563-64 Flower,
wills, chancery records, et al., I find confirmation of the
following [using current spelling]:
_________________________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice, dau. of Middleton of Stockeld
son& heir
_________________________________________________
thence [not part of my proposed pedigree]
John Peck=Jane, dau. of John Anne of Frickley
son&heir
also: four dau's: Isabel, Joan, Margaret, and Elizabeth
___________________________________________________
[Note: missing from this Peck pedigree segment is another
son, referred to in wills, chancery records, church records,
et al., namely:
Henry Peck=Margery, dau. of John Leeke
and their issue:
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters:
end of Note]
___________________________________________________
QUESTION: Are there other *Visitations* I should be
aware of that have a Peck/Leeke/Leake pedigree with this segment
expanded: particularly into descendants?
Bill
*****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters
_____________________________________
I'm as bewildered as Bill Arnold by Will Johnson's mention of Isabel
Plumpton, dau. of Sir William Plumpton and his 1st wife Elizabeth
Stapleton - especially since I can find no reference to Alice Plumpton in
any of Bill Arnold's posts. The only Plumpton that Bill mentioned is
Eustacia, several generations earlier. There may in fact be a problem in
the proposed pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem.
As I underestand it, Bill is trying to place Alice Middleton, wife of
Richard Peck. She is in fact mentioned in Clay's edition [with additions]
of Dugdale's 1664-5 Visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton of Stockeld
pedigree going back from her is, per Clay:
Sir Peter Middleton (d. ca. 1499), m. Anne, dau. of Sir Henry Vavasour of
Hazlewood
Sir John Middleton, m. Matilda, dau. of Sir John Thwaites of Lofthouse
William Middleton (will 1474), m. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen Hamerton of
Wigglesworth
Sir John Middleton, m. Alice, dau. of Sir Peter Mauleverer of Beamsley
Sir Nicholas Middleton; m. (2 of 3) Avice, dau. of Sir Gilbert Stapleton
Sir Thomas Middleton (prob. d. before March 1393), m. Eliza, dau. of Sir
Henry Gramary
Sir Peter Middleton, m. Eustacia, dau. of Sir Robert Plumpton
[and five more generations before this]
Alice Plumpton gets into this through the Hamerton marriage. Margaret
Hamerton who mar. William Middleton (d. 1474) is identified in Dugdale's
Middleton pedigree as daughter of Sir Steven Hamerton. In pedigrees of the
Hamerton family in visitations and other sources (e.g., Thomas Dunham
Whitaker's "Deanery of Craven"), Margaret is said to be a dau. of Sir
Stephen by his wife Isabel Plumpton - yes, THAT Isabel. The problem is that
Sir Stephen is said to have died 1500/1 per his IPM. Although this likely
presents no problems with the Plumpton chronology that Will mentions below,
it is problematic to give Sir Stephen a son-in-law who died 27 years before
him, as the pedigrees indicate. It seems possible that Margaret Hamerton
was in fact a sister, rather than daughter, of Sir Stephen Hamerton - but
this is only a guess.
Since Will has introduced Isabel Plumpton into the picture, does this help
to clarify things a bit and put her in a proper context?
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Alice Middleton, died aft.1491
Bill the full line, as presented, is not possible.
In particular its highly unlikely that Isabel Plumpton, daughter of Sir
William Plumpton "eldest son" by his wife Elizabeth Stapleton figures in the
line in the way you have described.
For Alice to be married and active on deeds in the 1490s, she has to be
too old to be in this descent. Sir William Plumpton is known to have been
born on 7 Oct 1404 and died on 15 Oct 1480, his Stapleton wife was dead by
1450.
If you calculate approximate years backward yourself you will see that
there is a problem.
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
-------------------------------
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/
-
Gjest
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strively
Dear Will, Bill, Kay and others,
I found some interesting
things concerning Barbara ( de Swinburne) de Strivelyn on the Rootsweb.com site "
Ancestors of a Modern British Family" by Richard Hodgson who based most of his
information on Sirnet.com. She is said to have been born in 1293 to Sir Adam
de Swinburne died 1318, somettime Sheriff of Northumberland who was married
as his 2nd wife between 1274-1279 Idonea de Graham born abt 1242, daughter of
Sir Henry de Graham,kt. of Dalkeith and his wife a daughter and heiress of Sir
Roger Avenel. Henry was one of the Magnates who swore to make King Alexander
III of the Scots grandaughter Margaret of Norway Queen. The Grahams had been in
the Comyn following since the early thirteenth century and when John Baliol
was deposed by King Edward I of England, Adam invaded Northumberland with
them, burning most of it, including his father John Swinburne`s village of East
Swinburne. He was captured and sent to Berwick Castle as a prisoner by King
Edward I who later pardoned him with the rest of Comyn`s followers.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
I found some interesting
things concerning Barbara ( de Swinburne) de Strivelyn on the Rootsweb.com site "
Ancestors of a Modern British Family" by Richard Hodgson who based most of his
information on Sirnet.com. She is said to have been born in 1293 to Sir Adam
de Swinburne died 1318, somettime Sheriff of Northumberland who was married
as his 2nd wife between 1274-1279 Idonea de Graham born abt 1242, daughter of
Sir Henry de Graham,kt. of Dalkeith and his wife a daughter and heiress of Sir
Roger Avenel. Henry was one of the Magnates who swore to make King Alexander
III of the Scots grandaughter Margaret of Norway Queen. The Grahams had been in
the Comyn following since the early thirteenth century and when John Baliol
was deposed by King Edward I of England, Adam invaded Northumberland with
them, burning most of it, including his father John Swinburne`s village of East
Swinburne. He was captured and sent to Berwick Castle as a prisoner by King
Edward I who later pardoned him with the rest of Comyn`s followers.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
wjhonson
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strivelyn
On Oct 16, 6:02 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
The problem James isn't that individual facts may be correct. Sure
some Swinburne and some Graham may have married. That doesn't prove
that Barbara or anybody else was their offspring. The problem is that
the connection of all those facts to each other to make a family
descent may be incorrect.
Will
Dear Will,
Do You recall a discussion about the Comyn descent of the
Grahams of Dalkeith around 9 June of this year principally by John Ravilious and
Alex Findlater in the period I was off line ? John mentions the Swinburne /
Graham marriage.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
PS I was just trawling (i e like net fishing) with the name Graham of
Dalkeith and reference to that article came up.
************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com
The problem James isn't that individual facts may be correct. Sure
some Swinburne and some Graham may have married. That doesn't prove
that Barbara or anybody else was their offspring. The problem is that
the connection of all those facts to each other to make a family
descent may be incorrect.
Will
-
Gjest
Re: Was Sir John Middleton married to Christian de Strivelyn
Dear Will,
Do You recall a discussion about the Comyn descent of the
Grahams of Dalkeith around 9 June of this year principally by John Ravilious and
Alex Findlater in the period I was off line ? John mentions the Swinburne /
Graham marriage.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
PS I was just trawling (i e like net fishing) with the name Graham of
Dalkeith and reference to that article came up.
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Do You recall a discussion about the Comyn descent of the
Grahams of Dalkeith around 9 June of this year principally by John Ravilious and
Alex Findlater in the period I was off line ? John mentions the Swinburne /
Graham marriage.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
PS I was just trawling (i e like net fishing) with the name Graham of
Dalkeith and reference to that article came up.
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
with a cherished loved one?
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
-
Don Stone
Re: Parentage of Sir John Botetourt, 1st Lord Botetourt
Douglas Richardson wrote:
What is the exact wording of this reference to Robert, brother of John
Botetourt? If no surname is given, it occurs to me that it might be a
Robert de Saham, (half) brother of John Botetourt, since John is
elsewhere specified as a brother of William de Saham.
-- Don Stone
For additional evidence of Sir John
Botetourt's parentage, see Byerly, Recs. of the Wardrobe and Household
1286-1289 (1986): 258, which mentions Robert brother of John
Botetourt.
What is the exact wording of this reference to Robert, brother of John
Botetourt? If no surname is given, it occurs to me that it might be a
Robert de Saham, (half) brother of John Botetourt, since John is
elsewhere specified as a brother of William de Saham.
-- Don Stone
-
John Higgins
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
Adrian Channing's recent informative posting on the Bromes includes this
segment on the family of Brome [or Browne] of Holton [or Halton],
Oxfordshire:
If I am reading the above corrrectly, taking into account the genration
numbering and particularly the dates given for John Brome, the sequence of
the family is William -> Robert -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William.
Specifically it seems to say that Robert had two sons, Christopher [the
elder] and John, and only John had issue..
The source for this is apparently the following citation:
er% 20Browne". Date accessed: 26 September
The pertinent segment in this volume of VCH Bucks has the following to say:
"They [William Tracy and his wife Margery, dau. of Sir John Pauncefote]
conveyed it [Worminghall] to William Browne, who died in 1461, in the
minority of his son and heir Robert. He succeeded to his father's property
in 1480 on the death of his mother Agnes, who had survived her second
husband Sir Geoffrey Gate nearly four years. Christopher son and heir of
Robert proved his age in 1498 and died seised of the Worminghall estate in
1509, when an assignment in dower was made to his widow Sybil. The custody
of the son and heir John was granted in 1510 to Edward Grevill. In 1550
John Browne sold Worminghall Manor to William Birt." END QUOTE
Although the wording is admittedly less than specific, this seems to
indicate that John Browne [or Brome] was the son, not the brother, of
Christopher, and thus he was certainly not born in 1488 as indicated above.
He was a minor in 1510 and thus was presumably born no earlier than 1500
say. This would make the sequence of this family as William -> Robert ->
Christopher -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William, instead of the
sequence indicated above.
Does this make sense - or am I missing something here? Is there other
evidence indicating who was the father of John Brome of Halton?
segment on the family of Brome [or Browne] of Holton [or Halton],
Oxfordshire:
(B) William Browne (-1461 MI Holton) als Brome of Worminghall manor,
Bucks
and Holton (formally Halton), Oxon; 2nd son; m Agnes (c1428-1480) d&ch
(with 2
others) of Thomas Baldington (-1436) of Albury, Oxon by Agnes Danvers
(-1478) (Agnes Baldington m2 Sir Geoffrey Gate (-c1476), Agnes Danvers m2
(»4d)
John Fray chief bn of Exch.; m3« John Wenlock (-1471) Ld Wenlock and
m4« c1474
Sir John Say (-1478) speaker of HoC; of Broxbourne) »
(a) Robert Browne (1440x1459-) als Brome als Broun; s&h; of Worminghall »
Christopher Browne (1477-1509) s&h; of Worminghall; m Sybil»
(i) John Browne (1488x1509-1558 PCC Will 1558, to be bur Holton; MI) s&h;
knt (cr ?=>1549); In 1550 sold Worminghall to William Birt; of Holton; m
Margaret (-?<1556 bur Holton MI) ?d of John Rose or Rous of Ragley,
Warwicks »
(1) Christopher Browne (-1589 bur Holton MI) als Broome, of Holton; knt
(1566 at Bradenham); In 1560/1 acquired from Edward Ferrys [Ferrers] the
manors
of Badsley Clynton [als Baddesley Clinton] and Hambleton Magna, Ruts
(jointly
with Edmund Wyndsore [perhaps his br-in-law] and Thomas Hawes); m1«
Elizabeth
d of Sir Thomas Weynman; m2 (<1556) Eleanor (-bur Holton MI) 2d of
William
Windsor (1498-1558 Will left all to his servant Mary Symes!) Ld Windsor
of
Stanwell & Bradenham »
(I) George Brome; s&h; In 1595/6 sold the Ferrers manors (» (a) William
Brome (-1599 bur Holton MI) and (b) Ursula (heir of her br) m Sir Thomas
Whorwood
of Sandwell, Staffs); (II) Thomas Brome; (III) Katherine m John Dynham of
Bowstall (Bostall), Bucks; (IV) Elizabeth; (V) Bridget; (VI) Anne; (VII)
Mary;
(VIII) Elianor (but MI says quinque filias?)
(2) dau m (<1556) Vincent Poore
(3) dau m (<1556) Babhyn (as far as I can make out)
(4) dau m (<1556) Purefray (cf Fray?)
(5) dau m (<1556) John Powell
(6) Katherine Browne als Brome; maid of honour to queen Mary; m (his m1)
Edward Nevill (-1588/9) 7Bn Abergavenny
(7) & (8) octo daughters per MI
(ii) William Browne » Nicholas Browne (In 1556 s&h app.)
(b) Constance Browne [026S1425] als Fray, abbess of Syon and whom Agnes
Danvers left property in Newgate, London
[END OF QUOTE]
If I am reading the above corrrectly, taking into account the genration
numbering and particularly the dates given for John Brome, the sequence of
the family is William -> Robert -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William.
Specifically it seems to say that Robert had two sons, Christopher [the
elder] and John, and only John had issue..
The source for this is apparently the following citation:
SOURCES (with the form of the name Browne/Brome)
Citation: 'Parishes : Worminghall', A History of the County of Buckingham:
Volume 4 (1927), pp. 125-30. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... &strquery="Christoph
er% 20Browne". Date accessed: 26 September
2007. (Browne)
The pertinent segment in this volume of VCH Bucks has the following to say:
"They [William Tracy and his wife Margery, dau. of Sir John Pauncefote]
conveyed it [Worminghall] to William Browne, who died in 1461, in the
minority of his son and heir Robert. He succeeded to his father's property
in 1480 on the death of his mother Agnes, who had survived her second
husband Sir Geoffrey Gate nearly four years. Christopher son and heir of
Robert proved his age in 1498 and died seised of the Worminghall estate in
1509, when an assignment in dower was made to his widow Sybil. The custody
of the son and heir John was granted in 1510 to Edward Grevill. In 1550
John Browne sold Worminghall Manor to William Birt." END QUOTE
Although the wording is admittedly less than specific, this seems to
indicate that John Browne [or Brome] was the son, not the brother, of
Christopher, and thus he was certainly not born in 1488 as indicated above.
He was a minor in 1510 and thus was presumably born no earlier than 1500
say. This would make the sequence of this family as William -> Robert ->
Christopher -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William, instead of the
sequence indicated above.
Does this make sense - or am I missing something here? Is there other
evidence indicating who was the father of John Brome of Halton?
-
Bryn
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
An entirely recent development.
--
Bryn
To the Phenomenonologist,
legend is an artefact.
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
--
Bryn
To the Phenomenonologist,
legend is an artefact.
-
Ken Ozanne
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
On 17/10/07 14:33, "gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com"
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
Will, Kay, others,
I didn't think it likely that I would have typed all that
out if there were an alternative. The source is at British History Online,
Final Concords for Lancashire, Part 1: 1189-1307 (1899), pp. 74-93. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... mpid=52534.
The editor was one William Farrer.
I don't think any of the words were mine, but you can
obviously check. I usually put my interpolations in square brackets as is
evident in the following:
From the same volume:
No. 41.‹At Lancaster, on the Octave of St. John, ante portam Latinam, 19
Henry III. [13th May, 1235].
Between Richard de Bracebrigh, (fn. 14) plaintiff, and Gilbert de Barton,
(fn. 15) tenant, respecting the fee of one knight and a half, with the
appurtenances in Barton. A jury of grand assize had been summoned between
them.
Richard quit-claimed to Gilbert and his heirs, in perpetuity, all his right
in that fee. For this quit-claim Gilbert granted to him three oxgangs of
land with the appurtenances in Bruneshop [Boysnope], to wit, whatever he
(Gilbert) had in the town of Bruneshop on the day that this concord was
made, except the town mill, which shall quietly remain to Gilbert and his
heirs; to hold to Richard and his heirs, of Gilbert and his heirs, rendering
yearly four barbed arrows, or one penny, at the feast of St. Michael, for
all service, saving forinsec service. And be it known that Richard de
Bruneshop (sic) shall be quit of multure [at Boysnope Mill] for ever.
14 [footnote]
Richard de Bracebridge (circa 1242) appears to have been a tenant of Thomas
Grelley, in Lincolnshire. "Richard, son of William, holds half a Knight's
fee in Bracebridge and Canwick, of the fee of Thomas Grelley, who holds of
the King in chief, as of the Honour of Lancaster de veteri feoffamento."
(Testa ii., f. 464). Robert de Bracebridge, who had been enfeoffed of two
oxgangs of land in the demesne lands in Manchester, by Albert Grelley
(11601188), was probably the ancestor of Richard, as the heirs of Robert
were said to be in possession of that land in 1212, (Testa ii., f. 823).
There is no evidence as to the grounds of Richard's claim against Gilbert,
but it is probable that there was a relationship by marriage between Barton
and Bracebridge. A similar claim against Gilbert de Barton was made in the
year 1241. See No. 98, postea. [I believe this is a misprint for 93 which is
below.]
No. 93.‹At Lancaster, on the Octave of St. Martin, 26 Henry III. [18th
November, 1241].
Between Richard, son of Christiana de Alreton, plaintiff, and Gilbert de
Barton, (fn. 32) tenant of one knight's fee and half a knight's fee in
Barton, except four oxgangs of land in Hetun.
Richard quit-claimed all right in the said knight's fees, except as above,
to Gilbert and his heirs in perpetuity. For this quitclaim Gilbert gave him
fifteen marks of silver.
[Endorsed]. Henry, son of Margery, put in his claim.
Best,
Ken
<gen-medieval-request@rootsweb.com> wrote:
From: wjhonson <wjhonson@aol.com
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:19:38 -0700
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
Ken thank you for typing all of that out. I assume the entire extract
should be quoted, that is, none is it is *your* writing, its all one
large extract?
Can you tell us who the editor was?
I don't find it compelling that your editor claims that Gilbert de
Notton, by his first wife had three sons William, Roger and John,
while Farrar claims that the two sons were Gilbert and William.
It sounds like neither editor had hard facts in front of them, and is
merely trying to create a family by sticking the pieces where they
might fit. In addition to which one puts Margaret de Eland a
generation higher than the other one.
Sounds like we need some primary quotes to back up those claims, since
these two secondary footsnotes, conflict.
Will Johnson
Will, Kay, others,
I didn't think it likely that I would have typed all that
out if there were an alternative. The source is at British History Online,
Final Concords for Lancashire, Part 1: 1189-1307 (1899), pp. 74-93. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... mpid=52534.
The editor was one William Farrer.
I don't think any of the words were mine, but you can
obviously check. I usually put my interpolations in square brackets as is
evident in the following:
From the same volume:
No. 41.‹At Lancaster, on the Octave of St. John, ante portam Latinam, 19
Henry III. [13th May, 1235].
Between Richard de Bracebrigh, (fn. 14) plaintiff, and Gilbert de Barton,
(fn. 15) tenant, respecting the fee of one knight and a half, with the
appurtenances in Barton. A jury of grand assize had been summoned between
them.
Richard quit-claimed to Gilbert and his heirs, in perpetuity, all his right
in that fee. For this quit-claim Gilbert granted to him three oxgangs of
land with the appurtenances in Bruneshop [Boysnope], to wit, whatever he
(Gilbert) had in the town of Bruneshop on the day that this concord was
made, except the town mill, which shall quietly remain to Gilbert and his
heirs; to hold to Richard and his heirs, of Gilbert and his heirs, rendering
yearly four barbed arrows, or one penny, at the feast of St. Michael, for
all service, saving forinsec service. And be it known that Richard de
Bruneshop (sic) shall be quit of multure [at Boysnope Mill] for ever.
14 [footnote]
Richard de Bracebridge (circa 1242) appears to have been a tenant of Thomas
Grelley, in Lincolnshire. "Richard, son of William, holds half a Knight's
fee in Bracebridge and Canwick, of the fee of Thomas Grelley, who holds of
the King in chief, as of the Honour of Lancaster de veteri feoffamento."
(Testa ii., f. 464). Robert de Bracebridge, who had been enfeoffed of two
oxgangs of land in the demesne lands in Manchester, by Albert Grelley
(11601188), was probably the ancestor of Richard, as the heirs of Robert
were said to be in possession of that land in 1212, (Testa ii., f. 823).
There is no evidence as to the grounds of Richard's claim against Gilbert,
but it is probable that there was a relationship by marriage between Barton
and Bracebridge. A similar claim against Gilbert de Barton was made in the
year 1241. See No. 98, postea. [I believe this is a misprint for 93 which is
below.]
No. 93.‹At Lancaster, on the Octave of St. Martin, 26 Henry III. [18th
November, 1241].
Between Richard, son of Christiana de Alreton, plaintiff, and Gilbert de
Barton, (fn. 32) tenant of one knight's fee and half a knight's fee in
Barton, except four oxgangs of land in Hetun.
Richard quit-claimed all right in the said knight's fees, except as above,
to Gilbert and his heirs in perpetuity. For this quitclaim Gilbert gave him
fifteen marks of silver.
[Endorsed]. Henry, son of Margery, put in his claim.
Best,
Ken
-
a.spencer3
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:zreRi.541$6q5.2082@eagle.america.net...
To get away from the chrished loved one.
Surreyman
news:zreRi.541$6q5.2082@eagle.america.net...
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
To get away from the chrished loved one.
Surreyman
-
jonathan kirton
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
To Will Jhonson and Group.
Will,
Thank you very much indeed for your last three of 15 and 16 Oct. on
this thread.
Three very legitimate questions. I am afraid that I had allowed
myself to be taken in by the IGI.
Back in 1999 somebody sent me a print out of the "Family Group
Record" of Stephen Kirton
(AFN:8QK1-6P) and his wife, Margaret (nee Offley) (AFN: 8QK1-RM) and
a listing of their "12"
children. I have just re-checked and was amazed to find that this
same "data" is still listed on http://www.FamilySearch. org., and is
evidently repeated on RootsWeb's WorldConnect Project Global Search.
Back in 1999 I should have been a lot more suspicious of any source
which suggested that
Stephen Kirton was born in 1510 at Thorp Mandeville, NORTHUMBERLAND
(sic), England,
and was married to Margaret in Stafford, Staffordshire, in 1521, and
that Stephen died on 15 Aug., 1566 at "St. Andrew's, Undershaft,
London", and was "Buried Aug., 1566 at London".
(evidently he died right in the church where he was going to be
buried, jolly convenient !)
(Stephen may have been born in 1510, but it was in Christchurch,
Hants., as is stated in his will,
a long way from Northumberland ! From your statement that
Margaret's first husband did not die until 1530, obviously Stephen
and Margaret's marriage did not occur until at least 1530, although I
do have a note from another source that their eldest daughter, Jane
married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ?
Stephen only purchased the Manor of Thorp Mandeville, at the hamlet
of Thorp Mandeville, Northamptonshire in 1552, very shortly before he
died, and never actually lived there himself.
He actually died in London on 16 Aug., 1553, probably at his home, in
the Parish of St. Andrew's, (Sainct Andrus) where his will mentions
that he was then living, and was buried in
the Parish Church of St. Andrew's Undershaft a few days later.)
So back in 1999 I tried to rationalize the births of the children,
and I am afraid that some of it
has stuck in my records until very recently. I would now submit that
there is no extant evidence that Stephen and Margaret ever had any
children who died in childhood, and that their adult children, as
described in "The Genealogist", New Series, Volume XIX, (London,
1903), p.223,
were, in chronological order:
Jane, born circa 1530,
Grissel, born circa 1535,
Thomas, born circa 1537 (only one Thomas, the elder brother, the son
& heir, and a lawyer),
John, born circa 1539 (like his father, a Merchant Tailor, and a
Merchant of the English Wool Staple at Calais),
Ellen, (not Helen), born circa 1541,
Anne, born c. 1545.(Not named in her father's, brother's or mother's
wills, died before 1566 ?)
A good transcription of Margaret's will (P.C.C. 22 Peter) can be
found at:
<http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cousin/html/p439.htm#i29389>
(The original is held by the P.R.O. / The National Archives, and can
be ordered online)
I must apologize for my posting which contained errors.
Sincerely, Jonathan Kirton
Will,
Thank you very much indeed for your last three of 15 and 16 Oct. on
this thread.
Three very legitimate questions. I am afraid that I had allowed
myself to be taken in by the IGI.
Back in 1999 somebody sent me a print out of the "Family Group
Record" of Stephen Kirton
(AFN:8QK1-6P) and his wife, Margaret (nee Offley) (AFN: 8QK1-RM) and
a listing of their "12"
children. I have just re-checked and was amazed to find that this
same "data" is still listed on http://www.FamilySearch. org., and is
evidently repeated on RootsWeb's WorldConnect Project Global Search.
Back in 1999 I should have been a lot more suspicious of any source
which suggested that
Stephen Kirton was born in 1510 at Thorp Mandeville, NORTHUMBERLAND
(sic), England,
and was married to Margaret in Stafford, Staffordshire, in 1521, and
that Stephen died on 15 Aug., 1566 at "St. Andrew's, Undershaft,
London", and was "Buried Aug., 1566 at London".
(evidently he died right in the church where he was going to be
buried, jolly convenient !)
(Stephen may have been born in 1510, but it was in Christchurch,
Hants., as is stated in his will,
a long way from Northumberland ! From your statement that
Margaret's first husband did not die until 1530, obviously Stephen
and Margaret's marriage did not occur until at least 1530, although I
do have a note from another source that their eldest daughter, Jane
married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ?
Stephen only purchased the Manor of Thorp Mandeville, at the hamlet
of Thorp Mandeville, Northamptonshire in 1552, very shortly before he
died, and never actually lived there himself.
He actually died in London on 16 Aug., 1553, probably at his home, in
the Parish of St. Andrew's, (Sainct Andrus) where his will mentions
that he was then living, and was buried in
the Parish Church of St. Andrew's Undershaft a few days later.)
So back in 1999 I tried to rationalize the births of the children,
and I am afraid that some of it
has stuck in my records until very recently. I would now submit that
there is no extant evidence that Stephen and Margaret ever had any
children who died in childhood, and that their adult children, as
described in "The Genealogist", New Series, Volume XIX, (London,
1903), p.223,
were, in chronological order:
Jane, born circa 1530,
Grissel, born circa 1535,
Thomas, born circa 1537 (only one Thomas, the elder brother, the son
& heir, and a lawyer),
John, born circa 1539 (like his father, a Merchant Tailor, and a
Merchant of the English Wool Staple at Calais),
Ellen, (not Helen), born circa 1541,
Anne, born c. 1545.(Not named in her father's, brother's or mother's
wills, died before 1566 ?)
A good transcription of Margaret's will (P.C.C. 22 Peter) can be
found at:
<http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cousin/html/p439.htm#i29389>
(The original is held by the P.R.O. / The National Archives, and can
be ordered online)
I must apologize for my posting which contained errors.
Sincerely, Jonathan Kirton
-
Gjest
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
In a message dated 17/10/2007 05:34:19 GMT Standard Time,
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
SNIP
indicate that John Browne [or Brome] was the son, not the brother, of
Christopher, and thus he was certainly not born in 1488 as indicated above.
He was a minor in 1510 and thus was presumably born no earlier than 1500
say. This would make the sequence of this family as William -> Robert ->
Christopher -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William, instead of the
sequence indicated above.
Does this make sense - or am I missing something here? Is there other
evidence indicating who was the father of John Brome of Halton?
<<<<
I guess I could have laid this out better, it might help to put a paragraph
ending immediately before Christopher Browne (1477-1509). It is his issue by
Sybil who are (i) John Browne and (ii) William Browne.
A minor means he was under 21; my notation John Browne (1488x1509-1558...
means that John was born between 1488 and 1509.
I don't have any additional verification of John's father, apart from VCH
Bucks, but you could try the refs given therein
Let me know if the above is still not clear.
Regards,
Adrian
jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
SNIP
Although the wording is admittedly less than specific, this seems to
indicate that John Browne [or Brome] was the son, not the brother, of
Christopher, and thus he was certainly not born in 1488 as indicated above.
He was a minor in 1510 and thus was presumably born no earlier than 1500
say. This would make the sequence of this family as William -> Robert ->
Christopher -> John -> Christopher -> George -> William, instead of the
sequence indicated above.
Does this make sense - or am I missing something here? Is there other
evidence indicating who was the father of John Brome of Halton?
<<<<
I guess I could have laid this out better, it might help to put a paragraph
ending immediately before Christopher Browne (1477-1509). It is his issue by
Sybil who are (i) John Browne and (ii) William Browne.
A minor means he was under 21; my notation John Browne (1488x1509-1558...
means that John was born between 1488 and 1509.
I don't have any additional verification of John's father, apart from VCH
Bucks, but you could try the refs given therein
Let me know if the above is still not clear.
Regards,
Adrian
-
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Bryn wrote:
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're
just slow on the uptake.
Deirdre
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're
just slow on the uptake.
Deirdre
-
Bryn
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with me.
It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
--
Bryn
To the Phenomenonologist,
legend is an artefact.
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're
just slow on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with me.
It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
--
Bryn
To the Phenomenonologist,
legend is an artefact.
-
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Bryn wrote:
Ah, never trust a Tech or Student, they have to manufacture
it because they don't make enough to purchase good quality.
If you stick to the Senior Scientists then you can drink their
(highly drinkable, expensive) anesthesia without concern for
your internal organs or exchequer.
Deirdre
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of hooch at home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're
just slow on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with me.
It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
Ah, never trust a Tech or Student, they have to manufacture
it because they don't make enough to purchase good quality.
If you stick to the Senior Scientists then you can drink their
(highly drinkable, expensive) anesthesia without concern for
your internal organs or exchequer.
Deirdre
-
Vince
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Bryn wrote:
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Vince
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just slow
on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with
me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Vince
-
Richard Casady
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:30:14 -0500, Deirdre Sholto Douglas
<finch.enteract@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
It is dead easy to make good quality moon. First, you make it with
pure sugar. The fewer impurities you start with the fewer you end up
with. Find a thrift shop pressure cooker, one of the old ones once
used for canning, with six or so thumbscrews securing the lid, and a
pressure gauge. Three feet of one inch copper pipe, four feet of
1/4inch copper tubing, two one inch pipe caps, bit of solder, some
plastic tubing. A ring stand is convenient. You need an adapter to
connect the cooling water from the kitchen sink. They sell a rig for
watering plants with an adapter and a long hose. You can, of course,
make a servicable still from lab glassware. Get some of those five gal
plastic jugs they sell bottled water in for doing the fermentation.
Ten pounds sugar, five gallons water, bit of yeast, wait a few days...
Quality-wise the worst that can happen is a bit of taste of yeast.
As usual, I deny everything...
Casady
<finch.enteract@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Ah, never trust a Tech or Student, they have to manufacture
it because they don't make enough to purchase good quality.
It is dead easy to make good quality moon. First, you make it with
pure sugar. The fewer impurities you start with the fewer you end up
with. Find a thrift shop pressure cooker, one of the old ones once
used for canning, with six or so thumbscrews securing the lid, and a
pressure gauge. Three feet of one inch copper pipe, four feet of
1/4inch copper tubing, two one inch pipe caps, bit of solder, some
plastic tubing. A ring stand is convenient. You need an adapter to
connect the cooling water from the kitchen sink. They sell a rig for
watering plants with an adapter and a long hose. You can, of course,
make a servicable still from lab glassware. Get some of those five gal
plastic jugs they sell bottled water in for doing the fermentation.
Ten pounds sugar, five gallons water, bit of yeast, wait a few days...
Quality-wise the worst that can happen is a bit of taste of yeast.
As usual, I deny everything...
Casady
-
La N
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:tMednW14K-JziIvanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
And, here's an example where a hospital actually fed vodka to a patient via
iv drip!:
October 10, 2007 4:39 a.m. PT
Hospital gives man drip-feed of vodka
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... _Drip.html
BRISBANE, Australia -- Doctors plugged an Italian tourist into a
drip-feed of vodka to save him at a hospital in Australia that ran out
of the medicinal alcohol it would normally have used for treatment.
The 24-year-old Italian, who was not further identified, was brought
to Mackay Base Hospital in northeastern Queensland state and was
diagnosed as having ingested a large quantity of ethylene glycol, a
common ingredient of antifreeze that can cause renal failure.
Pure alcohol is often given in treating such cases because it can
inhibit the toxic effects of ethylene glycol.
Mackay Base Hospital Dr. Pascal Gelperowicz said the man was given
pharmaceutical-grade alcohol when he arrived, but that the hospital's
supplies soon ran out.
"We quickly used all the available vials of 100 per cent alcohol and
decided the next best way to get alcohol into the man's system was by
feeding him spirits through a naso gastric tube," Dr. Gelperowicz said
in a statement.
"The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for
three days in the intensive care unit," he said. "The hospital's
administrators were also very understanding when we explained our
reasons for buying a case of vodka."
The patient, was believed to have ingested the poison in an attempt at
self-harm, made a successful recover. The incident occurred about two
months ago, though the hospital just released information on the case.
- nilita
news:tMednW14K-JziIvanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just slow
on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with
me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
And, here's an example where a hospital actually fed vodka to a patient via
iv drip!:
October 10, 2007 4:39 a.m. PT
Hospital gives man drip-feed of vodka
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... _Drip.html
BRISBANE, Australia -- Doctors plugged an Italian tourist into a
drip-feed of vodka to save him at a hospital in Australia that ran out
of the medicinal alcohol it would normally have used for treatment.
The 24-year-old Italian, who was not further identified, was brought
to Mackay Base Hospital in northeastern Queensland state and was
diagnosed as having ingested a large quantity of ethylene glycol, a
common ingredient of antifreeze that can cause renal failure.
Pure alcohol is often given in treating such cases because it can
inhibit the toxic effects of ethylene glycol.
Mackay Base Hospital Dr. Pascal Gelperowicz said the man was given
pharmaceutical-grade alcohol when he arrived, but that the hospital's
supplies soon ran out.
"We quickly used all the available vials of 100 per cent alcohol and
decided the next best way to get alcohol into the man's system was by
feeding him spirits through a naso gastric tube," Dr. Gelperowicz said
in a statement.
"The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for
three days in the intensive care unit," he said. "The hospital's
administrators were also very understanding when we explained our
reasons for buying a case of vodka."
The patient, was believed to have ingested the poison in an attempt at
self-harm, made a successful recover. The incident occurred about two
months ago, though the hospital just released information on the case.
- nilita
-
Vince
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
La N wrote:
A nasogastric tube is not an IV
Vince
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:tMednW14K-JziIvanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just slow
on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with
me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
And, here's an example where a hospital actually fed vodka to a patient via
iv drip!:
October 10, 2007 4:39 a.m. PT
Hospital gives man drip-feed of vodka
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... _Drip.html
BRISBANE, Australia -- Doctors plugged an Italian tourist into a
drip-feed of vodka to save him at a hospital in Australia that ran out
of the medicinal alcohol it would normally have used for treatment.
The 24-year-old Italian, who was not further identified, was brought
to Mackay Base Hospital in northeastern Queensland state and was
diagnosed as having ingested a large quantity of ethylene glycol, a
common ingredient of antifreeze that can cause renal failure.
Pure alcohol is often given in treating such cases because it can
inhibit the toxic effects of ethylene glycol.
Mackay Base Hospital Dr. Pascal Gelperowicz said the man was given
pharmaceutical-grade alcohol when he arrived, but that the hospital's
supplies soon ran out.
"We quickly used all the available vials of 100 per cent alcohol and
decided the next best way to get alcohol into the man's system was by
feeding him spirits through a naso gastric tube," Dr. Gelperowicz said
in a statement.
"The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for
three days in the intensive care unit," he said. "The hospital's
administrators were also very understanding when we explained our
reasons for buying a case of vodka."
The patient, was believed to have ingested the poison in an attempt at
self-harm, made a successful recover. The incident occurred about two
months ago, though the hospital just released information on the case.
- nilita
A nasogastric tube is not an IV
Vince
-
La N
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:tMednWx4K-ItiovanZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@comcast.com...
Oops ..you're right. I didn't read it carefully enough.
- nil
news:tMednWx4K-ItiovanZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@comcast.com...
La N wrote:
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:tMednW14K-JziIvanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just slow
on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with
me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
And, here's an example where a hospital actually fed vodka to a patient
via iv drip!:
October 10, 2007 4:39 a.m. PT
Hospital gives man drip-feed of vodka
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... _Drip.html
BRISBANE, Australia -- Doctors plugged an Italian tourist into a
drip-feed of vodka to save him at a hospital in Australia that ran out
of the medicinal alcohol it would normally have used for treatment.
The 24-year-old Italian, who was not further identified, was brought
to Mackay Base Hospital in northeastern Queensland state and was
diagnosed as having ingested a large quantity of ethylene glycol, a
common ingredient of antifreeze that can cause renal failure.
Pure alcohol is often given in treating such cases because it can
inhibit the toxic effects of ethylene glycol.
Mackay Base Hospital Dr. Pascal Gelperowicz said the man was given
pharmaceutical-grade alcohol when he arrived, but that the hospital's
supplies soon ran out.
"We quickly used all the available vials of 100 per cent alcohol and
decided the next best way to get alcohol into the man's system was by
feeding him spirits through a naso gastric tube," Dr. Gelperowicz said
in a statement.
"The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for
three days in the intensive care unit," he said. "The hospital's
administrators were also very understanding when we explained our
reasons for buying a case of vodka."
The patient, was believed to have ingested the poison in an attempt at
self-harm, made a successful recover. The incident occurred about two
months ago, though the hospital just released information on the case.
- nilita
A nasogastric tube is not an IV
Oops ..you're right. I didn't read it carefully enough.
- nil
-
Peter Skelton
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:01:54 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us>
wrote:
undrinkable. (That would flush you out for certain.) It could
also contain a minor fraction of methanol. A big jug of clear
fluid lablled "ethanol" sitting in a lab was not necessarily usp
ethanol.
Peter Skelton
wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just slow
on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his with
me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a dash of
Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Some cleaning ethanol was denatured with phenolthalien to make it
undrinkable. (That would flush you out for certain.) It could
also contain a minor fraction of methanol. A big jug of clear
fluid lablled "ethanol" sitting in a lab was not necessarily usp
ethanol.
Peter Skelton
-
Vince
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Peter Skelton wrote:
I have to agree. If it wasn't in a sealed bottle labeled USP it could
be anything
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Vince
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:01:54 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just
slow on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his
with me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a
dash of Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Some cleaning ethanol was denatured with phenolthalien to make it
undrinkable. (That would flush you out for certain.) It could also
contain a minor fraction of methanol. A big jug of clear fluid
lablled "ethanol" sitting in a lab was not necessarily usp ethanol.
Peter Skelton
I have to agree. If it wasn't in a sealed bottle labeled USP it could
be anything
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Vince
-
Peter Skelton
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:48:27 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us>
wrote:
Peter Skelton
wrote:
Peter Skelton wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:01:54 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Bryn wrote:
Needing no introduction "an" Usenet stalwart wrote:
Why go to the pub at all if one can drink a better class of
hooch at
home
with a cherished loved one?
An entirely recent development.
Nah, Bryn, hooch has been around a looong time...you're just
slow on the uptake.
I've not felt the same about hooch since a Lab Tech shared his
with me. It transpired that it was largely Lab ethanol with a
dash of Coke-a-Cola.
I had a headache for 3 weeks and kidney problems for months.
That Coke will do it to you
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Some cleaning ethanol was denatured with phenolthalien to make it
undrinkable. (That would flush you out for certain.) It could also
contain a minor fraction of methanol. A big jug of clear fluid
lablled "ethanol" sitting in a lab was not necessarily usp ethanol.
Peter Skelton
I have to agree. If it wasn't in a sealed bottle labeled USP it could
be anything
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Probably, I didn't look it up.
Peter Skelton
-
Richard Casady
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:04:17 GMT, "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com>
wrote:
No chance of surviving that. None. Zero. It might kill in twelve hours
or less. It takes about one drink an hour to maintain a given alcohol
level.
This is also the treatment for methanol poisoning. If you drink
90%ethanol,10%methanol paint thinner the treatment comes with the
abuse. I looked into it since I have a car that burns methanol.
Casady
wrote:
"The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for
three days in the intensive care unit,
No chance of surviving that. None. Zero. It might kill in twelve hours
or less. It takes about one drink an hour to maintain a given alcohol
level.
This is also the treatment for methanol poisoning. If you drink
90%ethanol,10%methanol paint thinner the treatment comes with the
abuse. I looked into it since I have a car that burns methanol.
Casady
-
Richard Casady
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:13:35 GMT, "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Pure BS. Medical alcohol is 95%. Almost all industrial alcohol always
has been, although as for fuel alcohol blended with gasoline, I just
don't know. Anything over 95% is difficult to make. Also, it doesn't
come in vials, it comes in good sized bottles.
Not to mention the fact that pure alcohol will dehydrate anything it
touches, in fact, absorbs water from the atmosphere. and if
administered IV. would kill blood cells. It is dangerous to drink, and
even 95% Evercleer says on the bottle to dilute it before drinking.
Stuff is dangerously flammable, as well. The was a barroom fire and
lawsuit here in Iowa a year or two back, from horsing around with
burning evercleer.
Casady
wrote:
"We quickly used all the available vials of 100 per cent alcohol
Pure BS. Medical alcohol is 95%. Almost all industrial alcohol always
has been, although as for fuel alcohol blended with gasoline, I just
don't know. Anything over 95% is difficult to make. Also, it doesn't
come in vials, it comes in good sized bottles.
Not to mention the fact that pure alcohol will dehydrate anything it
touches, in fact, absorbs water from the atmosphere. and if
administered IV. would kill blood cells. It is dangerous to drink, and
even 95% Evercleer says on the bottle to dilute it before drinking.
Stuff is dangerously flammable, as well. The was a barroom fire and
lawsuit here in Iowa a year or two back, from horsing around with
burning evercleer.
Casady
-
Richard Casady
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:48:27 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
It was widely used as an over-the-counter laxative, Ex-Lax, Feenamint
gum, etc. They quit using it a few years ago. Denatured ethanol
rubbing alcohol contained it, and the label warned of 'serious gastric
disturbances' if you drank it. You can't denature rubbing alcohol with
methanol, goes thriough the skin, and ethanol containing it is labeled
'will cause death'. Phenolphthalein is the stuff you supposedly can
remove by straining through bread, which doesn't work at all with
methanol. Ask your local wino.
Casady
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
It was widely used as an over-the-counter laxative, Ex-Lax, Feenamint
gum, etc. They quit using it a few years ago. Denatured ethanol
rubbing alcohol contained it, and the label warned of 'serious gastric
disturbances' if you drank it. You can't denature rubbing alcohol with
methanol, goes thriough the skin, and ethanol containing it is labeled
'will cause death'. Phenolphthalein is the stuff you supposedly can
remove by straining through bread, which doesn't work at all with
methanol. Ask your local wino.
Casady
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Royal Ancestry Of Barack Obama
Right!
His FATHER is the Black Kenyan.
Obama's ancestors were never American slaves and many of his ancestors were
SLAVEOWNERS themselves.
Perhaps he should pay REPARATIONS to Black Americans.
NOW...
Will Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make capital of this and try to discredit
Obama some more as "Not Black Enough"?
American Politics make for Great Theatre & Great Genealogy.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Duvall, Jeffery A" <jduvall@iupui.edu> wrote in message
news:mailman.91.1192628579.19317.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message news:...
His FATHER is the Black Kenyan.
Obama's ancestors were never American slaves and many of his ancestors were
SLAVEOWNERS themselves.
Perhaps he should pay REPARATIONS to Black Americans.
NOW...
Will Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make capital of this and try to discredit
Obama some more as "Not Black Enough"?
American Politics make for Great Theatre & Great Genealogy.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Duvall, Jeffery A" <jduvall@iupui.edu> wrote in message
news:mailman.91.1192628579.19317.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
This story, in one form or another, has been floating around for months
now (it was a topic of conversation among my cousins at a family event
early in the summer and I know it was at least a small part of the earlier
"is Obama Black enough" debate). In looking at Wm. Reitwiesner's page a
little while ago, however, it looks like he's added more details on
Obama's ancestry and connections since I last looked at it in June.
What I got tired of trying to explain to people who saw the story and
asked me about it, assuming (rightly as it happened, but still it was
annoying) that I must be part of the same Duvall family, was that this was
not a case (as far as anyone can know) of Obama's Duvall ancestor being a
master who raped a slave, but was instead simply an ordinary line of
descent through his mother who happens to have been white...
Jeff Duvall
Subject: Re: Lynne Cheney: Vice President Dick Cheney & Senator Barak
Obama Are Eighth Cousins
Of course, Mrs. Cheney may actually mean 7th cousins, or more
generations.
Cheney is also reportedly a third cousin, twice removed, of former
President
Harry Truman -- and even looks like Truman.
The common ancestors there are Robert Tyler [1751-1815] of Frederick
County, Virginia and Shelby County, Kentucky and his wife Margaret
[1755-1840].
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Deus Vult
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message news:...
You're welcome, John.
Barak Obama also seems to be related to Robert Duvall, the actor.
DSH
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1192590778.083802.122980@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Dear DSH et al.,
Thanks for that update re: Senator Obama. I see WAR has already
been working on his ancestry, which (besides Mareen Duvall) is
currently traced to the emigrant Edward FitzRandolph, among others:
http://www.wargs.com/political/obama.html
Besides assorted nobility and Magna Carta sureties, there is at
least 1 line back to Hugh Capet, and 1 to the Emperor Lothar I (d.
855). Plus Henry the Fowler, and a multitude of the expected 10th-9th
century ancestors.
All we have to do now is wait for the traditional 'Best royal
ancestry wins White House' journalism......
Cheers,
John
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Royal Ancestry Of Barack Obama
"None of Mr. Obama's ancestors lived under slavery in North America. The
first of Mr. Obama's paternal ancestors to leave Kenya was Mr. Obama's own
father, who left in the mid-20th century, about 100 years after slavery had
been abolished in the United States."
"Several of Mr. Obama's maternal ancestors owned slaves. Mr. Obama's
slave-owning ancestors include George Washington Overall (number 110, above,
husband of Mrs. Louisiana Duvall Overall and father-in-law of the
Christopher Columbus Clark mentioned above) and Mrs. Mary Grable Duvall
(number 223, above, mother of Mrs. Louisiana Duvall Overall and
grandmother-in-law of Christopher Columbus Clark), both of whom are
enumerated in the 1850 Federal Census as slave owners. George Washington
Overall is also enumerated in the 1860 Federal Census as a slave owner. See
the Extracts from the Federal Censuses, above, for details."
"On 4 March 2007, in a speech at the George C. Wallace Community College in
Selma, Alabama, Mr. Obama acknowledged his mother's slave-owning ancestors,
adding "That's no surprise. That's part of our tortured, tangled history."
See <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/us/politics/05selma.html.>
William Addams Reitwiesner
<http://www.wargs.com/political/obama.html>
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
first of Mr. Obama's paternal ancestors to leave Kenya was Mr. Obama's own
father, who left in the mid-20th century, about 100 years after slavery had
been abolished in the United States."
"Several of Mr. Obama's maternal ancestors owned slaves. Mr. Obama's
slave-owning ancestors include George Washington Overall (number 110, above,
husband of Mrs. Louisiana Duvall Overall and father-in-law of the
Christopher Columbus Clark mentioned above) and Mrs. Mary Grable Duvall
(number 223, above, mother of Mrs. Louisiana Duvall Overall and
grandmother-in-law of Christopher Columbus Clark), both of whom are
enumerated in the 1850 Federal Census as slave owners. George Washington
Overall is also enumerated in the 1860 Federal Census as a slave owner. See
the Extracts from the Federal Censuses, above, for details."
"On 4 March 2007, in a speech at the George C. Wallace Community College in
Selma, Alabama, Mr. Obama acknowledged his mother's slave-owning ancestors,
adding "That's no surprise. That's part of our tortured, tangled history."
See <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/us/politics/05selma.html.>
William Addams Reitwiesner
<http://www.wargs.com/political/obama.html>
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Hilarious!
Abstruse Factoids From Our Resident Irishman.
DSH
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:2tGdnYpVEI5KvYvanZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com...
Abstruse Factoids From Our Resident Irishman.
DSH
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:2tGdnYpVEI5KvYvanZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com...
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Vince
-
John Briggs
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Vince wrote:
Well, that depends on the purity. For the less pure grades the impurity is
water. For the high purity grades, the impurity is benzene, which has been
used to remove the water...
--
John Briggs
laboratory grade usp ethanol is perfectly drinkable if diluted
Well, that depends on the purity. For the less pure grades the impurity is
water. For the high purity grades, the impurity is benzene, which has been
used to remove the water...
--
John Briggs
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Royal Ancestry Of Barack Obama
Whereas Mitt Romney is reportedly related to Billy The Kid, Christopher
Reeve and Dr. Spock.
<http://www.wargs.com/political/romney.html>
I love it that Mitt's Real First Name is WILLARD.
Deeeeeeelightful!
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Reeve and Dr. Spock.
<http://www.wargs.com/political/romney.html>
I love it that Mitt's Real First Name is WILLARD.
Deeeeeeelightful!
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
-
Ray O'Hara
Re: Royal Ancestry Of Barack Obama
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:u2sRi.573$6q5.2106@eagle.america.net...
you get weirder with every post you make.
news:u2sRi.573$6q5.2106@eagle.america.net...
Whereas Mitt Romney is reportedly related to Billy The Kid, Christopher
Reeve and Dr. Spock.
http://www.wargs.com/political/romney.html
I love it that Mitt's Real First Name is WILLARD.
Deeeeeeelightful!
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
you get weirder with every post you make.
-
Gjest
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
<<<In a message dated 10/17/2007 4:55:54 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
Jane married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ?>>>
----------------------
On her age, it's a frequent (quite frequent) mistake that people use an age
like "aged 16" or "in her 16th year" to say she was 16 years old as we'd do
today.
We no longer use this form. If someone is 15 years and 364 days old, we say
they are 15, however, at one time, if someone was 15 years and 1 day old
they would say "in their 16th year". The 16th year starting on your 15th
birthday or the day after.
So it's quite possible that she wasn't 16 but rather "in her 16th year" and
someone has mis-transcribed it.
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
Jane married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ?>>>
----------------------
On her age, it's a frequent (quite frequent) mistake that people use an age
like "aged 16" or "in her 16th year" to say she was 16 years old as we'd do
today.
We no longer use this form. If someone is 15 years and 364 days old, we say
they are 15, however, at one time, if someone was 15 years and 1 day old
they would say "in their 16th year". The 16th year starting on your 15th
birthday or the day after.
So it's quite possible that she wasn't 16 but rather "in her 16th year" and
someone has mis-transcribed it.
Will Johnson
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
Vince
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Hardly "abstruse"
Abstruse from the latin
abstruse adjective
Etymology: Latin abstrusus, from past participle of abstrudere to
conceal, from abs-, ab- + trudere to push — more at threat
Date:
1599
: difficult to comprehend : recondite <the abstruse calculations of
mathematicians>
As sherlock homes said
My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram, or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. But I abhor the dull routine of existence.
I crave for mental exaltation.
Spelling is never abstruse, "meaning" can be abstruse, but not in this
case
have a nice day
Vince
Hilarious!
Abstruse Factoids From Our Resident Irishman.
DSH
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:2tGdnYpVEI5KvYvanZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com...
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Vince
Hardly "abstruse"
Abstruse from the latin
abstruse adjective
Etymology: Latin abstrusus, from past participle of abstrudere to
conceal, from abs-, ab- + trudere to push — more at threat
Date:
1599
: difficult to comprehend : recondite <the abstruse calculations of
mathematicians>
As sherlock homes said
My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram, or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. But I abhor the dull routine of existence.
I crave for mental exaltation.
Spelling is never abstruse, "meaning" can be abstruse, but not in this
case
have a nice day
Vince
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Hilarious!
Abstruse Factoids From Our Resident Irishman.
DSH
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:2tGdnYpVEI5KvYvanZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com...
Abstruse Factoids From Our Resident Irishman.
DSH
"Vince" <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote in message
news:2tGdnYpVEI5KvYvanZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com...
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
Vince
-
Richard Casady
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:39:11 GMT, richardcasady@earthlink.net (Richard
Casady) wrote:
I forgot to mention that ethanol based rubbing alcohol is not all that
cheap,considerably more expensive than isopropanol base rubbing
alcohol at $4 a pint or so, and not the cheapest possible drunk. Why
do you think they call them 'winos'. You can make beer and wine,
legal, or moon, illegal, cheaper. I know how to make moon, but beer is
a mystery. They have kits, and, specialist supply houses, for beer
making, I understand.
Casady
Casady) wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:48:27 -0400, Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
BTW did you mean "Phenolphthalein" (not a spelling flame its just my
favorite exception to the "I before e" convention)
I won my only spelling bee spelling Phenolphthalein
It was widely used as an over-the-counter laxative, Ex-Lax, Feenamint
gum, etc. They quit using it a few years ago. Denatured ethanol
rubbing alcohol contained it, and the label warned of 'serious gastric
disturbances' if you drank it. You can't denature rubbing alcohol with
methanol, goes thriough the skin, and ethanol containing it is labeled
'will cause death'. Phenolphthalein is the stuff you supposedly can
remove by straining through bread, which doesn't work at all with
methanol. Ask your local wino.
I forgot to mention that ethanol based rubbing alcohol is not all that
cheap,considerably more expensive than isopropanol base rubbing
alcohol at $4 a pint or so, and not the cheapest possible drunk. Why
do you think they call them 'winos'. You can make beer and wine,
legal, or moon, illegal, cheaper. I know how to make moon, but beer is
a mystery. They have kits, and, specialist supply houses, for beer
making, I understand.
Casady
-
WJhonson
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
<<In a message dated 10/17/07 04:55:54 Pacific Daylight Time, jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
and Margaret's marriage did not occur until at least 1530, although I
do have a note from another source that their eldest daughter, Jane
married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ? >>
====================================
It is possible that Jane was married in 1546, but the article in "The Genealogist" only states that she was married "before 1 Feb 1551/2" which date of course, is the date of her father's will.
If we have more evidence than that to date her marriage, I haven't seen it.
Will Johnson
From your statement that
Margaret's first husband did not die until 1530, obviously Stephen
and Margaret's marriage did not occur until at least 1530, although I
do have a note from another source that their eldest daughter, Jane
married Richard Whethill in 1546, when Jane was aged 16, which would
seem to indicate that Jane was born probably by the end of 1530 ? >>
====================================
It is possible that Jane was married in 1546, but the article in "The Genealogist" only states that she was married "before 1 Feb 1551/2" which date of course, is the date of her father's will.
If we have more evidence than that to date her marriage, I haven't seen it.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Genealogics: Connecting the Machells to the Barons Aungi
<<In a message dated 10/17/07 04:55:54 Pacific Daylight Time, jonathankirton@sympatico.ca writes:
Stephen only purchased the Manor of Thorp Mandeville, at the hamlet
of Thorp Mandeville, Northamptonshire in 1552, very shortly before he
died, and never actually lived there himself. >>
==================
Do you have a source for this? Burke seems to dispute you, evidently the insinuation being that it must have passed to Stephen as brother and heir, or to his son as nephew and heir of William Kirton Esq
http://books.google.com/books?id=JC9qCI ... bG0uSSZEW0
Will Johnson
Stephen only purchased the Manor of Thorp Mandeville, at the hamlet
of Thorp Mandeville, Northamptonshire in 1552, very shortly before he
died, and never actually lived there himself. >>
==================
Do you have a source for this? Burke seems to dispute you, evidently the insinuation being that it must have passed to Stephen as brother and heir, or to his son as nephew and heir of William Kirton Esq
http://books.google.com/books?id=JC9qCI ... bG0uSSZEW0
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Lynne Cheney: Vice President Dick Cheney & Senator Barak
Dear Fellow Listers,
I have a number of immigrant ancestors in
common with Vice President Cheney including Isaac Cummings and Anne NN, Anthony
Colby and Susanna , George and Susannah (North) Martin, William and Susannah
(Jameson) Pressey, William and Margaret ( ) Cheney, George Parkhurst and
Phebe (nee Leete) and Michael Emerson who married Hannah Webster as well as
probably Peter Garland whose descendants in New Hampshire are said to include
George who married Lucretia ( ) Hitchcock , widow of L t. Richard Hitchcock
after shacking up with her for long enough that the town ordered them to marry.
They had a son Jabez Garland and also John Garland of Hampton who married
Elizabeth Philbrick..
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
I have a number of immigrant ancestors in
common with Vice President Cheney including Isaac Cummings and Anne NN, Anthony
Colby and Susanna , George and Susannah (North) Martin, William and Susannah
(Jameson) Pressey, William and Margaret ( ) Cheney, George Parkhurst and
Phebe (nee Leete) and Michael Emerson who married Hannah Webster as well as
probably Peter Garland whose descendants in New Hampshire are said to include
George who married Lucretia ( ) Hitchcock , widow of L t. Richard Hitchcock
after shacking up with her for long enough that the town ordered them to marry.
They had a son Jabez Garland and also John Garland of Hampton who married
Elizabeth Philbrick..
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
WJhonson
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
<<In a message dated 10/16/07 07:48:05 Pacific Daylight Time, allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
William son of Gilbert de Notton, named above. (V.C. H. Lans., vols. iv and v, passim) This William was sometime constable to John de Lascy, constable of Chester, (Chartul. Of Pontefract, 146) and his son Gilbert III, upon succeeding to the Lancashire estate of his mother's mother upon her death in 1220 took the name of Barton. (R. Litt. Claus., i, 438b; Excerpt. e R. Fin., I, 78.) >>
--------------------
This is probably a case of reading too much into something.
We know that Gilbert had livery of the lands in 1222, and we know he was under-age in 1220 because the custody of his body was granted as heir. I don't think we know that his mother died IN 1220, or his father, or his grandmother. What we know is that *something* happened in 1220 that caused him and his lands to be granted.
You'd think it might be that his grandmother Edith died. It could also be that his father, holding lands for his life jure uxoris had just died. Or that Cecily Barton his mother had just died.
What we know is all three, Cecily, Edith and William were dead *by* 16 Oct 1220.
Unless you have a quote from the underlying primary source that clarifies which of them actually had just died.
Will Johnson
William son of Gilbert de Notton, named above. (V.C. H. Lans., vols. iv and v, passim) This William was sometime constable to John de Lascy, constable of Chester, (Chartul. Of Pontefract, 146) and his son Gilbert III, upon succeeding to the Lancashire estate of his mother's mother upon her death in 1220 took the name of Barton. (R. Litt. Claus., i, 438b; Excerpt. e R. Fin., I, 78.) >>
--------------------
This is probably a case of reading too much into something.
We know that Gilbert had livery of the lands in 1222, and we know he was under-age in 1220 because the custody of his body was granted as heir. I don't think we know that his mother died IN 1220, or his father, or his grandmother. What we know is that *something* happened in 1220 that caused him and his lands to be granted.
You'd think it might be that his grandmother Edith died. It could also be that his father, holding lands for his life jure uxoris had just died. Or that Cecily Barton his mother had just died.
What we know is all three, Cecily, Edith and William were dead *by* 16 Oct 1220.
Unless you have a quote from the underlying primary source that clarifies which of them actually had just died.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Baldwin le Tyas orTyes (Teutonicus)
There are a couple more errors in Farrar's statements evidently.
That William de Notton, living in 1212, but dead by 1220 had a wife Cecily Barton "heir to her mother" is probably false on the point of "heir", since apparently Cecily never took possession of any inheritence from her own mother.
I think it would be more proper to say "heir presumptive" or something of that sort. Assuming that Cecily d.v.m. and then Edith died which is why Gilbert is in 1220 named "now heir", etc.
On another point, I doubt that Gilbert I was "seneschal 1220-30". I think it's much more likely that he also was dead by 1220 when the heir of his son William was then under-age.
Will Johnson
That William de Notton, living in 1212, but dead by 1220 had a wife Cecily Barton "heir to her mother" is probably false on the point of "heir", since apparently Cecily never took possession of any inheritence from her own mother.
I think it would be more proper to say "heir presumptive" or something of that sort. Assuming that Cecily d.v.m. and then Edith died which is why Gilbert is in 1220 named "now heir", etc.
On another point, I doubt that Gilbert I was "seneschal 1220-30". I think it's much more likely that he also was dead by 1220 when the heir of his son William was then under-age.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Dear Allan,
Lineage doesn`t necessarily mean wealth and for a very long
time political office didn`t necessarily gain one wealth either as being a
lawyer didn`t pay that much and lawyers became presidents else They were
landowners or military heroes (neither terribly high paying , especially the latter.
In 1928 We elected an engineer (the sort that plans bridges( to be our
President. I believe the presidential salary only topped 1 000 000 american dollars
per year back in the 1980s. I think it had been at 500, 000 for a while but
running for office haqs been a rather expensive proposition for a while else the
corruption and great political machines could not have come into being.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Lineage doesn`t necessarily mean wealth and for a very long
time political office didn`t necessarily gain one wealth either as being a
lawyer didn`t pay that much and lawyers became presidents else They were
landowners or military heroes (neither terribly high paying , especially the latter.
In 1928 We elected an engineer (the sort that plans bridges( to be our
President. I believe the presidential salary only topped 1 000 000 american dollars
per year back in the 1980s. I think it had been at 500, 000 for a while but
running for office haqs been a rather expensive proposition for a while else the
corruption and great political machines could not have come into being.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
What is the proof that John Peck who married Jane (Joan) Anne was "of Beccles" ?
I think John was "of Wakefield".
Also what is the proof that Henry Peck was his "son and heir" as you stated ? I do not find any Henry Peck at this point.
Thanks
Will Johnson
I think John was "of Wakefield".
Also what is the proof that Henry Peck was his "son and heir" as you stated ? I do not find any Henry Peck at this point.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
Isn't Edwards a descendant of Major General Andrew Pickens, victor of the
Battle of Cowpens in the American Revolution? Pickens were said to be one of the
most influential families in the (old) south. So there might be a touch of
blue blood in Edwards, after all
Robert Bowman
n a message dated 10/17/2007 2:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
NicholasIII@gmail.com writes:
Battle of Cowpens in the American Revolution? Pickens were said to be one of the
most influential families in the (old) south. So there might be a touch of
blue blood in Edwards, after all
Robert Bowman
n a message dated 10/17/2007 2:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
NicholasIII@gmail.com writes:
Right now the front-runner is a President's wife. McCain's father, and
grandfather were Admirals. Romney's dad was a Governor. Obama's a
strange case -- he's also an 8th cousin to Dick Cheney on his mother's
side, and his father may have been a Kenyan Aristocrat. Guliani and
Edwards are the only ones who can argue they're 100% non-blue-blooded.
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
<<In a message dated 10/15/07 15:44:52 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs >>
--------------------------
http://books.google.com/books?id=9jNHy0PBqlUC&pg=PA1756
"Historic Homes and Places and Genealogical and Personal Memoires Relating To...", by William Richard Cutter
states that the ascent goes
John Peck + Joan Anne
Robert Peck +1 Norton +2 Waters (he does NOT specify which mother was the mother of...)
Robert Peck + Helen Babbs
Joseph Peck "fourth son" +1 Rebecca Clark +2 "second wife's name is Unknown"
----------End of quote=========
This is why is always very important to cite exactly what source you are using and exactly what it says and doesn't say.
Will Johnson
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs >>
--------------------------
http://books.google.com/books?id=9jNHy0PBqlUC&pg=PA1756
"Historic Homes and Places and Genealogical and Personal Memoires Relating To...", by William Richard Cutter
states that the ascent goes
John Peck + Joan Anne
Robert Peck +1 Norton +2 Waters (he does NOT specify which mother was the mother of...)
Robert Peck + Helen Babbs
Joseph Peck "fourth son" +1 Rebecca Clark +2 "second wife's name is Unknown"
----------End of quote=========
This is why is always very important to cite exactly what source you are using and exactly what it says and doesn't say.
Will Johnson
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
You are WAY off.
The CURRENT salary of the POTUS is $400,000 per year.
<http://people.howstuffworks.com/question449.htm>
DSH
<Jwc1870@aol.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.107.1192661117.19317.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
The CURRENT salary of the POTUS is $400,000 per year.
<http://people.howstuffworks.com/question449.htm>
DSH
<Jwc1870@aol.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.107.1192661117.19317.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com...
Dear Allan,
Lineage doesn`t necessarily mean wealth and for a very
long
time political office didn`t necessarily gain one wealth either as being a
lawyer didn`t pay that much and lawyers became presidents else They were
landowners or military heroes (neither terribly high paying , especially
the latter.
In 1928 We elected an engineer (the sort that plans bridges( to be our
President. I believe the presidential salary only topped 1 000 000
american dollars
per year back in the 1980s. I think it had been at 500, 000 for a while
but
running for office haqs been a rather expensive proposition for a while
else the
corruption and great political machines could not have come into being.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: The Flat Earth
Hilarious!
Gans even came a cropper on THAT anserine effort.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Paul J Gans" <gans@panix.com> wrote in message
news:ff62fk$9sl$1@reader1.panix.com...
Gans even came a cropper on THAT anserine effort.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Paul J Gans" <gans@panix.com> wrote in message
news:ff62fk$9sl$1@reader1.panix.com...
One additional story. Draper is still very popular at NYU.
There is a Draper Program, a Draper Society, etc., etc. A
number of years ago I tried to suggest to Those in Power that
perhaps a better role model could be found.
Nothing happened.
The historical lesson is that once a person is a hero, nobody
wants to hear anything bad about them.
--
--- Paul J. Gans
-
John Briggs
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Rather more relevant is that Herbert Hoover was in fact a *mining* engineer
(originally a geologist) - he had translated Agricola's De Re Metallica
(1556).
--
John Briggs
You are WAY off.
The CURRENT salary of the POTUS is $400,000 per year.
Rather more relevant is that Herbert Hoover was in fact a *mining* engineer
(originally a geologist) - he had translated Agricola's De Re Metallica
(1556).
--
John Briggs
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
Re: previous post to this thread:
I am looking at George Marshall's *The Genealogist's Guide*
and notice on page 477-8, LEAKE-LEEK, and on 480,
LEEK, or LEEKE, and 484 LEKE, finally: 534 MARTIN-LEAKE.
I possess none of the citations, and my nearest library is
not helpful, and interlibrary loan is five weeks waiting.
I suspect a gen-medieval member has an interest in my
main interest: I have seen and read about Sir John and
Sir Simon Leeke pedigrees:
does anyone have one to share? Re below: Margery Leeke
was the dau. of John Leeke, Beccles, England, and I am
seeking ancestors of Margery Leeke and her father?
Bill
*****************
I searched both the 1575 Visitations of the North
by Wm Flower and the 1665 Visitations of Yorke
by Dugdale and found no Peck pedigrees and
no Leake/Leeke pedigrees.
In the 1563-64 Visitation of Yorkshire by Wm Flower
I found no Leake/Leeke pedigrees but a substantial
Peck pedigree, pages 236-237.
Of the Peck pedigree, re: my proposed Peck pedigree
based on ALL sources, including the 1563-64 Flower,
wills, chancery records, et al., I find confirmation of the
following [using current spelling]:
_________________________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice, dau. of Middleton of Stockeld
son& heir
_________________________________________________
thence [not part of my proposed pedigree]
John Peck=Jane, dau. of John Anne of Frickley
son&heir
also: four dau's: Isabel, Joan, Margaret, and Elizabeth
___________________________________________________
[Note: missing from this Peck pedigree segment is another
son, referred to in wills, chancery records, church records,
et al., namely:
Henry Peck=Margery, dau. of John Leeke
and their issue:
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters:
end of Note]
___________________________________________________
QUESTION: Are there other *Visitations* I should be
aware of that have a Peck/Leeke/Leake pedigree with this segment
expanded: particularly into descendants?
Bill
*****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters
_____________________________________
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
I am looking at George Marshall's *The Genealogist's Guide*
and notice on page 477-8, LEAKE-LEEK, and on 480,
LEEK, or LEEKE, and 484 LEKE, finally: 534 MARTIN-LEAKE.
I possess none of the citations, and my nearest library is
not helpful, and interlibrary loan is five weeks waiting.
I suspect a gen-medieval member has an interest in my
main interest: I have seen and read about Sir John and
Sir Simon Leeke pedigrees:
does anyone have one to share? Re below: Margery Leeke
was the dau. of John Leeke, Beccles, England, and I am
seeking ancestors of Margery Leeke and her father?
Bill
*****************
I searched both the 1575 Visitations of the North
by Wm Flower and the 1665 Visitations of Yorke
by Dugdale and found no Peck pedigrees and
no Leake/Leeke pedigrees.
In the 1563-64 Visitation of Yorkshire by Wm Flower
I found no Leake/Leeke pedigrees but a substantial
Peck pedigree, pages 236-237.
Of the Peck pedigree, re: my proposed Peck pedigree
based on ALL sources, including the 1563-64 Flower,
wills, chancery records, et al., I find confirmation of the
following [using current spelling]:
_________________________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice, dau. of Middleton of Stockeld
son& heir
_________________________________________________
thence [not part of my proposed pedigree]
John Peck=Jane, dau. of John Anne of Frickley
son&heir
also: four dau's: Isabel, Joan, Margaret, and Elizabeth
___________________________________________________
[Note: missing from this Peck pedigree segment is another
son, referred to in wills, chancery records, church records,
et al., namely:
Henry Peck=Margery, dau. of John Leeke
and their issue:
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters:
end of Note]
___________________________________________________
QUESTION: Are there other *Visitations* I should be
aware of that have a Peck/Leeke/Leake pedigree with this segment
expanded: particularly into descendants?
Bill
*****************************************************
--- John Higgins <jthiggins@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
John Higgins wrote, "There may in fact be a problem in the proposed
pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem."
The Middleton segment expands into descendants of Leeke and Peck.
_____________________________________
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder)=Johan, dau. of John Waters
_____________________________________
I'm as bewildered as Bill Arnold by Will Johnson's mention of Isabel
Plumpton, dau. of Sir William Plumpton and his 1st wife Elizabeth
Stapleton - especially since I can find no reference to Alice Plumpton in
any of Bill Arnold's posts. The only Plumpton that Bill mentioned is
Eustacia, several generations earlier. There may in fact be a problem in
the proposed pedigree but it's likely not in the Middleton segments - and
Isabel Plumpton is not the problem.
As I underestand it, Bill is trying to place Alice Middleton, wife of
Richard Peck. She is in fact mentioned in Clay's edition [with additions]
of Dugdale's 1664-5 Visitation of Yorkshire. The Middleton of Stockeld
pedigree going back from her is, per Clay:
Sir Peter Middleton (d. ca. 1499), m. Anne, dau. of Sir Henry Vavasour of
Hazlewood
Sir John Middleton, m. Matilda, dau. of Sir John Thwaites of Lofthouse
William Middleton (will 1474), m. Margaret, dau. of Sir Stephen Hamerton of
Wigglesworth
Sir John Middleton, m. Alice, dau. of Sir Peter Mauleverer of Beamsley
Sir Nicholas Middleton; m. (2 of 3) Avice, dau. of Sir Gilbert Stapleton
Sir Thomas Middleton (prob. d. before March 1393), m. Eliza, dau. of Sir
Henry Gramary
Sir Peter Middleton, m. Eustacia, dau. of Sir Robert Plumpton
[and five more generations before this]
Alice Plumpton gets into this through the Hamerton marriage. Margaret
Hamerton who mar. William Middleton (d. 1474) is identified in Dugdale's
Middleton pedigree as daughter of Sir Steven Hamerton. In pedigrees of the
Hamerton family in visitations and other sources (e.g., Thomas Dunham
Whitaker's "Deanery of Craven"), Margaret is said to be a dau. of Sir
Stephen by his wife Isabel Plumpton - yes, THAT Isabel. The problem is that
Sir Stephen is said to have died 1500/1 per his IPM. Although this likely
presents no problems with the Plumpton chronology that Will mentions below,
it is problematic to give Sir Stephen a son-in-law who died 27 years before
him, as the pedigrees indicate. It seems possible that Margaret Hamerton
was in fact a sister, rather than daughter, of Sir Stephen Hamerton - but
this is only a guess.
Since Will has introduced Isabel Plumpton into the picture, does this help
to clarify things a bit and put her in a proper context?
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Alice Middleton, died aft.1491
Bill the full line, as presented, is not possible.
In particular its highly unlikely that Isabel Plumpton, daughter of Sir
William Plumpton "eldest son" by his wife Elizabeth Stapleton figures in the
line in the way you have described.
For Alice to be married and active on deeds in the 1490s, she has to be
too old to be in this descent. Sir William Plumpton is known to have been
born on 7 Oct 1404 and died on 15 Oct 1480, his Stapleton wife was dead by
1450.
If you calculate approximate years backward yourself you will see that
there is a problem.
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
-------------------------------
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
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
WJhonson
Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne Cheney: Vi
The *shortest* royal line I have for Barack Obama is to Alexander I, King of Scotland 1107-24
Anybody have a shorter one?
Anybody have a shorter one?
-
WJhonson
Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne Cheney: Vi
Leo asked me privately how Barack connects up to Alexander, King of Scotland.
So starting with WAR's ascent of Barack Obama to Martha Eltonhead, we then have Martha as a descendent of Alexander in 18 steps.
Martha Eltonhead, dau of
Richard Eltonhead d 1664 and Anne Sutton d possibly 1654, dau of
Edward Sutton, living 5J1 and Anne Stanley bap 31 Dec 1561 Ormskirk, Lancs., dau of
Peter Stanley bur 24 Jul 1592 Ormskirk, Lancs. and Cecily Tarleton bur 28 Nov 1568 Ormskirk, Lancs., son of
William Stanley b abt 1474/5 and Anne Harrington "co-heiress of her father", son of
William Stanley of Hooten d 3 Mar 1512 and Agnes Grosvenor d 5 Feb 1482 "co-heiress of her father", son of
William Stanley and Mary Savage, dau of
Sir John Savage d 1 Aug 1450 and Maud de Swynnerton "only daughter", b AFT 1364 disp., dau of
Robert, Lord Swynnerton d abt 1395 and Elizabeth Beke d 1386 dau of
Sir Nicholas Beke, Knt of Tean d abt Jul 1369 and Joan de Stafford, dau of
Ralph, 2nd Baron and 1st Earl of Stafford b 1301, d 1379 and Katherine Hastang
and then Leo's database already supplies the rest of the ascent to Alexander.
Will Johnson
So starting with WAR's ascent of Barack Obama to Martha Eltonhead, we then have Martha as a descendent of Alexander in 18 steps.
Martha Eltonhead, dau of
Richard Eltonhead d 1664 and Anne Sutton d possibly 1654, dau of
Edward Sutton, living 5J1 and Anne Stanley bap 31 Dec 1561 Ormskirk, Lancs., dau of
Peter Stanley bur 24 Jul 1592 Ormskirk, Lancs. and Cecily Tarleton bur 28 Nov 1568 Ormskirk, Lancs., son of
William Stanley b abt 1474/5 and Anne Harrington "co-heiress of her father", son of
William Stanley of Hooten d 3 Mar 1512 and Agnes Grosvenor d 5 Feb 1482 "co-heiress of her father", son of
William Stanley and Mary Savage, dau of
Sir John Savage d 1 Aug 1450 and Maud de Swynnerton "only daughter", b AFT 1364 disp., dau of
Robert, Lord Swynnerton d abt 1395 and Elizabeth Beke d 1386 dau of
Sir Nicholas Beke, Knt of Tean d abt Jul 1369 and Joan de Stafford, dau of
Ralph, 2nd Baron and 1st Earl of Stafford b 1301, d 1379 and Katherine Hastang
and then Leo's database already supplies the rest of the ascent to Alexander.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
OT Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebr
On Oct 17, 3:59 pm, Rs...@cs.com wrote:
Dan Morgan might have something to say about this characterization.
Sort of like calling Eustace, Count of Boulogne the "victor of the
Battle of Hastings".
taf
Isn't Edwards a descendant of Major General Andrew Pickens, victor of the
Battle of Cowpens in the American Revolution?
Dan Morgan might have something to say about this characterization.
Sort of like calling Eustace, Count of Boulogne the "victor of the
Battle of Hastings".
taf
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Alice Middleton, died aft
<<In a message dated 10/13/07 20:07:34 Pacific Daylight Time, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
I'm as bewildered as Bill Arnold by Will Johnson's mention of Isabel
Plumpton, dau. of Sir William Plumpton and his 1st wife Elizabeth
Stapleton - especially since I can find no reference to Alice Plumpton in
any of Bill Arnold's posts. >>
-----------------------------
Is not Margaret (Hammerton) Middleton, a dau of Stephen de Hammerton, K.B. by his wife Isabel Plumpton ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
I'm as bewildered as Bill Arnold by Will Johnson's mention of Isabel
Plumpton, dau. of Sir William Plumpton and his 1st wife Elizabeth
Stapleton - especially since I can find no reference to Alice Plumpton in
any of Bill Arnold's posts. >>
-----------------------------
Is not Margaret (Hammerton) Middleton, a dau of Stephen de Hammerton, K.B. by his wife Isabel Plumpton ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Alice Middleton, died aft
<<In a message dated 10/13/07 20:07:34 Pacific Daylight Time, jthiggins@sbcglobal.net writes:
Isabel Plumpton - yes, THAT Isabel. The problem is that
Sir Stephen is said to have died 1500/1 per his IPM. Although this likely
presents no problems with the Plumpton chronology that Will mentions below,
it is problematic to give Sir Stephen a son-in-law who died 27 years before
him, as the pedigrees indicate. It seems possible that Margaret Hamerton
was in fact a sister, rather than daughter, of Sir Stephen Hamerton - but
this is only a guess. >>
----------------------------
Yes it makes much more sense that Margaret is a sister of Sir Stephen, both children of Sir Richard Hammerton of Preston in Craven, Yorkshire who d 1480 (or thereabouts).
It would certainly ease the chronological nightmare's I've been having trying to make all the documentation fit.
Will
Isabel Plumpton - yes, THAT Isabel. The problem is that
Sir Stephen is said to have died 1500/1 per his IPM. Although this likely
presents no problems with the Plumpton chronology that Will mentions below,
it is problematic to give Sir Stephen a son-in-law who died 27 years before
him, as the pedigrees indicate. It seems possible that Margaret Hamerton
was in fact a sister, rather than daughter, of Sir Stephen Hamerton - but
this is only a guess. >>
----------------------------
Yes it makes much more sense that Margaret is a sister of Sir Stephen, both children of Sir Richard Hammerton of Preston in Craven, Yorkshire who d 1480 (or thereabouts).
It would certainly ease the chronological nightmare's I've been having trying to make all the documentation fit.
Will
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne Cheney:Vic
----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne
Cheney:VicePresident Dick Cheney & Senator Barak Obama
father, not even as a grandfather...........
Joan de Stafford, wife of Sir Nicholas Beke, is a descendant of Henry I,
King of England.
At _this moment_ I do not have Joan de Stafford as an ancestor of Barack
Obama either.
Leo
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne
Cheney:VicePresident Dick Cheney & Senator Barak Obama
Leo asked me privately how Barack connects up to Alexander, King of
Scotland.
So starting with WAR's ascent of Barack Obama to Martha Eltonhead, we then
have Martha as a descendent of Alexander in 18 steps.
Martha Eltonhead, dau of
Richard Eltonhead d 1664 and Anne Sutton d possibly 1654, dau of
Edward Sutton, living 5J1 and Anne Stanley bap 31 Dec 1561 Ormskirk,
Lancs., dau of
Peter Stanley bur 24 Jul 1592 Ormskirk, Lancs. and Cecily Tarleton bur 28
Nov 1568 Ormskirk, Lancs., son of
William Stanley b abt 1474/5 and Anne Harrington "co-heiress of her
father", son of
William Stanley of Hooten d 3 Mar 1512 and Agnes Grosvenor d 5 Feb 1482
"co-heiress of her father", son of
William Stanley and Mary Savage, dau of
Sir John Savage d 1 Aug 1450 and Maud de Swynnerton "only daughter", b AFT
1364 disp., dau of
Robert, Lord Swynnerton d abt 1395 and Elizabeth Beke d 1386 dau of
Sir Nicholas Beke, Knt of Tean d abt Jul 1369 and Joan de Stafford, dau of
Ralph, 2nd Baron and 1st Earl of Stafford b 1301, d 1379 and Katherine
Hastang
and then Leo's database already supplies the rest of the ascent to
Alexander.
================= No it doesn't. I have Alexander I, king of Scots as a
father, not even as a grandfather...........
Joan de Stafford, wife of Sir Nicholas Beke, is a descendant of Henry I,
King of England.
At _this moment_ I do not have Joan de Stafford as an ancestor of Barack
Obama either.
Leo
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
-
WJhonson
Re: Royal Ancestry of Barack Obama (was Re: Lynne Cheney:Vic
<<In a message dated 10/17/07 19:24:33 Pacific Daylight Time, leovdpas@netspeed.com.au writes:
No it doesn't. I have Alexander I, king of Scots as a
father, not even as a grandfather...........
Joan de Stafford, wife of Sir Nicholas Beke, is a descendant of Henry I,
King of England.
At _this moment_ I do not have Joan de Stafford as an ancestor of Barack
Obama either.
Leo >>
-------------------
Oops, okay I've posted the full ascent from Martha Eltonhead to King Alexander here
http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... rack_Obama
Perhaps some eagle-eye can see where it fails, if it does.
Will Johnson
No it doesn't. I have Alexander I, king of Scots as a
father, not even as a grandfather...........
Joan de Stafford, wife of Sir Nicholas Beke, is a descendant of Henry I,
King of England.
At _this moment_ I do not have Joan de Stafford as an ancestor of Barack
Obama either.
Leo >>
-------------------
Oops, okay I've posted the full ascent from Martha Eltonhead to King Alexander here
http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... rack_Obama
Perhaps some eagle-eye can see where it fails, if it does.
Will Johnson
-
WJhonson
Re: Brome of Baddesley Clinton and of Holton
<<In a message dated 10/17/07 04:18:03 Pacific Daylight Time, ADRIANCHANNING02 writes:
A minor means he was under 21; my notation John Browne (1488x1509-1558...
means that John was born between 1488 and 1509. >>
--------------------
Since Christopher Brome proved his age in 1498, it's likely he was 21 in that year, putting his own birthyear as 1477. Since he died 1509 seized of Worminghall, then his son and heir John Brome must have been born 1495/1510, shaving a few more years off your estimate.
Will Johnson
A minor means he was under 21; my notation John Browne (1488x1509-1558...
means that John was born between 1488 and 1509. >>
--------------------
Since Christopher Brome proved his age in 1498, it's likely he was 21 in that year, putting his own birthyear as 1477. Since he died 1509 seized of Worminghall, then his son and heir John Brome must have been born 1495/1510, shaving a few more years off your estimate.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Stanhope-Walker Marriage
Will,
I am very new to the Stanhopes and with books still packed, I did most of this online:
I have:
(A General and Heraldic Dictionary of the Peerage and Baronetage of the by John Burke states p. 234 that this Sir John had three sons and six daughters.)
Complete Peerage for Michael Stanhope
For John Stanhope-Stanhopp of Melwood:
1.http://www.goodrick.info/incidents_in_t ... rickes.htm
“The father of this hero-priest, the Rev. George Walker, also named George Walker, was a clergyman of some distinction. He was Rector of Kilmore and Chancellor of Armagh in Ireland, and was nominated Archdeacon of Derry in succession to this brother-in-law, Archdeacon Stanhope (a Yorkshire man) who died in 1641. Being a staunch Royalist he fled from Ireland at the outbreak of the Civil War, and under the protection of the Stapleton’s, held the Vicarage of Wignill in Yorkshire from about 1643 to 1650, when he retired to Kirk Deighton (a neighbouring parish to Ribston) upon Cromwell's succession to power. At Kirk Deighton a daughter was born to him and his wife Ursula, daughter of Sir John Stanhope of Melwood co. Lincoln, and the baptism of this daughter is recorded in the Parish Registers of Kirk Deighton for 20 September 1650. “
2. Lincolnshire Pedigrees:
http://books.google.com/books?id=IPcMAA ... utput=html
3. YARBURGH MUNIMENTS
Catalogue Ref. YM
Creator(s):
Yarburgh family of Heslington Hall, East Riding of Yorkshire
Legal Papers - ref. YM/LP4. The Peerage
http://www.thepeerage.com/p1696.htm
4. The Peerage
http://www.thepeerage.com/p1696.htm
For George Walker:
http://books.google.com/books?id=kDoJAA ... g#PPA55,M1
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com ... kerG1.html
I have several other promising sources I'd like to check in the Vanderbilt Library as well.
Pat
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: wjhonson <wjhonson@aol.com>
I am very new to the Stanhopes and with books still packed, I did most of this online:
I have:
(A General and Heraldic Dictionary of the Peerage and Baronetage of the by John Burke states p. 234 that this Sir John had three sons and six daughters.)
Complete Peerage for Michael Stanhope
For John Stanhope-Stanhopp of Melwood:
1.http://www.goodrick.info/incidents_in_t ... rickes.htm
“The father of this hero-priest, the Rev. George Walker, also named George Walker, was a clergyman of some distinction. He was Rector of Kilmore and Chancellor of Armagh in Ireland, and was nominated Archdeacon of Derry in succession to this brother-in-law, Archdeacon Stanhope (a Yorkshire man) who died in 1641. Being a staunch Royalist he fled from Ireland at the outbreak of the Civil War, and under the protection of the Stapleton’s, held the Vicarage of Wignill in Yorkshire from about 1643 to 1650, when he retired to Kirk Deighton (a neighbouring parish to Ribston) upon Cromwell's succession to power. At Kirk Deighton a daughter was born to him and his wife Ursula, daughter of Sir John Stanhope of Melwood co. Lincoln, and the baptism of this daughter is recorded in the Parish Registers of Kirk Deighton for 20 September 1650. “
2. Lincolnshire Pedigrees:
http://books.google.com/books?id=IPcMAA ... utput=html
3. YARBURGH MUNIMENTS
Catalogue Ref. YM
Creator(s):
Yarburgh family of Heslington Hall, East Riding of Yorkshire
Legal Papers - ref. YM/LP4. The Peerage
http://www.thepeerage.com/p1696.htm
4. The Peerage
http://www.thepeerage.com/p1696.htm
For George Walker:
http://books.google.com/books?id=kDoJAA ... g#PPA55,M1
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com ... kerG1.html
I have several other promising sources I'd like to check in the Vanderbilt Library as well.
Pat
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: wjhonson <wjhonson@aol.com>
On Oct 16, 9:26 am, pajun...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Stanhope- Walker
I am interested in the descent of the Walker family from Ursula Stanhope,
daughter of Sir John Stanhope of Melwood.(YARBURGH YM/LP Stanhope v. Yarburgh
and Ward - ref. YM/LP/1 - date: 1639-1648 Includes judgements, and copy of
will and inventories of Sir John Stanhope of Melwood Park, Lincs.)Lincolnshire
Pedigrees indicates that the most probably candidate for Ursula's father is Sir
John Stanhope of Melwood, Isle of Axholme buries Hooton Paynell 1627 by his wife
Mary Hawley of Stotfold whom he married in 1593.
There seems to be confusion as to which George Walker she married.
*Ursula Stanhope,b.c. 1610-1617 in Melwood Park, Isle of Axholme, Lincs. d. 17
May 1654 in Wighill married, 1642, George Walker b. 5 September 1603 in Great
Straughton, d. 15 September 1677 in Armagh.
DNB states: George Walker received "appointment in 1669 to the parishes of
Lissan and Desertlyn in co. Londonderry and Armagh diocese. He was already
married to Isabella Maxwell of Finnebrogue."
To which George does Isabella Maxwell belong?
George Walker and Ursula Stanhope Walker had:
1. George Walker b. c. 1618 in Wighill, Yorkshire , d. 1 July 1690 in the
Battle of the Boyne married 1669 Isabella Barclay,b.c. 1644 in Tyrone, Ireland,
d. 18 February 1704. "hero of the siege of Londonderry, was the son of George
Walker, rector of Kilmore and chancellor of Armagh (d. 1677), and of Ursula,
daughter of Sir John Stanhope of Melwood, and is said to have been born in 1618
in Tyrone."
(Dictionary of National Biography. Leslie Stephen
Walker, George (1618-1690) governor of Londonderry, was the son of George
Walker a native of Yorkshire, who became chancellor of Armagh, by his wife
Ursula Stanhope.)
If there is reasonable certainty of the date of the "hero's" birth is 1618, I
hardly think that Ursula b. c. 1610 would have had a child at eight years old.
This is not the same Stanhope as the
Sir John Stanhope of Elvaston, Derbyshire b. before 1611, d. 29 May 1638, son
of Sir John Stanhope1 b. before 1568, d. 1611
and Catherine Trentham1 b. before 1596.
The arms of these families appear to be similar, but I have not found the
common ancestor.
Observations appreciated,
Pat
Pat my first observation is that you have a lot of statements above,
but only list a single source DNB, "Walker, George" which doesn't have
all these statements in it.
So what's your source for the other statements?
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
-
WJhonson
Re: a biography of Helena Snakenborg, marchioness of Northam
<<In a message dated 10/14/07 17:24:41 Pacific Daylight Time, qsj5@yahoo.com writes:
Lord Northampton hoped to marry Helena but was
prevented from so doing because his first, though
divorced, wife Anne Bourchier, heiress of the Essex
family, yet lived. They had divorced in 1551, but
English church was not permissible of new marriages of
divorced persons until the divorced spouse was dead. >>
-------------------------
M Sjostrom has presented us with a very useful biography of Helena Snakenborg. But this section is not exactly true. After all Henry the King himself, had as his third wife Anne of Cleves, a women he divorced who yet lived through his next two (and last) marriages. So something else must be going on in the above.
Will Johnson
Lord Northampton hoped to marry Helena but was
prevented from so doing because his first, though
divorced, wife Anne Bourchier, heiress of the Essex
family, yet lived. They had divorced in 1551, but
English church was not permissible of new marriages of
divorced persons until the divorced spouse was dead. >>
-------------------------
M Sjostrom has presented us with a very useful biography of Helena Snakenborg. But this section is not exactly true. After all Henry the King himself, had as his third wife Anne of Cleves, a women he divorced who yet lived through his next two (and last) marriages. So something else must be going on in the above.
Will Johnson
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
Much thanks for that citation, Will.
I do believe based on the REGISTER series of articles cited in my
previous post, that this proposed pedigree of John as father of
Robert Peck, the Elder, is flawed. The authors, Stanhope and
S. Allyn Peck refuted that lineage in the 1930s. Again: I will
post detailed notes, forthcoming.
Let me clarify:
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. io, pp. 334339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)."
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father-in-law of Richard,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
I wish to categorically state that I do not find John Peck as father
of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles, although there are other
Roberts in John's line, not to be confused with Robert, the Elder.
I apologize for seeking confirmation of the 1930s conclusions,
but it did bear fruition with John Higgins finding of Alice Middleton
found as dau. of Sir Peter Middleton in the Visitations.
Bill
****************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
I do believe based on the REGISTER series of articles cited in my
previous post, that this proposed pedigree of John as father of
Robert Peck, the Elder, is flawed. The authors, Stanhope and
S. Allyn Peck refuted that lineage in the 1930s. Again: I will
post detailed notes, forthcoming.
Let me clarify:
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. io, pp. 334339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)."
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father-in-law of Richard,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
I wish to categorically state that I do not find John Peck as father
of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles, although there are other
Roberts in John's line, not to be confused with Robert, the Elder.
I apologize for seeking confirmation of the 1930s conclusions,
but it did bear fruition with John Higgins finding of Alice Middleton
found as dau. of Sir Peter Middleton in the Visitations.
Bill
****************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/15/07 15:44:52 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs
--------------------------
http://books.google.com/books?id=9jNHy0PBqlUC&pg=PA1756
"Historic Homes and Places and Genealogical and Personal Memoires Relating To...", by William
Richard Cutter
states that the ascent goes
John Peck + Joan Anne
Robert Peck +1 Norton +2 Waters (he does NOT specify which mother was the mother of...)
Robert Peck + Helen Babbs
Joseph Peck "fourth son" +1 Rebecca Clark +2 "second wife's name is Unknown"
----------End of quote=========
This is why is always very important to cite exactly what source you are using and exactly what
it says and doesn't say.
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
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
the_verminator@comcast.ne
Re: Diana, Princess Of Wales & Continuing Mindless Celebrity
On Oct 17, 5:44 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
Err.. the President's salary hasn't even topped $500,000 yet.
In September 1999, President Clinton signed legislation that increased
the presidential salary to $400000, effective January 2001. ...
Dear Allan,
Lineage doesn`t necessarily mean wealth and for a very long
time political office didn`t necessarily gain one wealth either as being a
lawyer didn`t pay that much and lawyers became presidents else They were
landowners or military heroes (neither terribly high paying , especially the latter.
In 1928 We elected an engineer (the sort that plans bridges( to be our
President. I believe the presidential salary only topped 1 000 000 american dollars
per year back in the 1980s. I think it had been at 500, 000 for a while but
running for office haqs been a rather expensive proposition for a while else the
corruption and great political machines could not have come into being.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com
Err.. the President's salary hasn't even topped $500,000 yet.
In September 1999, President Clinton signed legislation that increased
the presidential salary to $400000, effective January 2001. ...
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
Much thanks for the interest, Will.
I do not recall saying that John Peck was "of Beccles" and if I did
consider it withdrawn. Truly, for my proposed pedigree of gateway
ancestor to America Joseph Peck, I have no interest in John Peck except
as he illuminates the pedigree. He has been an instrument of much
confusion online in many alleged pedigrees of Joseph, 1587.
Nor do I ever recall saying that Henry Peck was his "son and heir."
I do not know where you are reading that and if I did consider
it withdrawn, as well. John Peck who married the dau. of Anne
was the primogeniture son of his father and most visitations
I have seen list him as son and heir. I believe I said that because
of the English history with laws of primogeniture, it seemed to
me that was why he, the eldest son, referenced himself and four
sisters to the Visitation requests. There appears no doubt that
there were two sons born of the union of Richard Peck=Alice
Middleton, and the second, Henry, unnamed, except in other
sources, was apparently the father with Margery Leeke, dau.
of John Leeke, of Beccles, of Robert Peck, of Beccles, the Elder.
I will cite the full references in a later post. The ones I have
found, as I have already posted, were in the series of articles
in the American publication, NEHGSRegister in the 1930s, by
Stanhope and S. Allyn Peck, descendants of this line of Pecks.
I have already posted specifics from the series about the
Middleton segment of this proposed pedigree.
Bill
*************************************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
I do not recall saying that John Peck was "of Beccles" and if I did
consider it withdrawn. Truly, for my proposed pedigree of gateway
ancestor to America Joseph Peck, I have no interest in John Peck except
as he illuminates the pedigree. He has been an instrument of much
confusion online in many alleged pedigrees of Joseph, 1587.
Nor do I ever recall saying that Henry Peck was his "son and heir."
I do not know where you are reading that and if I did consider
it withdrawn, as well. John Peck who married the dau. of Anne
was the primogeniture son of his father and most visitations
I have seen list him as son and heir. I believe I said that because
of the English history with laws of primogeniture, it seemed to
me that was why he, the eldest son, referenced himself and four
sisters to the Visitation requests. There appears no doubt that
there were two sons born of the union of Richard Peck=Alice
Middleton, and the second, Henry, unnamed, except in other
sources, was apparently the father with Margery Leeke, dau.
of John Leeke, of Beccles, of Robert Peck, of Beccles, the Elder.
I will cite the full references in a later post. The ones I have
found, as I have already posted, were in the series of articles
in the American publication, NEHGSRegister in the 1930s, by
Stanhope and S. Allyn Peck, descendants of this line of Pecks.
I have already posted specifics from the series about the
Middleton segment of this proposed pedigree.
Bill
*************************************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
What is the proof that John Peck who married Jane (Joan) Anne was "of Beccles" ?
I think John was "of Wakefield".
Also what is the proof that Henry Peck was his "son and heir" as you stated ? I do not find any
Henry Peck at this point.
Thanks
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
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
Bill Arnold
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
CORRECTION:
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father of Margery,
and
father-in-law of HENRY,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
**************************
Much thanks for that citation, Will.
I do believe based on the REGISTER series of articles cited in my
previous post, that this proposed pedigree of John as father of
Robert Peck, the Elder, is flawed. The authors, Stanhope and
S. Allyn Peck refuted that lineage in the 1930s. Again: I will
post detailed notes, forthcoming.
Let me clarify:
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. 89, pp. 334-339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)."
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father-in-law of Henry,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
I wish to categorically state that I do not find John Peck as father
of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles, although there are other
Roberts in John's line, not to be confused with Robert, the Elder.
I apologize for seeking confirmation of the 1930s conclusions,
but it did bear fruition with John Higgins finding of Alice Middleton
found as dau. of Sir Peter Middleton in the Visitations.
Bill
****************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father of Margery,
and
father-in-law of HENRY,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
**************************
Much thanks for that citation, Will.
I do believe based on the REGISTER series of articles cited in my
previous post, that this proposed pedigree of John as father of
Robert Peck, the Elder, is flawed. The authors, Stanhope and
S. Allyn Peck refuted that lineage in the 1930s. Again: I will
post detailed notes, forthcoming.
Let me clarify:
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. 89, pp. 334-339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)."
With this and other citations, in the REGISTER series, the conclusions:
John Leeke had a dau. Margery who married second son of
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton, who was the father-in-law of Henry,
who was thusly the grandfather of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles.
I wish to categorically state that I do not find John Peck as father
of Robert Peck, the Elder, of Beccles, although there are other
Roberts in John's line, not to be confused with Robert, the Elder.
I apologize for seeking confirmation of the 1930s conclusions,
but it did bear fruition with John Higgins finding of Alice Middleton
found as dau. of Sir Peter Middleton in the Visitations.
Bill
****************************************
--- WJhonson <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/15/07 15:44:52 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
Richard Peck=Alice Middleton
_____________________________________
Henry Peck=Margery Leeke
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Sr.(Elder=Joan Water
d.20 Nov 1556
_____________________________________
Robert Peck, Jr.=Ellen(Helen)Babbs
--------------------------
http://books.google.com/books?id=9jNHy0PBqlUC&pg=PA1756
"Historic Homes and Places and Genealogical and Personal Memoires Relating To...", by William
Richard Cutter
states that the ascent goes
John Peck + Joan Anne
Robert Peck +1 Norton +2 Waters (he does NOT specify which mother was the mother of...)
Robert Peck + Helen Babbs
Joseph Peck "fourth son" +1 Rebecca Clark +2 "second wife's name is Unknown"
----------End of quote=========
This is why is always very important to cite exactly what source you are using and exactly what
it says and doesn't say.
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
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
WJhonson
Re: Lynne Cheney: Vice President Dick Cheney & Senator Barak
Thanks John, I've now corrected that to show Barack's [next] shortest ascent to Henry I, King of England.
Thanks for the catch.
Will
Thanks for the catch.
Will
-
WJhonson
Re: Middleton pedigree, 1100-1600: Leeke and Peck
<<In a message dated 10/17/07 20:01:05 Pacific Daylight Time, billarnoldfla@yahoo.com writes:
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. io, pp. 334339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)." >>
---------------------------
How can any conclusion be drawn from the above? In what you presented above, it is undated. So we have no idea what decade or even what century this took place. Also the note is by a modern editor based on what?
Will
[Note 1: 1939 NEHGSRegister, April, page 178,
"Additional Material Relating To The Leekes and Pecks of Beccles,
co. Suffolk, From the Record of the Court of Requests, Robert Young
v. Robert Peck and Katherin Drawer, Wife of Thomas Drawer,"
"...complainant sold to John Leke of Beccles,tanner...[certain items]
....now afterwards said Leke made his last will and testament and
appointed Robert Pekke (Peck) and Katherine Drawer, wife of
Thomas Drawer...."
"[This case should be compared with the statements about the will,
family, executors, etc., of John Leeke of Beccles given in the REGISTER,
vol. io, pp. 334339 (October 1935), the reader keeping in mind the
fact that Robert Peck, one of the executors of the will of John Leeke
should probably be regarded as a grandson, rather than a nephew of
John Leeke. See Editorial Note in REGISTER, vol. 91, p. 7 (January 1937)." >>
---------------------------
How can any conclusion be drawn from the above? In what you presented above, it is undated. So we have no idea what decade or even what century this took place. Also the note is by a modern editor based on what?
Will