Blount-Ayala
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
jlucsoler
Re: DE MONTLUEL / DE TULLINS
Merci Renia , Merci Denis
oui il y a erreur sur la mere de Alix d'apres les nobiliaire.. je ne sais
donc pas a quoi m'en tenir
oui il y a erreur sur la mere de Alix d'apres les nobiliaire.. je ne sais
donc pas a quoi m'en tenir
-
Chris Phillips
Re: dodsworth
W David Samuelsen wrote:
That would be extremely useful, but I've just been looking at the online
catalogue, and can see only published editions of Dodsworth's work, not the
unpublished manuscripts.
Chris Phillips
Dodsworth MSS's are available on microfilm through Family History
Library system of the FHCs.
That would be extremely useful, but I've just been looking at the online
catalogue, and can see only published editions of Dodsworth's work, not the
unpublished manuscripts.
Chris Phillips
-
Allen Meyer
Re: GEN-MEDIEVAL-D Digest V06 #362
Subject:
Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
From:
"joe" <joeycook@mail.com
Date:
30 Apr 2006 08:14:09 -0700
To:
GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
To:
GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
rexy@ij.net wrote:
One dictionary definition of vampire is: a person who preys ruthlessly
upon others. Under that definition, socialists ARE vampires. And the
worst socilialists
Quite wrong. Republicans are vampires, the the worst sort.
-
Ginny Wagner
RE: dodsworth
Thank you both for your helpful information. From what Hunter wrote, I understood the MSS had become the Monasticon published by Dugdale. Was curious as to how the two differed, if so. There are several genealogies in which I am interested; glad to know I can order them from the FHC just down the street. 
Ginny
Ginny
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
In message of 1 May, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I think you will find that he was no more than "Lord of Carew", in other
words all he had was a manor, neither he nor his ancestors had been
summoned to Parliament as a peer. There is no Lord Carew of that
period in Complete Peerage.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Probably a little surprised when the male line died out after the 14th Earl
14 Jul 1526, the Earldom next passed to his second-cousin John de Vere who had
married Elizabeth Trussel of Kibblestone. This John de Vere, 15th Earl of
Oxford, was the son of another John de Vere and his wife Alice Kilrington
Until today I had only a vague idea of a birthrange for John de Vere, the
father of the 15th Earl. However, by good fortune, a letter survives writen by
Queen Margaret of Anjou to Jane (Courtenay) Carew, widow of Nicholas, Lord
Carew.
I think you will find that he was no more than "Lord of Carew", in other
words all he had was a manor, neither he nor his ancestors had been
summoned to Parliament as a peer. There is no Lord Carew of that
period in Complete Peerage.
This letter writen between 1447 and 1450 puts a limit on when Jane (Joan)
could have married secondly to Robert de Vere, father of John and thus
grandmother to the 15th Earl.
The source states that Sir Nicholas Crew died 3 May 1447. It also states
that this widow Jane married second to Robert de Vere and the license "of Lacy,
Bishop of Exeter, bears date 5 Oct 1450"
Thus John de Vere, could not have been born until at least 1451.
The source further states that Jane had five Carew sons, but only the one de
Vere son.
Will Johnson
-----------------------------------
"Letters of Queen Margaret of Anjou and Bishop Beckington", Cecil Monro, Esq,
Editor. Printed for the Camden Society. 1863
online at
http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... 96&lpg=PA9
6&dq=15th+Earl+oxford+vere&as_brr=1
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gjest
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
Probably a little surprised when the male line died out after the 14th Earl
14 Jul 1526, the Earldom next passed to his second-cousin John de Vere who had
married Elizabeth Trussel of Kibblestone. This John de Vere, 15th Earl of
Oxford, was the son of another John de Vere and his wife Alice Kilrington
Until today I had only a vague idea of a birthrange for John de Vere, the
father of the 15th Earl. However, by good fortune, a letter survives writen by
Queen Margaret of Anjou to Jane (Courtenay) Carew, widow of Nicholas, Lord
Carew.
This letter writen between 1447 and 1450 puts a limit on when Jane (Joan)
could have married secondly to Robert de Vere, father of John and thus
grandmother to the 15th Earl.
The source states that Sir Nicholas Crew died 3 May 1447. It also states
that this widow Jane married second to Robert de Vere and the license "of Lacy,
Bishop of Exeter, bears date 5 Oct 1450"
Thus John de Vere, could not have been born until at least 1451.
The source further states that Jane had five Carew sons, but only the one de
Vere son.
Will Johnson
-----------------------------------
"Letters of Queen Margaret of Anjou and Bishop Beckington", Cecil Monro, Esq,
Editor. Printed for the Camden Society. 1863
online at
http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... 96&lpg=PA9
6&dq=15th+Earl+oxford+vere&as_brr=1
14 Jul 1526, the Earldom next passed to his second-cousin John de Vere who had
married Elizabeth Trussel of Kibblestone. This John de Vere, 15th Earl of
Oxford, was the son of another John de Vere and his wife Alice Kilrington
Until today I had only a vague idea of a birthrange for John de Vere, the
father of the 15th Earl. However, by good fortune, a letter survives writen by
Queen Margaret of Anjou to Jane (Courtenay) Carew, widow of Nicholas, Lord
Carew.
This letter writen between 1447 and 1450 puts a limit on when Jane (Joan)
could have married secondly to Robert de Vere, father of John and thus
grandmother to the 15th Earl.
The source states that Sir Nicholas Crew died 3 May 1447. It also states
that this widow Jane married second to Robert de Vere and the license "of Lacy,
Bishop of Exeter, bears date 5 Oct 1450"
Thus John de Vere, could not have been born until at least 1451.
The source further states that Jane had five Carew sons, but only the one de
Vere son.
Will Johnson
-----------------------------------
"Letters of Queen Margaret of Anjou and Bishop Beckington", Cecil Monro, Esq,
Editor. Printed for the Camden Society. 1863
online at
http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... 96&lpg=PA9
6&dq=15th+Earl+oxford+vere&as_brr=1
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
Dear Will ~
Some of your information appears to be incorrect.
John Vere, K.G., 15th Earl of Oxford (died 1540), was the son and heir
of John Vere, Esq. (died testate before 15 March 1488), by his wife,
Alice, daughter and co-heiress of Walter Colbroke, Gent., of
Cullompton, Devon, by Joan (or Jane), daughter and co-heiress of
Richard Tresytheny, of Tresytheny (in St. Columb), Cornwall. For
further particulars on the Vere and Colbroke families, see Douglas
Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Some of your information appears to be incorrect.
John Vere, K.G., 15th Earl of Oxford (died 1540), was the son and heir
of John Vere, Esq. (died testate before 15 March 1488), by his wife,
Alice, daughter and co-heiress of Walter Colbroke, Gent., of
Cullompton, Devon, by Joan (or Jane), daughter and co-heiress of
Richard Tresytheny, of Tresytheny (in St. Columb), Cornwall. For
further particulars on the Vere and Colbroke families, see Douglas
Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Probably a little surprised when the male line died out after the 14th Earl
14 Jul 1526, the Earldom next passed to his second-cousin John de Vere who had
married Elizabeth Trussel of Kibblestone. This John de Vere, 15th Earl of
Oxford, was the son of another John de Vere and his wife Alice Kilrington
Until today I had only a vague idea of a birthrange for John de Vere, the
father of the 15th Earl. However, by good fortune, a letter survives writen by
Queen Margaret of Anjou to Jane (Courtenay) Carew, widow of Nicholas, Lord
Carew.
This letter writen between 1447 and 1450 puts a limit on when Jane (Joan)
could have married secondly to Robert de Vere, father of John and thus
grandmother to the 15th Earl.
The source states that Sir Nicholas Crew died 3 May 1447. It also states
that this widow Jane married second to Robert de Vere and the license "of Lacy,
Bishop of Exeter, bears date 5 Oct 1450"
Thus John de Vere, could not have been born until at least 1451.
The source further states that Jane had five Carew sons, but only the one de
Vere son.
Will Johnson
-----------------------------------
"Letters of Queen Margaret of Anjou and Bishop Beckington", Cecil Monro, Esq,
Editor. Printed for the Camden Society. 1863
online at
http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... 96&lpg=PA9
6&dq=15th+Earl+oxford+vere&as_brr=1
-
Gjest
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
In a message dated 5/1/06 5:08:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< John Vere, K.G., 15th Earl of Oxford (died 1540), was the son and heir of
John Vere, Esq. (died testate before 15 March 1488), by his wife, Alice,
daughter and co-heiress of Walter Colbroke, Gent., of Cullompton, Devon, by Joan
(or Jane), daughter and co-heiress of Richard Tresytheny, of Tresytheny (in
St. Columb), Cornwall. For further particulars on the Vere and Colbroke
families, see Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). >>
John de Vere, 15th Earl of Oxford
son of Alice Kilrington, apparently comes from The Lineage and Ancestry of
H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Edinburgh, 1977, Paget, Gerald,
Reference: O 29073
see further
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 1&tree=LEO
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< John Vere, K.G., 15th Earl of Oxford (died 1540), was the son and heir of
John Vere, Esq. (died testate before 15 March 1488), by his wife, Alice,
daughter and co-heiress of Walter Colbroke, Gent., of Cullompton, Devon, by Joan
(or Jane), daughter and co-heiress of Richard Tresytheny, of Tresytheny (in
St. Columb), Cornwall. For further particulars on the Vere and Colbroke
families, see Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). >>
John de Vere, 15th Earl of Oxford
son of Alice Kilrington, apparently comes from The Lineage and Ancestry of
H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Edinburgh, 1977, Paget, Gerald,
Reference: O 29073
see further
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 1&tree=LEO
-
Chris Phillips
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
Will Johnson wrote:
Complete Peerage vol. 10, p. 245, calls her "Alice, da. and coh. of Walter
Kilrington, otherwise Colbroke".
Ian Mortimer in his online Guide to the Manors of Devon calls her father
"Walter de Kilrington of Colbrook in Cullompton".
http://www.mortimer.co.uk/manors/cliston.htm
But both Brad Verity and Douglas Richardson have posted evidence that he
used the surname Colbroke.
Chris Phillips
John de Vere, 15th Earl of Oxford
son of Alice Kilrington, apparently comes from The Lineage and Ancestry of
H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Edinburgh, 1977, Paget, Gerald,
Reference: O 29073
Complete Peerage vol. 10, p. 245, calls her "Alice, da. and coh. of Walter
Kilrington, otherwise Colbroke".
Ian Mortimer in his online Guide to the Manors of Devon calls her father
"Walter de Kilrington of Colbrook in Cullompton".
http://www.mortimer.co.uk/manors/cliston.htm
But both Brad Verity and Douglas Richardson have posted evidence that he
used the surname Colbroke.
Chris Phillips
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: Vlad the impaler and the genealogy of real vampires" Eli
Elizabeth (Erzsebet) Bathory was Hungarian, indeed, but she lived in
Upper Hungary (nowadays Slovakia), not in Transylvania."
The "Blood Countess" has numerous descendants worldwide - sometimes
found in surprising places (like the USA)!
For a few lines of descent see:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php? ... 3&tree=LEO
Tony
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
Upper Hungary (nowadays Slovakia), not in Transylvania."
The "Blood Countess" has numerous descendants worldwide - sometimes
found in surprising places (like the USA)!
For a few lines of descent see:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php? ... 3&tree=LEO
Tony
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: The genealogy of real vampires "Elizabeth Bathory"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Hoskins" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the genealogy of real vampires"Elizabeth Bathory
| Elizabeth (Erzsebet) Bathory was Hungarian, indeed, but she lived in
| Upper Hungary (nowadays Slovakia), not in Transylvania."
|
| The "Blood Countess" has numerous descendants worldwide - sometimes
| found in surprising places (like the USA)!
|
| For a few lines of descent see:
|
| http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php? ... 3&tree=LEO
|
| Tony
|
| Anthony Hoskins
| History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
| History and Genealogy Library
| Sonoma County Library
Among those claiming descent from her were the last Moncreiffe of that Ilk, through his mother's father.
Ford
From: "Tony Hoskins" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the genealogy of real vampires"Elizabeth Bathory
| Elizabeth (Erzsebet) Bathory was Hungarian, indeed, but she lived in
| Upper Hungary (nowadays Slovakia), not in Transylvania."
|
| The "Blood Countess" has numerous descendants worldwide - sometimes
| found in surprising places (like the USA)!
|
| For a few lines of descent see:
|
| http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php? ... 3&tree=LEO
|
| Tony
|
| Anthony Hoskins
| History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
| History and Genealogy Library
| Sonoma County Library
Among those claiming descent from her were the last Moncreiffe of that Ilk, through his mother's father.
Ford
-
John Higgins
[OT} Re: The genealogy of real vampires "Elizabeth Bathory"
I assume you're talking below about Sir Iain Moncreiffe of that Ilk, the
well-known genealogist, whose maternal grandfather was Count François de
Miremont. His descent from Erzsebet Bathory, through the Festetics family
among others, can be readily traced in Leo's Genealogics database [although
this particular rendition seems to be missing the details on the generation
immediately preceding Count François].
Sir Iain wrote an entertaining article about the "Blood Countess" (whom he
referred to as "ancestral grandma"). The article is titled "Blood is
Thicker than Water" and is included in a 1986 posthumous collection of his
articles called "Lord of the Dance: A Moncrieffe Miscellany".
Some years ago there were extensive lists of the descendants of Erzsebet
Bathory on the web, courtesy (I believe) of either Paul Theroff or William
Addams Reitwiesner (or possibly both), but they seem to have disappeared
now.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ford Mommaerts-Browne" <FordMommaerts@cox.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: The genealogy of real vampires "Elizabeth Bathory"
well-known genealogist, whose maternal grandfather was Count François de
Miremont. His descent from Erzsebet Bathory, through the Festetics family
among others, can be readily traced in Leo's Genealogics database [although
this particular rendition seems to be missing the details on the generation
immediately preceding Count François].
Sir Iain wrote an entertaining article about the "Blood Countess" (whom he
referred to as "ancestral grandma"). The article is titled "Blood is
Thicker than Water" and is included in a 1986 posthumous collection of his
articles called "Lord of the Dance: A Moncrieffe Miscellany".
Some years ago there were extensive lists of the descendants of Erzsebet
Bathory on the web, courtesy (I believe) of either Paul Theroff or William
Addams Reitwiesner (or possibly both), but they seem to have disappeared
now.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ford Mommaerts-Browne" <FordMommaerts@cox.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: The genealogy of real vampires "Elizabeth Bathory"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Hoskins" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the genealogy of real vampires"Elizabeth
Bathory
| Elizabeth (Erzsebet) Bathory was Hungarian, indeed, but she lived in
| Upper Hungary (nowadays Slovakia), not in Transylvania."
|
| The "Blood Countess" has numerous descendants worldwide - sometimes
| found in surprising places (like the USA)!
|
| For a few lines of descent see:
|
| http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php? ... 3&tree=LEO
|
| Tony
|
| Anthony Hoskins
| History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
| History and Genealogy Library
| Sonoma County Library
Among those claiming descent from her were the last Moncreiffe of that
Ilk, through his mother's father.
Ford
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Another Knapp Question
Dear Denise ~
John Knapp (died 1604), merchant, of St. Peter's, Ipswich, Suffolk and
his wife, Martha Blosse, had twelve children, among them three sons,
John (died young), John (again), and Thomas [see Walter C. Metcalfe,
ed., Vis. Of Suffolk 1561, 1577, and 1612 (1882): 149 (Knapp pedigree].
There was no son named Nicholas.
The Knapp family seated at Bures St. Mary, Suffolk, was a separate and
distinct family. The Knapp family of Bures St. Mary is in my own
ancestry, by the way.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
Denise1270@aol.com wrote:
John Knapp (died 1604), merchant, of St. Peter's, Ipswich, Suffolk and
his wife, Martha Blosse, had twelve children, among them three sons,
John (died young), John (again), and Thomas [see Walter C. Metcalfe,
ed., Vis. Of Suffolk 1561, 1577, and 1612 (1882): 149 (Knapp pedigree].
There was no son named Nicholas.
The Knapp family seated at Bures St. Mary, Suffolk, was a separate and
distinct family. The Knapp family of Bures St. Mary is in my own
ancestry, by the way.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
Denise1270@aol.com wrote:
Does anyone know if John Knapp and MarthaBlois had a son named Nicholas that
married Eleanor Lockwood?
What I have is Nicholas was born on 16 May 1592 in St. Mary's Parish, Bures,
Suffolk, England and died 16 April 1670 at Stamford, Connecticut.
Eleanor Lockwood was daughter of Edmund Lockwood and Alice Cowper, born 3
Sep 1609 at Combs, Sussex, England and died 16 Aug 1658 at Stamford, CT.
Was this Nicholas the one who was married to a woman named Unity on 9 Mar
1660 at Wells-Next-Sea(?), England? Supposedly, Nicholas and Eleanor's
children were all born in Waterbury, Massachusetts between 1631 and 1649. I have 10
children of theirs and 16 children for John Knapp and Martha Blois; does
this sound correct?
Denise D'Antona
-
Gjest
Re: A third Hubbard question
Dear Douglas,
I have William and Mabel`s daughter Justice (later
Abigail) Reade who married Francis Wyman Jr and Robert Longe`s daughter Elizabeth ,
wife of Captain James Parker.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
I have William and Mabel`s daughter Justice (later
Abigail) Reade who married Francis Wyman Jr and Robert Longe`s daughter Elizabeth ,
wife of Captain James Parker.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
John
Re: dodsworth
Just to put a small point on this, I am now informed by staff of the
Western Manuscripts Department at the Bodleian that they know of no
current efforts to transcribe or treanslate the Dodsworth MSS.
John Schuerman
Western Manuscripts Department at the Bodleian that they know of no
current efforts to transcribe or treanslate the Dodsworth MSS.
John Schuerman
-
Gjest
Re: Another Knapp Question
Dear Douglas,
I descend from a 2nd branch of the Bures St Mary,
Suffolk Knopps / Knapps. Elizabeth Knopp born abt 1593 to William and Elizabeth
(Reade) Knopp married June 4, 1615, Bures St Mary, Thomas Philbrick b 1584 Bures
St Mary son of Thomas and Elizabeth ( ) Felbrigg / Filbrick. As
William son of Thomas and Alice ( Howlatt) Knapp, husband of Judith Tue and
Priscilla ( ) Akers of Watertown was born in 1581 and married Judith Tue in 1607
(all dates Bures St Mary , Suffolk) It seems likely that Elizabeth
Philbricks father was a close relative, perhaps even a brother to Thomas Knapp.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
I descend from a 2nd branch of the Bures St Mary,
Suffolk Knopps / Knapps. Elizabeth Knopp born abt 1593 to William and Elizabeth
(Reade) Knopp married June 4, 1615, Bures St Mary, Thomas Philbrick b 1584 Bures
St Mary son of Thomas and Elizabeth ( ) Felbrigg / Filbrick. As
William son of Thomas and Alice ( Howlatt) Knapp, husband of Judith Tue and
Priscilla ( ) Akers of Watertown was born in 1581 and married Judith Tue in 1607
(all dates Bures St Mary , Suffolk) It seems likely that Elizabeth
Philbricks father was a close relative, perhaps even a brother to Thomas Knapp.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Robert Forrest
Re: Another Knapp Question
Surprised that no one has yet mentioned Clifford Stott's article "English
Origins of William and Judith (Tue) Knopp of Watertown, Mass.," NEHGR
147:313-328. From his research, William (1582-1658) Knopp, husband of Judith
Tue, was a son of Thomas "The Sexton" Knopp of Bures St. Mary, thus a nephew
of the William (c1560-c1640) Knopp who m. Elizabeth Reade and was
father-in-law of Thomas Philbrick, the immigrant.
Further, in "The Great Migration Begins", Robert Anderson adds this note at
the end of his article on William Knopp:
"BIBLIOGRAPHIC NOTE: Two treatments of the family of William Knopp were
published in 1993. Clifford L. Stott prepared an account in which the
immigrant had resided at both Wormingford in Essex and Bures St. Mary on the
Essex-Suffolk border, and had married a woman from Wormingford, Judith Tue
[ NEHGR 147:313-28]. John Brayton produced a version in which the immigrant
had lived only in Bures St. Mary and had married Margaret Deane of that
parish [ GMC26 175-84]. Brayton apparently missed the chronological clues
which indicate that there were two William Knopps of Bures St. Mary, so he
apparently did not undertake the wider search which led Stott to his
conclusions. We follow Stott's results, and the English records cited above
are taken from his article, unless stated otherwise."
Origins of William and Judith (Tue) Knopp of Watertown, Mass.," NEHGR
147:313-328. From his research, William (1582-1658) Knopp, husband of Judith
Tue, was a son of Thomas "The Sexton" Knopp of Bures St. Mary, thus a nephew
of the William (c1560-c1640) Knopp who m. Elizabeth Reade and was
father-in-law of Thomas Philbrick, the immigrant.
Further, in "The Great Migration Begins", Robert Anderson adds this note at
the end of his article on William Knopp:
"BIBLIOGRAPHIC NOTE: Two treatments of the family of William Knopp were
published in 1993. Clifford L. Stott prepared an account in which the
immigrant had resided at both Wormingford in Essex and Bures St. Mary on the
Essex-Suffolk border, and had married a woman from Wormingford, Judith Tue
[ NEHGR 147:313-28]. John Brayton produced a version in which the immigrant
had lived only in Bures St. Mary and had married Margaret Deane of that
parish [ GMC26 175-84]. Brayton apparently missed the chronological clues
which indicate that there were two William Knopps of Bures St. Mary, so he
apparently did not undertake the wider search which led Stott to his
conclusions. We follow Stott's results, and the English records cited above
are taken from his article, unless stated otherwise."
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
Dear Will ~
I think it goes without saying that Gerald Paget's Lineage and Ancestry
of H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, 1977, is not the best source
in print for the Vere family. Paget gives names and dates, but
provides no biographical information and no sources. The material
contains many errors. I wouldn't recommend that anyone use the
Ancestry of Prince Charles as a primary reference. I'm actually a bit
surprised that you would cite Paget's book as your sole source. I
thought you were a smarter cookie than this, Will.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I think it goes without saying that Gerald Paget's Lineage and Ancestry
of H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, 1977, is not the best source
in print for the Vere family. Paget gives names and dates, but
provides no biographical information and no sources. The material
contains many errors. I wouldn't recommend that anyone use the
Ancestry of Prince Charles as a primary reference. I'm actually a bit
surprised that you would cite Paget's book as your sole source. I
thought you were a smarter cookie than this, Will.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/1/06 5:08:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
John Vere, K.G., 15th Earl of Oxford (died 1540), was the son and heir of
John Vere, Esq. (died testate before 15 March 1488), by his wife, Alice,
daughter and co-heiress of Walter Colbroke, Gent., of Cullompton, Devon, by Joan
(or Jane), daughter and co-heiress of Richard Tresytheny, of Tresytheny (in
St. Columb), Cornwall. For further particulars on the Vere and Colbroke
families, see Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005).
John de Vere, 15th Earl of Oxford
son of Alice Kilrington, apparently comes from The Lineage and Ancestry of
H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Edinburgh, 1977, Paget, Gerald,
Reference: O 29073
see further
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 1&tree=LEO
-
Gjest
Re: A better birthrange for John de Vere, father of the 15th
In a message dated 5/3/2006 6:53:40 AM Pacific Standard Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
I'm actually a bit
surprised that you would cite Paget's book as your sole source. I
thought you were a smarter cookie than this, Will.
I've never read the book. As you know I cited Leo's database. Leo cites
the book.
Will Johnson
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
I'm actually a bit
surprised that you would cite Paget's book as your sole source. I
thought you were a smarter cookie than this, Will.
I've never read the book. As you know I cited Leo's database. Leo cites
the book.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Another Knapp Question
Dear Forrest,
Thank you for the heads up on the William Knapp article.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Thank you for the heads up on the William Knapp article.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Renia
Re: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 -
Glad it may be of use. PROcat has this:
E 178/3946 More information
KENT: Smarden, Pluckley, Bethersden, and other places Inquisition as to
the lands and inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight,
attainted. 8 Jas. I.
E 178/4194 More information
MIDDLESEX: London Inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight, a
recusant, at his house in St. John's Street. 10 James I.
And PRO wills:
Will of Henry James of Saint Andrew Holborn, Middlesex 10 October
1645 PROB 11/194
Will of Henry James, Cordwainer of Saint Leonard Shoreditch, Middlesex
23 October 1604 PROB 11/104
Will of Henry James, Yeoman of Filton, Gloucestershire 29 June 1639
PROB 11/180
Will of Roger James of All Saints Barking, City of London 13 March 1592
PROB 11/79
Will of Ann James, Widow of Barking, Essex 02 June 1802 PROB 11/1376
Will of John James, Farrier of Barking London 25 August 1752 PROB 11/796
Will of John James, Gentleman of All Hallows Barking, City of London 22
September 1758 PROB 11/840
Will of Henry James, Gentleman of Barking , Essex 25 June 1792 PROB 11/1220
Will of Robert James of All Hallows Barking , City of London 14
October 1797 PROB 11/1297
Will of Thomas James, Mealman of Barking , Essex 22 December 1798 PROB
11/1316
Renia
Patricia Junkin wrote:
E 178/3946 More information
KENT: Smarden, Pluckley, Bethersden, and other places Inquisition as to
the lands and inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight,
attainted. 8 Jas. I.
E 178/4194 More information
MIDDLESEX: London Inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight, a
recusant, at his house in St. John's Street. 10 James I.
And PRO wills:
Will of Henry James of Saint Andrew Holborn, Middlesex 10 October
1645 PROB 11/194
Will of Henry James, Cordwainer of Saint Leonard Shoreditch, Middlesex
23 October 1604 PROB 11/104
Will of Henry James, Yeoman of Filton, Gloucestershire 29 June 1639
PROB 11/180
Will of Roger James of All Saints Barking, City of London 13 March 1592
PROB 11/79
Will of Ann James, Widow of Barking, Essex 02 June 1802 PROB 11/1376
Will of John James, Farrier of Barking London 25 August 1752 PROB 11/796
Will of John James, Gentleman of All Hallows Barking, City of London 22
September 1758 PROB 11/840
Will of Henry James, Gentleman of Barking , Essex 25 June 1792 PROB 11/1220
Will of Robert James of All Hallows Barking , City of London 14
October 1797 PROB 11/1297
Will of Thomas James, Mealman of Barking , Essex 22 December 1798 PROB
11/1316
Renia
Patricia Junkin wrote:
Renia,
Thank you for this. The Henry James mentioned may belong to the family of
Roger James of All Saintes Barkinge London. Roger James married Sara
Morskyn. His sons, Henry and Richard, inherited by will property in
"Stratford le Bow in the Parish of Bromley in County of Middlesex."
Pat
----------
From: Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 - not coming to
church for 3 months
Date: Wed, 3, 2006, 5:21 PM
Bumped into this on Ancestry.com which might prove useful to someone,
somewhere:
Middlesex: - Calendar to the Sessions Records, 1614-1615
Middlesex Sessions Records.
Sessions Roll.
County: Middlesex
Country: England
John Dam alias Adam of St Andrew's, Holborn, yeoman, and Helen his wife,
William Champney, yeoman,
Joan, wife of Christopher Emerson, cutler,
Isabel, wife of George Moodye, tailor, and Hannah Smythe her servant,
William Mathewes, cutler, and Helen his wife,
Susan, wife of Edwin Saule, gentleman,
Magdalen, wife of John Blake, tailor, and Sarah Smythe her servant,
William Woodfall, tailor, and Jane his wife,
William Cooke, gentleman, and Margaret his wife,
Hart, gentleman,
wife of Haskins, gentleman,
Mary, wife of William Cobbe, gentleman,
Ann Dowse, widow,
William Beswicke, shoemaker, and Mary his wife and Ambrose Burche and
George Kenney his servants,
Susan, wife of Thomas Strange, tailor,
Mary Sincleare, widow, and Susan Banninge her servant,
Margaret Morley, spinster, and Alice Baylief her servant,
John Knighte, scrivener, and Joan his wife and John his son and Richard
his servant,
Christabel, wife of Thomas Bateman, embroiderer,
Margaret, wife of Thurstan Field, shoemaker, and Joan, wife of Richard
Gressam, carpenter, all of the same,
Christiana, wife of Thomas Sleepe of St. James', Clerkenwell, gentleman
and Helen Vaughan her servant,
Elizabeth Jones, spinster,
Dorcas, Lady James, wife of Sir Henry James, Knight, and Anne and Martha
her daughters,
Elizabeth Wade, spinster,
Mary Lunne, widow,
Tobias Hinderson, yeoman, and Mary his wife,
Elizabeth Palmer,
Mary Gower,
Elizabeth Reynoldes and
Jane Derrey, spinsters,
Elizabeth, wife of Richard Peuvose, yeoman,
Katherine Cashe alias Hutchenson, spinster,
Peter Smythe, printer,
John Higgins, labourer,
Edmund Yates, esquire, and Elizabeth his wife and Richard Aldreor, Sarah
Brackett and Elizabeth Boldinge his servants,
Jane, wife of Christopher Beeston, yeoman, and William Allen her
servant, all of the same,
Elizabeth Reynoldes of Holywell Street, spinster,
Alice Nashe of St. Sepulchre's, widow,
Margaret, wife of Robert Gutteris of the same, gentleman, and
Christiana Banckes of the same, widow,
all for not coming to church for the space of three months.
-
Patricia Junkin
Re: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 -
Renia,
Thank you for this. The Henry James mentioned may belong to the family of
Roger James of All Saintes Barkinge London. Roger James married Sara
Morskyn. His sons, Henry and Richard, inherited by will property in
"Stratford le Bow in the Parish of Bromley in County of Middlesex."
Pat
----------
Thank you for this. The Henry James mentioned may belong to the family of
Roger James of All Saintes Barkinge London. Roger James married Sara
Morskyn. His sons, Henry and Richard, inherited by will property in
"Stratford le Bow in the Parish of Bromley in County of Middlesex."
Pat
----------
From: Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 - not coming to
church for 3 months
Date: Wed, 3, 2006, 5:21 PM
Bumped into this on Ancestry.com which might prove useful to someone,
somewhere:
Middlesex: - Calendar to the Sessions Records, 1614-1615
Middlesex Sessions Records.
Sessions Roll.
County: Middlesex
Country: England
John Dam alias Adam of St Andrew's, Holborn, yeoman, and Helen his wife,
William Champney, yeoman,
Joan, wife of Christopher Emerson, cutler,
Isabel, wife of George Moodye, tailor, and Hannah Smythe her servant,
William Mathewes, cutler, and Helen his wife,
Susan, wife of Edwin Saule, gentleman,
Magdalen, wife of John Blake, tailor, and Sarah Smythe her servant,
William Woodfall, tailor, and Jane his wife,
William Cooke, gentleman, and Margaret his wife,
Hart, gentleman,
wife of Haskins, gentleman,
Mary, wife of William Cobbe, gentleman,
Ann Dowse, widow,
William Beswicke, shoemaker, and Mary his wife and Ambrose Burche and
George Kenney his servants,
Susan, wife of Thomas Strange, tailor,
Mary Sincleare, widow, and Susan Banninge her servant,
Margaret Morley, spinster, and Alice Baylief her servant,
John Knighte, scrivener, and Joan his wife and John his son and Richard
his servant,
Christabel, wife of Thomas Bateman, embroiderer,
Margaret, wife of Thurstan Field, shoemaker, and Joan, wife of Richard
Gressam, carpenter, all of the same,
Christiana, wife of Thomas Sleepe of St. James', Clerkenwell, gentleman
and Helen Vaughan her servant,
Elizabeth Jones, spinster,
Dorcas, Lady James, wife of Sir Henry James, Knight, and Anne and Martha
her daughters,
Elizabeth Wade, spinster,
Mary Lunne, widow,
Tobias Hinderson, yeoman, and Mary his wife,
Elizabeth Palmer,
Mary Gower,
Elizabeth Reynoldes and
Jane Derrey, spinsters,
Elizabeth, wife of Richard Peuvose, yeoman,
Katherine Cashe alias Hutchenson, spinster,
Peter Smythe, printer,
John Higgins, labourer,
Edmund Yates, esquire, and Elizabeth his wife and Richard Aldreor, Sarah
Brackett and Elizabeth Boldinge his servants,
Jane, wife of Christopher Beeston, yeoman, and William Allen her
servant, all of the same,
Elizabeth Reynoldes of Holywell Street, spinster,
Alice Nashe of St. Sepulchre's, widow,
Margaret, wife of Robert Gutteris of the same, gentleman, and
Christiana Banckes of the same, widow,
all for not coming to church for the space of three months.
-
Gjest
Re: General James Cudworth of Massachusetts b 1604
Dear Will,
Burton W Spear in his Search for the Passengers of the Mary
and John 1830 Volume 18 West Country Ancestries 1820-1643 part 2 , says of James
Cudworth that He and his wife whose name (Mary Parker) was then unknown
pp42-43 had the following children
1 James Jr bapt 3 May 1635 -d 1697 married Mary Howland,
daughter of Henry (a Quaker) and Mary Newland) Howland 7 children born 1667-1677
2 Mary bapt 23 July 1637 married 9 March 1660 Robert Whitcomb, a
Quaker 5 children (note John Whitcomb sketch same publication page 151 gives
Mary Cudworth`s mother as Sarah Stoughton.
3 Jonathan Born 16 July 1638-died 16 September 1638
4 Israel Bapt 18 April 1641 married Johanna NN a daughter born in
1678
5 Joanna Bapt 26 March 1643 married __________ Jones (no known
children)
6 son dy buried 24 June 1644
7 Jonathan died in 1718 Married 1st Sarah Jackson , 2nd
Elizabeth NN 8 children
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Burton W Spear in his Search for the Passengers of the Mary
and John 1830 Volume 18 West Country Ancestries 1820-1643 part 2 , says of James
Cudworth that He and his wife whose name (Mary Parker) was then unknown
pp42-43 had the following children
1 James Jr bapt 3 May 1635 -d 1697 married Mary Howland,
daughter of Henry (a Quaker) and Mary Newland) Howland 7 children born 1667-1677
2 Mary bapt 23 July 1637 married 9 March 1660 Robert Whitcomb, a
Quaker 5 children (note John Whitcomb sketch same publication page 151 gives
Mary Cudworth`s mother as Sarah Stoughton.
3 Jonathan Born 16 July 1638-died 16 September 1638
4 Israel Bapt 18 April 1641 married Johanna NN a daughter born in
1678
5 Joanna Bapt 26 March 1643 married __________ Jones (no known
children)
6 son dy buried 24 June 1644
7 Jonathan died in 1718 Married 1st Sarah Jackson , 2nd
Elizabeth NN 8 children
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Gjest
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
According to Robert Charles Anderson in Great Migration Begins I:234-7,
John2 was born say 1647, named in his father's will and no further
record. There were many immigrants by the name of Briggs who came to
New England in the 1600s.
John2 was born say 1647, named in his father's will and no further
record. There were many immigrants by the name of Briggs who came to
New England in the 1600s.
-
Kevin Bradford
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
John Briggs, s. of Clement & Joan, was born between 1630-1640:
http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bi ... t&id=I1191
If there was in fact a connection between Clement Briggs of Weymouth and John Briggs of Hingham, MA (I've seen no evidence), it was not as father and son since, as you've noted, the chronology makes this supposition quite untenable.
Best,
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bi ... t&id=I1191
If there was in fact a connection between Clement Briggs of Weymouth and John Briggs of Hingham, MA (I've seen no evidence), it was not as father and son since, as you've noted, the chronology makes this supposition quite untenable.
Best,
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: WJhonson@aol.com
Sent: May 4, 2006 6:11 PM
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
Clement Briggs made a deposition on 19 Aug 1638 in which he states that 22
years before he was "dwelling with Mr Samuell Lathame in Barmundsey Street in
Southwark".
The Source: "Clement Briggs of Plymouth Colony and his descendants
1621-1965", compiled by Edna Anne Hannibal of Palo Alto, California with Abstracts of
Probate and Land Records by Claude W Barlow, PhD Clark University, Worcester,
Mass.
uses this to mean that he was at that time an apprentice fellmonger (tanner)
So from this we should be able to infer that he could not have been very old.
In addition, his first known wife Joan Allen was married to him probably
shortly before 1 Mar 1630/1, on which date, the person who married them was fined
5 pounds for doing so.
He had at least three children from this marriage and an additional three
from his next wife Elizabeth somebody, whom he married between 1635 and 1639.
Clement died 23 Dec 1648 at Weymouth, Mass.
So I believe we can conclude that Clement Briggs could not have been born
much if any before 1600, and if he were an apprentice fellmonger in 1616, it's
doubtful he was already married at this time, and we have no record of any
previous wife or children.
Except.
There are many trees which give him a son John Briggs who married Hannah
Fisher and had a son William Briggs 2 Apr 1646 born at Highham, Massachusetts.
This son William then married Sarah Macomber 6 Nov 1666 at Taunton,
Massachusetts.
Can someone help me straighten this out? I certainly don't believe that this
William Briggs was a grandson to Clement Briggs at this point. The
chronology is just too tight, and other than this, there is no evidence, to my
knowledge, that Clement had a family previous to his marriage to Joan Allen.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
In a message dated 5/4/06 4:14:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
plantagenet60@earthlink.net writes:
<< John Briggs, s. of Clement & Joan, was born between 1630-1640:
http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bi ... t&id=I1191
If there was in fact a connection between Clement Briggs of Weymouth and
John Briggs of Hingham, MA (I've seen no evidence), it was not as father and son
since, as you've noted, the chronology makes this supposition quite untenable.
That John was born 1630/40 is probably a supposition based on the fine to the
person who married Clement to Joan.
And the fact that Clement was married to Elizabeth by 1639. I'm not
necessarily convinced that John whose lands Jonathan's was adjoining is actually a son
of Clement's. It would depend on what that illegible word after John is, in
the will.
We can probably narrow his birth even further by noticing that his father
Clement, gives the bulk of his estate to his son Thomas, who was then,
presumably, the eldest. He also names Thomas first in his will. Thomas gets the "home
lott at Plymouth 20 acres", while Jonathan gets 3 acres at Plymouth when he is
18 and another 3 at Weymouth when he is 21
If the John in the will who already has lands next to what Jonathan is to
receive, is the son of Clement, than this John would had had to get his land when
he was something like 14 years old, OR Thomas is not the eldest and then John
could get his land when he is as much as 17 years old. Still rather early.
The will doesn't actually give John the land adjoining Jonathan's, it states
John already has the land.
Later in the will he does mention he has a son John, but he is to share with
his brothers Thomas, David and Remember in the "other land" at Plymouth.
Since, the authors think John is sharing the land with Jonathan, they make
him his full-brother, but he could also be a son to Elizabeth if we remove the
assumption that the John mentioned in the will with land is a son of Clement.
Will Johnson
plantagenet60@earthlink.net writes:
<< John Briggs, s. of Clement & Joan, was born between 1630-1640:
http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bi ... t&id=I1191
If there was in fact a connection between Clement Briggs of Weymouth and
John Briggs of Hingham, MA (I've seen no evidence), it was not as father and son
since, as you've noted, the chronology makes this supposition quite untenable.
That John was born 1630/40 is probably a supposition based on the fine to the
person who married Clement to Joan.
And the fact that Clement was married to Elizabeth by 1639. I'm not
necessarily convinced that John whose lands Jonathan's was adjoining is actually a son
of Clement's. It would depend on what that illegible word after John is, in
the will.
We can probably narrow his birth even further by noticing that his father
Clement, gives the bulk of his estate to his son Thomas, who was then,
presumably, the eldest. He also names Thomas first in his will. Thomas gets the "home
lott at Plymouth 20 acres", while Jonathan gets 3 acres at Plymouth when he is
18 and another 3 at Weymouth when he is 21
If the John in the will who already has lands next to what Jonathan is to
receive, is the son of Clement, than this John would had had to get his land when
he was something like 14 years old, OR Thomas is not the eldest and then John
could get his land when he is as much as 17 years old. Still rather early.
The will doesn't actually give John the land adjoining Jonathan's, it states
John already has the land.
Later in the will he does mention he has a son John, but he is to share with
his brothers Thomas, David and Remember in the "other land" at Plymouth.
Since, the authors think John is sharing the land with Jonathan, they make
him his full-brother, but he could also be a son to Elizabeth if we remove the
assumption that the John mentioned in the will with land is a son of Clement.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
Don't argue with me. I'm just the messenger. Argue with RCA.
-
Gjest
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
In a message dated 5/4/06 5:53:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mhollick@mac.com
writes:
<< According to Robert Charles Anderson in Great Migration Begins I:234-7,
John2 was born say 1647, named in his father's will and no further
record. There were many immigrants by the name of Briggs who came to
New England in the 1600s. >>
However this is conjecture.
He is named in the will, period.
The will was writen Dec 1648
The father was married probably shortly before Mar 1630/1
John either, already had his land and thus was a son from a previous marriage
possibly
OR he was a fourth or younger son, since what he got from the will, is not
mentioned until after three sons, towit Thomas, Jonathan and Clement.
Thomas, the one who got the "home place" is given a birthdate of 14 June 1633
but it's curious that there is no age requirement put upon him in the will.
He doesn't have to wait until he is 18 or 21 or anything. It's simply not
stated. So either he was already over 18/21, or for some reason the father
didn't care to put an age requirement upon his eldest son.
Jonathan however, is stated to be not yet 18. While Clement is stated to be
not yet 21.
Assigning a birthyear of "say" anything at all to John is arbitrary. He
could have been born anywhere between 1631 (or 1634 if you accept my idea that
Thomas was the eldest) all the way to 1648 when Clement wrote the will.
There is simply no easy way to give him any more specific year.
Will Johnson
writes:
<< According to Robert Charles Anderson in Great Migration Begins I:234-7,
John2 was born say 1647, named in his father's will and no further
record. There were many immigrants by the name of Briggs who came to
New England in the 1600s. >>
However this is conjecture.
He is named in the will, period.
The will was writen Dec 1648
The father was married probably shortly before Mar 1630/1
John either, already had his land and thus was a son from a previous marriage
possibly
OR he was a fourth or younger son, since what he got from the will, is not
mentioned until after three sons, towit Thomas, Jonathan and Clement.
Thomas, the one who got the "home place" is given a birthdate of 14 June 1633
but it's curious that there is no age requirement put upon him in the will.
He doesn't have to wait until he is 18 or 21 or anything. It's simply not
stated. So either he was already over 18/21, or for some reason the father
didn't care to put an age requirement upon his eldest son.
Jonathan however, is stated to be not yet 18. While Clement is stated to be
not yet 21.
Assigning a birthyear of "say" anything at all to John is arbitrary. He
could have been born anywhere between 1631 (or 1634 if you accept my idea that
Thomas was the eldest) all the way to 1648 when Clement wrote the will.
There is simply no easy way to give him any more specific year.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Clement Briggs d 1648 Weymouth, Mass and his son John
In a message dated 5/4/2006 8:15:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mhollick@mac.com writes:
Don't argue with me. I'm just the messenger. Argue with RCA.
I'm not arguing against you. I'm pointing out that there is no reason to
pick a particular year for the birth of John. To do so, implies that we have
more records than we do. What we have, is his name appears in the will of his
father, that's it.
Will
mhollick@mac.com writes:
Don't argue with me. I'm just the messenger. Argue with RCA.
I'm not arguing against you. I'm pointing out that there is no reason to
pick a particular year for the birth of John. To do so, implies that we have
more records than we do. What we have, is his name appears in the will of his
father, that's it.
Will
-
Patricia Junkin
Re: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 -
Renia,
Thank you again. We do have the will of Roger James b. 1523 who died in
1590. His brass remains at All Hallows Barking. It is probable that the
Henry with Lady Dorcas you posted is his grandson.
Roger James and Sara Morskyn had:
1. Roger who m. Sarah Smyth daughter of John Smyth Brewer of Southwark who
m. 2) Thomas Claiborne parents of William Claiborne of Virginia. Roger and
Sara had Margaret James who married William Bishe of Fen Place, Sussex,
parents of Ursula Bishe Thompson Mottrom Colclough of Northumberland, VA.
Margaret's brother, Roger who owned Reigate Castle married Elizabeth Aucher,
daughter of Sir Anthony Aucher.
2. Arnold,
3. Henrie (possible father of Henry with Lady Dorcas),
4. Thomas,
5. William (of Ightham Court),
6. Richard who m. Gertrude daughter of John Smyth Brewer of Southwark,
7. John
8. George and
9. Sara.
From Visitations of Kent and Essex and other documents detailed and
transcribed in Alice Algood's privately published Ursula Bysshe Thompson
Mottrom Colclough.
Pat
----------
Thank you again. We do have the will of Roger James b. 1523 who died in
1590. His brass remains at All Hallows Barking. It is probable that the
Henry with Lady Dorcas you posted is his grandson.
Roger James and Sara Morskyn had:
1. Roger who m. Sarah Smyth daughter of John Smyth Brewer of Southwark who
m. 2) Thomas Claiborne parents of William Claiborne of Virginia. Roger and
Sara had Margaret James who married William Bishe of Fen Place, Sussex,
parents of Ursula Bishe Thompson Mottrom Colclough of Northumberland, VA.
Margaret's brother, Roger who owned Reigate Castle married Elizabeth Aucher,
daughter of Sir Anthony Aucher.
2. Arnold,
3. Henrie (possible father of Henry with Lady Dorcas),
4. Thomas,
5. William (of Ightham Court),
6. Richard who m. Gertrude daughter of John Smyth Brewer of Southwark,
7. John
8. George and
9. Sara.
From Visitations of Kent and Essex and other documents detailed and
transcribed in Alice Algood's privately published Ursula Bysshe Thompson
Mottrom Colclough.
Pat
----------
From: Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 - not
coming to church for 3 months
Date: Thu, 4, 2006, 5:59 PM
Glad it may be of use. PROcat has this:
E 178/3946 More information
KENT: Smarden, Pluckley, Bethersden, and other places Inquisition as to
the lands and inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight,
attainted. 8 Jas. I.
E 178/4194 More information
MIDDLESEX: London Inventory of the goods of Sir Henry James, knight, a
recusant, at his house in St. John's Street. 10 James I.
And PRO wills:
Will of Henry James of Saint Andrew Holborn, Middlesex 10 October
1645 PROB 11/194
Will of Henry James, Cordwainer of Saint Leonard Shoreditch, Middlesex
23 October 1604 PROB 11/104
Will of Henry James, Yeoman of Filton, Gloucestershire 29 June 1639
PROB 11/180
Will of Roger James of All Saints Barking, City of London 13 March 1592
PROB 11/79
Will of Ann James, Widow of Barking, Essex 02 June 1802 PROB 11/1376
Will of John James, Farrier of Barking London 25 August 1752 PROB 11/796
Will of John James, Gentleman of All Hallows Barking, City of London 22
September 1758 PROB 11/840
Will of Henry James, Gentleman of Barking , Essex 25 June 1792 PROB 11/1220
Will of Robert James of All Hallows Barking , City of London 14
October 1797 PROB 11/1297
Will of Thomas James, Mealman of Barking , Essex 22 December 1798 PROB
11/1316
Renia
Patricia Junkin wrote:
Renia,
Thank you for this. The Henry James mentioned may belong to the family of
Roger James of All Saintes Barkinge London. Roger James married Sara
Morskyn. His sons, Henry and Richard, inherited by will property in
"Stratford le Bow in the Parish of Bromley in County of Middlesex."
Pat
----------
From: Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: List of people in (Middx) Sessions Records, 1614-1615 - not coming
to
church for 3 months
Date: Wed, 3, 2006, 5:21 PM
Bumped into this on Ancestry.com which might prove useful to someone,
somewhere:
Middlesex: - Calendar to the Sessions Records, 1614-1615
Middlesex Sessions Records.
Sessions Roll.
County: Middlesex
Country: England
John Dam alias Adam of St Andrew's, Holborn, yeoman, and Helen his wife,
William Champney, yeoman,
Joan, wife of Christopher Emerson, cutler,
Isabel, wife of George Moodye, tailor, and Hannah Smythe her servant,
William Mathewes, cutler, and Helen his wife,
Susan, wife of Edwin Saule, gentleman,
Magdalen, wife of John Blake, tailor, and Sarah Smythe her servant,
William Woodfall, tailor, and Jane his wife,
William Cooke, gentleman, and Margaret his wife,
Hart, gentleman,
wife of Haskins, gentleman,
Mary, wife of William Cobbe, gentleman,
Ann Dowse, widow,
William Beswicke, shoemaker, and Mary his wife and Ambrose Burche and
George Kenney his servants,
Susan, wife of Thomas Strange, tailor,
Mary Sincleare, widow, and Susan Banninge her servant,
Margaret Morley, spinster, and Alice Baylief her servant,
John Knighte, scrivener, and Joan his wife and John his son and Richard
his servant,
Christabel, wife of Thomas Bateman, embroiderer,
Margaret, wife of Thurstan Field, shoemaker, and Joan, wife of Richard
Gressam, carpenter, all of the same,
Christiana, wife of Thomas Sleepe of St. James', Clerkenwell, gentleman
and Helen Vaughan her servant,
Elizabeth Jones, spinster,
Dorcas, Lady James, wife of Sir Henry James, Knight, and Anne and Martha
her daughters,
Elizabeth Wade, spinster,
Mary Lunne, widow,
Tobias Hinderson, yeoman, and Mary his wife,
Elizabeth Palmer,
Mary Gower,
Elizabeth Reynoldes and
Jane Derrey, spinsters,
Elizabeth, wife of Richard Peuvose, yeoman,
Katherine Cashe alias Hutchenson, spinster,
Peter Smythe, printer,
John Higgins, labourer,
Edmund Yates, esquire, and Elizabeth his wife and Richard Aldreor, Sarah
Brackett and Elizabeth Boldinge his servants,
Jane, wife of Christopher Beeston, yeoman, and William Allen her
servant, all of the same,
Elizabeth Reynoldes of Holywell Street, spinster,
Alice Nashe of St. Sepulchre's, widow,
Margaret, wife of Robert Gutteris of the same, gentleman, and
Christiana Banckes of the same, widow,
all for not coming to church for the space of three months.
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Dear Will,
The elder Sir James Douglas (who d. 1420) was the one who m.
Egidia Stewart. This was his second known marriage, although (I
suggest) he may have married at least once before his marriage to Agnes
Dunbar. I have added Egidia Stewart below, to remove what confusion I
can.
NN ~ Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith = 1) Agnes Dunbar
I ' the elder ' I [ =
2) Egidia Stewart]
_ _ _ I d. 1420 _________I_______________
I I I
NN = Walter Tweedie Agnes = Sir John Sir James
[Douglas?] I of Drumelzier Douglas I Livingston 'uncle'
_ _ _ _ _I____________ d. aft I k. Homildon <*>
I I I 1421 I 1402
James Elizabeth Christian I
Tweedie 'neptem' = William I
of Sir de Caldcotis I
James I I
Douglas <*> I I
Elizabeth = William Livingston
de Caldcotis I of Kilsyth
m. bef 12 Nov 1421 I d. bef 20 Apr 1460
I
V
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The elder Sir James Douglas (who d. 1420) was the one who m.
Egidia Stewart. This was his second known marriage, although (I
suggest) he may have married at least once before his marriage to Agnes
Dunbar. I have added Egidia Stewart below, to remove what confusion I
can.
NN ~ Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith = 1) Agnes Dunbar
I ' the elder ' I [ =
2) Egidia Stewart]
_ _ _ I d. 1420 _________I_______________
I I I
NN = Walter Tweedie Agnes = Sir John Sir James
[Douglas?] I of Drumelzier Douglas I Livingston 'uncle'
_ _ _ _ _I____________ d. aft I k. Homildon <*>
I I I 1421 I 1402
James Elizabeth Christian I
Tweedie 'neptem' = William I
of Sir de Caldcotis I
James I I
Douglas <*> I I
Elizabeth = William Livingston
de Caldcotis I of Kilsyth
m. bef 12 Nov 1421 I d. bef 20 Apr 1460
I
V
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/5/06 10:06:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d. 1420) certainly had issue by
at least one other woman (possibly wife) besides Agnes Dunbar, and
likely before.
Are you saying this is not the James Douglas who is showing as married to
Egidia "Gill" Stewart Oct 1378 ?
Will Johnson
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Dear Will,
Scots Peerage provides the following:
' Agnes, whom George, Earl of Dunbar, styles his very dear
sister, when in 1372 he granted to her the lands of Mordington
and Whittinghame, on her marriage with Sir James Douglas of
Dalkeith,.." [SP III:261, sub Dunbar, Earl of Dunbar, cites
Reg. Mag. Sig., ed. 1814, 117, Nos. 19, 20, 125, No. 31 ]
The marriage (or marriage contract) date I show is 21 November
1372; King David II (Agnes' paramour beforehand) died on 22 Feb
1370/71.
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Scots Peerage provides the following:
' Agnes, whom George, Earl of Dunbar, styles his very dear
sister, when in 1372 he granted to her the lands of Mordington
and Whittinghame, on her marriage with Sir James Douglas of
Dalkeith,.." [SP III:261, sub Dunbar, Earl of Dunbar, cites
Reg. Mag. Sig., ed. 1814, 117, Nos. 19, 20, 125, No. 31 ]
The marriage (or marriage contract) date I show is 21 November
1372; King David II (Agnes' paramour beforehand) died on 22 Feb
1370/71.
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/5/06 12:31:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
The chronology involved (between the 1372 marriage of James
Douglas 'the elder' to Agnes Dunbar, and of their grandson William
Livingston to Elizabeth de Caldcotis, BEFORE 12 Nov 1421) would not
readily permit Elizabeth de Caldcotis to be the granddaughter of
the younger James Douglas (d. 1441).
What is the source for this year of 1372 ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Friday, 5 May, 2006
Dear Doug,
The charter in question was allegedly dated 1434, as shown in
the following extract (see Freeman's website; the URL on Rootsweb's
"freepages" was in my earlier post):
" James of Douglas, second Lord of Dalkeith, by a Charter
dated 15th June 1434, granted the lands of Hartree in the
Barony of Kilbucho, resigned by James of Tuedy in 1389 as
above mentioned to Richard Brown, to be held by him and the
heirs of his marriage with "Elizabeth of Twedi", the
granddaughter [neptem] of Lord Dalkeith. This charter was
confirmed by James II on 12th March 1439-40. "
The chronology involved (between the 1372 marriage of James
Douglas 'the elder' to Agnes Dunbar, and of their grandson William
Livingston to Elizabeth de Caldcotis, BEFORE 12 Nov 1421) would not
readily permit Elizabeth de Caldcotis to be the granddaughter of
the younger James Douglas (d. 1441).
During this period, in Scotland, we do find relationships in
the 2nd and 3rd degree in dispensed marriages: besides the
Livingston-de Caldcotis marriage (as by my reconstruction), we
find also the following:
A. 'Egidie de Duglas quondam Henrici Soeuclar Militis relicte
vidue Glasguen.' , postnuptial dispensation for her marriage
to Alexander Stewart (related in the 3rd and 2nd degrees),
mandate issued at Rome, 29 Apr 1418 [Stuart, p 449 citing
'Martinus V. anno primo. 3 kal. Maii. 1418' ]
Elizabeth Mure = Robert II = 2) Euphemia of Ross
__________________I I__________
I I
Robert, Duke of Albany Sir William Douglas = Egidia
d. 1420 d. 1391 I Stewart
I I
Murdoch, Duke of Albany ____________I
I_________________ I
I I
2) Alexander Stewart = Egidia = 1) Sir Henry
Douglas Sinclair
B. Record of the supplication and dispensation for marriage of
Elizabeth Douglas to William Sinclair, dated at Rome, 12 Aug
1432:
' Dispensatio matrimonialis Cor.
Since William de Sancto Claro [Sinclair] and Elizabeth de
Douglas, damsel, Orkney diocese, not ignorant that they were
related on divers sides in second and third also in third
degrees of consanguinity...' [CSSR 1428-1432]
Joanna = Archibald Douglas = NN
_______I I_ _ _ _
I I
Archibald = Margaret Sir William Douglas = Egidia
Douglas I Stewart of Nithsdale I Stewart
I I
I Sir Henry Sinclair = Egidia Douglas
I___________ I
I I
Elizabeth Douglas = William Sinclair
In addition to the foregoing, there is a notable English
marriage (at least) of this period where the dispensation refers
to the partie being related " in the 3rd degree of kindred", but
also specifically states they were related in the 2nd and 3rd
degrees - that of Edward of Woodstock, "the Black Prince", and
Joan of Kent:
1362 CPL IV:29,
6 Id. Dec Regesta Vol. CCLII (1 Urban V)
Avignon
f. 62
' To Edward de Wydestok, prince of Aquitaine
and Wales, and Joan, countess of Kent. Decree
confirming the dispensation granted to them by
Innocent VI to intermarry, notwithstanding that
they were descended from a common stock in the
third and second degrees respectively, whereby
they are related in the third degree of
kindred, it having since come to their notice
that they are also related thereby in the
fourth degree. '
Cheers,
John
Dear Doug,
The charter in question was allegedly dated 1434, as shown in
the following extract (see Freeman's website; the URL on Rootsweb's
"freepages" was in my earlier post):
" James of Douglas, second Lord of Dalkeith, by a Charter
dated 15th June 1434, granted the lands of Hartree in the
Barony of Kilbucho, resigned by James of Tuedy in 1389 as
above mentioned to Richard Brown, to be held by him and the
heirs of his marriage with "Elizabeth of Twedi", the
granddaughter [neptem] of Lord Dalkeith. This charter was
confirmed by James II on 12th March 1439-40. "
The chronology involved (between the 1372 marriage of James
Douglas 'the elder' to Agnes Dunbar, and of their grandson William
Livingston to Elizabeth de Caldcotis, BEFORE 12 Nov 1421) would not
readily permit Elizabeth de Caldcotis to be the granddaughter of
the younger James Douglas (d. 1441).
During this period, in Scotland, we do find relationships in
the 2nd and 3rd degree in dispensed marriages: besides the
Livingston-de Caldcotis marriage (as by my reconstruction), we
find also the following:
A. 'Egidie de Duglas quondam Henrici Soeuclar Militis relicte
vidue Glasguen.' , postnuptial dispensation for her marriage
to Alexander Stewart (related in the 3rd and 2nd degrees),
mandate issued at Rome, 29 Apr 1418 [Stuart, p 449 citing
'Martinus V. anno primo. 3 kal. Maii. 1418' ]
Elizabeth Mure = Robert II = 2) Euphemia of Ross
__________________I I__________
I I
Robert, Duke of Albany Sir William Douglas = Egidia
d. 1420 d. 1391 I Stewart
I I
Murdoch, Duke of Albany ____________I
I_________________ I
I I
2) Alexander Stewart = Egidia = 1) Sir Henry
Douglas Sinclair
B. Record of the supplication and dispensation for marriage of
Elizabeth Douglas to William Sinclair, dated at Rome, 12 Aug
1432:
' Dispensatio matrimonialis Cor.
Since William de Sancto Claro [Sinclair] and Elizabeth de
Douglas, damsel, Orkney diocese, not ignorant that they were
related on divers sides in second and third also in third
degrees of consanguinity...' [CSSR 1428-1432]
Joanna = Archibald Douglas = NN
_______I I_ _ _ _
I I
Archibald = Margaret Sir William Douglas = Egidia
Douglas I Stewart of Nithsdale I Stewart
I I
I Sir Henry Sinclair = Egidia Douglas
I___________ I
I I
Elizabeth Douglas = William Sinclair
In addition to the foregoing, there is a notable English
marriage (at least) of this period where the dispensation refers
to the partie being related " in the 3rd degree of kindred", but
also specifically states they were related in the 2nd and 3rd
degrees - that of Edward of Woodstock, "the Black Prince", and
Joan of Kent:
1362 CPL IV:29,
6 Id. Dec Regesta Vol. CCLII (1 Urban V)
Avignon
f. 62
' To Edward de Wydestok, prince of Aquitaine
and Wales, and Joan, countess of Kent. Decree
confirming the dispensation granted to them by
Innocent VI to intermarry, notwithstanding that
they were descended from a common stock in the
third and second degrees respectively, whereby
they are related in the third degree of
kindred, it having since come to their notice
that they are also related thereby in the
fourth degree. '
Cheers,
John
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
In a message dated 5/5/06 10:06:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d. 1420) certainly had issue by
at least one other woman (possibly wife) besides Agnes Dunbar, and
likely before. >>
Are you saying this is not the James Douglas who is showing as married to
Egidia "Gill" Stewart Oct 1378 ?
Will Johnson
writes:
<< Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d. 1420) certainly had issue by
at least one other woman (possibly wife) besides Agnes Dunbar, and
likely before. >>
Are you saying this is not the James Douglas who is showing as married to
Egidia "Gill" Stewart Oct 1378 ?
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
In a message dated 5/5/06 10:06:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< While the possibility that Agnes Dunbar could
have been the ancestress of Elizabeth de Caldcotis is unlikely
from a chronological basis, >>
John can you expand on this? Why is it unlikely?
Thanks
Will Johnson
writes:
<< While the possibility that Agnes Dunbar could
have been the ancestress of Elizabeth de Caldcotis is unlikely
from a chronological basis, >>
John can you expand on this? Why is it unlikely?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
In a message dated 5/5/06 12:31:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< The chronology involved (between the 1372 marriage of James
Douglas 'the elder' to Agnes Dunbar, and of their grandson William
Livingston to Elizabeth de Caldcotis, BEFORE 12 Nov 1421) would not
readily permit Elizabeth de Caldcotis to be the granddaughter of
the younger James Douglas (d. 1441). >>
What is the source for this year of 1372 ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
writes:
<< The chronology involved (between the 1372 marriage of James
Douglas 'the elder' to Agnes Dunbar, and of their grandson William
Livingston to Elizabeth de Caldcotis, BEFORE 12 Nov 1421) would not
readily permit Elizabeth de Caldcotis to be the granddaughter of
the younger James Douglas (d. 1441). >>
What is the source for this year of 1372 ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Tony Hoskins
Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
The logical mental progression from vampirism to socialism is not lost
on me, put please take any political/ideological discussions elsewhere.
Thanks.
Tony Hoskins
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
on me, put please take any political/ideological discussions elsewhere.
Thanks.
Tony Hoskins
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
707/545-0831, ext. 562
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Dear John ~
The marriage you've cited for Edward of Woodstock and Joan of Kent is
the only 2nd-3rd degree marriage of which I am aware in medieval
England. To cite a true exception, not the rule, particularly for the
English king's eldest son, doesn't exactly lend support for your
argument for a similar marriage in Scotland for people of lower rank.
What I was saying is that a 2nd and 3rd degree marriage would be highly
unlikely. I'm sure this is just as true for Scottish couples in this
period, as it is for English couples. As such, I think you should see
if a 3rd-3rd degree combination would work before going onto an
extremely rare 2nd-3rd degree combination.
In my previous post I asked if it was possible chronologically for
Elizabeth Tweedie to be the niece of James Douglas (died 1420). If
James Douglas married his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, in 1372, and if
Elizabeth Tweedie's niece, Elizabeth de Caldicote, was married in 1421,
it seems the chronology would easily support that Elizabeth Tweedie was
the niece of James Douglas (died 1420).
Moreover, I note that in the record dated 1434 in which Elizabeth
Tweedie is called "neptem" [niece or granddaughter] to James Douglas,
reference is made back to an earlier document dated 1389. If
Elizabeth Tweedie was called "neptem" to the James Douglas living at
the date of the earlier document, that would put a different spin on
things than if she was styled "neptem" to the younger James Douglas
living in 1434. I know you interpreted the 1434 document to read that
Elizabeth Tweedie was "neptem" to James Douglas living in 1434, but I
believe the document as you have given it can also be interpreted in
such a way as to permit Elizabeth Tweedie to be "neptem" to the James
Douglas living in 1389. In other words, have you seen the actual 1434
document?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
The marriage you've cited for Edward of Woodstock and Joan of Kent is
the only 2nd-3rd degree marriage of which I am aware in medieval
England. To cite a true exception, not the rule, particularly for the
English king's eldest son, doesn't exactly lend support for your
argument for a similar marriage in Scotland for people of lower rank.
What I was saying is that a 2nd and 3rd degree marriage would be highly
unlikely. I'm sure this is just as true for Scottish couples in this
period, as it is for English couples. As such, I think you should see
if a 3rd-3rd degree combination would work before going onto an
extremely rare 2nd-3rd degree combination.
In my previous post I asked if it was possible chronologically for
Elizabeth Tweedie to be the niece of James Douglas (died 1420). If
James Douglas married his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, in 1372, and if
Elizabeth Tweedie's niece, Elizabeth de Caldicote, was married in 1421,
it seems the chronology would easily support that Elizabeth Tweedie was
the niece of James Douglas (died 1420).
Moreover, I note that in the record dated 1434 in which Elizabeth
Tweedie is called "neptem" [niece or granddaughter] to James Douglas,
reference is made back to an earlier document dated 1389. If
Elizabeth Tweedie was called "neptem" to the James Douglas living at
the date of the earlier document, that would put a different spin on
things than if she was styled "neptem" to the younger James Douglas
living in 1434. I know you interpreted the 1434 document to read that
Elizabeth Tweedie was "neptem" to James Douglas living in 1434, but I
believe the document as you have given it can also be interpreted in
such a way as to permit Elizabeth Tweedie to be "neptem" to the James
Douglas living in 1389. In other words, have you seen the actual 1434
document?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
In a message dated 5/5/06 1:53:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< The marriage (or marriage contract) date I show is 21 November
1372; King David II (Agnes' paramour beforehand) died on 22 Feb
1370/71. >>
Would it be a fair bet to say that the children of Agnes "of Dunbar" and
James Douglas were all born after this 1472 contract ?
writes:
<< The marriage (or marriage contract) date I show is 21 November
1372; King David II (Agnes' paramour beforehand) died on 22 Feb
1370/71. >>
Would it be a fair bet to say that the children of Agnes "of Dunbar" and
James Douglas were all born after this 1472 contract ?
-
Gjest
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
I just noticed that in my database I have
Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
married to Patrick Hepburn, Lord of Hailes (in 1367) d aft 22 Jun 1402
This Agnes I have as dau to Patrick, 10th Earl Dunbar d 11 Nov 1368 and Agnes
Randolph, Countess of Moray 1346-
This Patrick then I have as a son to Patrick, 9th Earl Dunbar d 1320/4 and
Ermengarde de Soulis
In contrast to all of that
I have a brother to this last Patrick, named Alexader of Dunbar d 1336
who has a son Sir Patrick of Dunbar d 1356/7 who married "Isabel" Randolph
and among others had a dau Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
who married Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith d 1420
Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray (from 1346) had at least three children
Patrick d s p
John d s p
and Agnes married Patrick Hepburn and I suppose but don't know for sure d s p
as well
so that the Earldom of Moray passes to the second son of her sister Isabel ?
Why wouldn't Moray pass to the eldest son George, 10th Earl of Dunbar ?
I presume he was the eldest since he obtained the earldom of Dunbar in 1368
Thanks
Will Johnson
Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
married to Patrick Hepburn, Lord of Hailes (in 1367) d aft 22 Jun 1402
This Agnes I have as dau to Patrick, 10th Earl Dunbar d 11 Nov 1368 and Agnes
Randolph, Countess of Moray 1346-
This Patrick then I have as a son to Patrick, 9th Earl Dunbar d 1320/4 and
Ermengarde de Soulis
In contrast to all of that
I have a brother to this last Patrick, named Alexader of Dunbar d 1336
who has a son Sir Patrick of Dunbar d 1356/7 who married "Isabel" Randolph
and among others had a dau Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
who married Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith d 1420
Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray (from 1346) had at least three children
Patrick d s p
John d s p
and Agnes married Patrick Hepburn and I suppose but don't know for sure d s p
as well
so that the Earldom of Moray passes to the second son of her sister Isabel ?
Why wouldn't Moray pass to the eldest son George, 10th Earl of Dunbar ?
I presume he was the eldest since he obtained the earldom of Dunbar in 1368
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
In message of 5 May, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Scots Peerage is the cavalry to the rescue. Vol 3, pp. 250 to 270 or so and
Vol 6, pp. 291-4.
Patrick Hepburn m. an Agnes but she was not a Dunbar.
Patrick Dunbar, 7th earl m. Cecilia and had
Their 1st son Patrick Dunbar, 8th earl, m. a Comyn dau.
Their 3rd son was Alexander who was not an earl.
Alexander had a son Patrick who m. Isabella Randolph, heiress of the
Morays but not, I believe, Countess.
Alexander and Isabella had several sons of whom 1st, George, who was
10th earl of Dunbar and 2nd, John, was earl of Moray. They also had
a dau Anes who m. James Douglas and they were ancestors of the Morton
earls.
Patrick and the Comyn dau. had a son Patrick who was 9th earl. he m.
Agnes Randolf but they had no children.
This may have come from the Moray article in SP which looks very odd by
the side of the Dunbar article.
Correct but he was already earl of March so three earldoms would be a
few too many belts and swords to carry around with him.
I must admit that I found a few blanks in my records as the Moray
article is a bit vague in SP but the Dunbar article sorts it out.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
I just noticed that in my database I have
Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
married to Patrick Hepburn, Lord of Hailes (in 1367) d aft 22 Jun
1402
This Agnes I have as dau to Patrick, 10th Earl Dunbar d 11 Nov 1368
and Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray 1346-
This Patrick then I have as a son to Patrick, 9th Earl Dunbar d
1320/4 and Ermengarde de Soulis
In contrast to all of that
I have a brother to this last Patrick, named Alexader of Dunbar Fd
1336 who has a son Sir Patrick of Dunbar d 1356/7 who married
"Isabel" Randolph and among others had a dau Agnes Dunbar d bef 1377
who married Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith d 1420
Scots Peerage is the cavalry to the rescue. Vol 3, pp. 250 to 270 or so and
Vol 6, pp. 291-4.
Patrick Hepburn m. an Agnes but she was not a Dunbar.
Patrick Dunbar, 7th earl m. Cecilia and had
Their 1st son Patrick Dunbar, 8th earl, m. a Comyn dau.
Their 3rd son was Alexander who was not an earl.
Alexander had a son Patrick who m. Isabella Randolph, heiress of the
Morays but not, I believe, Countess.
Alexander and Isabella had several sons of whom 1st, George, who was
10th earl of Dunbar and 2nd, John, was earl of Moray. They also had
a dau Anes who m. James Douglas and they were ancestors of the Morton
earls.
Patrick and the Comyn dau. had a son Patrick who was 9th earl. he m.
Agnes Randolf but they had no children.
Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray (from 1346) had at least three children
Patrick d s p
John d s p
and Agnes married Patrick Hepburn and I suppose but don't know for
sure d s p as well so that the Earldom of Moray passes to the second
son of her sister Isabel ?
This may have come from the Moray article in SP which looks very odd by
the side of the Dunbar article.
Why wouldn't Moray pass to the eldest son George, 10th Earl of
Dunbar? I presume he was the eldest since he obtained the earldom of
Dunbar in 1368
Correct but he was already earl of March so three earldoms would be a
few too many belts and swords to carry around with him.
I must admit that I found a few blanks in my records as the Moray
article is a bit vague in SP but the Dunbar article sorts it out.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Hoskins" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
| The logical mental progression from vampirism to socialism is not lost
| on me, put please take any political/ideological discussions elsewhere.
|
|
| Thanks.
|
| Tony Hoskins
|
Aw, c'mon! Let's do the subject. Knows anyone of a link betwixt Vlad & Bathor Erszbet?
Ford
From: "Tony Hoskins" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
| The logical mental progression from vampirism to socialism is not lost
| on me, put please take any political/ideological discussions elsewhere.
|
|
| Thanks.
|
| Tony Hoskins
|
Aw, c'mon! Let's do the subject. Knows anyone of a link betwixt Vlad & Bathor Erszbet?
Ford
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Saturday, 6 May, 2006
Dear Doug,
I am not immediately aware as to whether there are similar
dispensations for other English 'couples' of the period, but given
the view as shown in the 1362 dispensation that Prince Edward and
Joan of Kent were "related in the third degree of kindred" I don't
know how rare we can say this was. On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
As to the 1434 charter, I have not seen this document to date:
what I have seen, extracted, is what I have presented. I would
comment that it would be unusual for James Douglas (d. 1441) to
issue a charter to a kinswoman (Elizabeth Tweedie) and refer to
her relationship to his father, and not to himself. To my
recollection, such references to kinship (outside the witnesses)
in charters of this period involve relationships between the
granter and grantee(s). Of course, if the term <nepta> (as
expressed in "neptem" in the charter) is held to mean "kinswoman"
as opposed to "niece" [we can exclude the "granddaughter" version
in this case], then one could argue that Elizabeth Tweedie's
mother was aunt, not sister, to James Douglas (d. 1441).
Cheers,
John *
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Dear Doug,
I am not immediately aware as to whether there are similar
dispensations for other English 'couples' of the period, but given
the view as shown in the 1362 dispensation that Prince Edward and
Joan of Kent were "related in the third degree of kindred" I don't
know how rare we can say this was. On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
As to the 1434 charter, I have not seen this document to date:
what I have seen, extracted, is what I have presented. I would
comment that it would be unusual for James Douglas (d. 1441) to
issue a charter to a kinswoman (Elizabeth Tweedie) and refer to
her relationship to his father, and not to himself. To my
recollection, such references to kinship (outside the witnesses)
in charters of this period involve relationships between the
granter and grantee(s). Of course, if the term <nepta> (as
expressed in "neptem" in the charter) is held to mean "kinswoman"
as opposed to "niece" [we can exclude the "granddaughter" version
in this case], then one could argue that Elizabeth Tweedie's
mother was aunt, not sister, to James Douglas (d. 1441).
Cheers,
John *
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Dear John ~
The marriage you've cited for Edward of Woodstock and Joan of Kent is
the only 2nd-3rd degree marriage of which I am aware in medieval
England. To cite a true exception, not the rule, particularly for the
English king's eldest son, doesn't exactly lend support for your
argument for a similar marriage in Scotland for people of lower rank.
What I was saying is that a 2nd and 3rd degree marriage would be highly
unlikely. I'm sure this is just as true for Scottish couples in this
period, as it is for English couples. As such, I think you should see
if a 3rd-3rd degree combination would work before going onto an
extremely rare 2nd-3rd degree combination.
In my previous post I asked if it was possible chronologically for
Elizabeth Tweedie to be the niece of James Douglas (died 1420). If
James Douglas married his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, in 1372, and if
Elizabeth Tweedie's niece, Elizabeth de Caldicote, was married in 1421,
it seems the chronology would easily support that Elizabeth Tweedie was
the niece of James Douglas (died 1420).
Moreover, I note that in the record dated 1434 in which Elizabeth
Tweedie is called "neptem" [niece or granddaughter] to James Douglas,
reference is made back to an earlier document dated 1389. If
Elizabeth Tweedie was called "neptem" to the James Douglas living at
the date of the earlier document, that would put a different spin on
things than if she was styled "neptem" to the younger James Douglas
living in 1434. I know you interpreted the 1434 document to read that
Elizabeth Tweedie was "neptem" to James Douglas living in 1434, but I
believe the document as you have given it can also be interpreted in
such a way as to permit Elizabeth Tweedie to be "neptem" to the James
Douglas living in 1389. In other words, have you seen the actual 1434
document?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
-
Gjest
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
Saturday, 6 May, 2006
Dear Tim, Will, et al.,
A review of the posts to SGM from bygone days concerning the Earls
of Dunbar would be time-consuming, but I believe would prove most
useful in producing an accurate pedigree of that family. It would
also show the need to view any source, and especially secondary
sources (including Scots Peerage) with some skepticism.
The conjecture that Agnes, 1st wife of Patrick Hepburn of Hailes
(d. aft 22 Jul 1402) was a daughter (or granddaughter) of Patrick,
Earl of Dunbar (d. 1368) and Agnes Randolph is the original theory
of Andrew MacEwen. I posted a message to SGM on 13 Oct 2005, copied
below, in which I suggested that certain dispensations and known
relationships supported this conjecture [1].
This identification may be correct, but it is not proven as yet.
The best pedigree I can produce for the Earls of Dunbar, based on what
is known, clearly does not agree with the SP version, but does (with
the caveat concerning the ‘two Earls Patrick’ conundrum) agree with
Andrew MacEwen’s view at present:
Patrick = Marjory Comyn
Earl of Dunbar I
d. 10 Oct 1308 I
_________________________I____________________
I I I
Patrick = Ermengarde John Alexander
Earl of Dunbar * I
* I
<father of, or identical I
with:> ___________ I
* I I I
Patrick, Earl of = Agnes Isabel = Sir Patrick
Dunbar Randolph Randolph I Dunbar
d. 1368 I
I
____________________I___________
I I I I I
George John Agnes <siblings>
Earl of Earl of = Sir James
Dunbar Moray Douglas
1368-1420 d. 1420
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] J. Ravilious, <Agnes, 1st wife of Sir Patrick Hepburn (d. ca. 1402): a
conjecture>, SGM, 13 Oct 2005, which reads as follows:
Wednesday, 12 October, 2005
Hello All,
In 2003, I had proposed a slight correction to the relationship given
in SP between Sir James de Lindsay and his wife Egidia Stewart [1]. No
further relevant documentation concerning this suggestion has been
found to date, but there is another conjectured relationship which this
proposal supports.
In discussing this and other matters with Andrew B. W. MacEwen, he
noted a conjecture of his own would identify Agnes, first wife of
Sir Patrick Hepburn of Hailes (d. aft 22 June 1402), as either the
daughter or granddaughter of Patrick, Earl of Dunbar (d. aft 25 Jul 1368)
and his wife Agnes Randolph [2]. By coincidence, my suggested solution
for the relationship of Sir James de Lindsay and Egidia Stewart supports
Andrew’s conjecture, if in fact Agnes (1st wife of Sir Patrick de
Hepburn) was a daughter of Earl Patrick and Agnes Randolph.
Sir Patrick de Hepburn was married (2ndly) ca. 1376 to Eleanora
Douglas, widow of (amongst others) Alexander Bruce, Earl of Carrick
(d. 1333) and thereafter known as the ‘Countess of Carrick’. For this
marriage, Sir Patrick and Countess Eleanor received a dispensation based
on affinity, as she and his first wife Agnes were related in the 4th
degree [3]. This relationship has hitherto been unresolved given Agnes’
lack of identified parentage, but Andrew MacEwen’s identification would
provide the following relationship (note: conjectured relationships
indicated _ _ _ _ _ ):
Alexander le Steward = Joanna [not Jean of Bute]
_______________________I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I I
Sir John le Stewart = Margaret NN le Steward
of Bonkil, k. 1298 I de Bonkil I
I I
I I
Thomas Randolph = Isabel Sir Alexander = NN
E of Moray I le Stewart de Lindsay I______
I_______ I
I I
Patrick De Dunbar = Agnes Archibald Douglas = Beatrix
E of Dunbar I Randolph k. 1333 I Lindsay
I_ _ I
I I
(1) Agnes = Sir Patrick = (2) Eleanora
de Hepburn C of Carrick
The foregoing is clearly a composite of conjecture, and needful of
proof. Andrew agreed that the suggested identification of Agnes, and the
relationship as identified between Agnes and Countess Eleanora of
Carrick, could be presented to the list in the hope that one or more list
members might either note relevant documentation in hand or relationships
bearing on the above, or that additional findings of list members would
serve to either confirm or disprove these assertions. If validated, the
ancestry of the Lords Hepburn and their myriad descendants (the Earls of
Bothwell, Prince William, several list members and many more besides)
would be better defined.
To that end, any relevant comment, criticism or documentation will
certainly be appreciated.
Cheers,
John *
[1] SP III:11, citing Papal Letters, iii.225, states
' a papal dispensation for this marriage was granted at Avignon
3 Ides of April 1346, which describes the spouses as within the
third and fourth degree on the father's side, and in the fourth
degree on the mother's.' In my post to SGM of 11 June 2003 entitled
<SP Correction: Sir James de Lindsay and Egidia Stewart>, I stated
in part,
‘ The following more correctly illustrates their relationship
' within the third and fourth degree on the father's side ':
Alexander le Steward = Jean of Bute
_______________________I________________
I I
James le = Egidia (Giles) NN le Steward
Steward I de Burgh I
_________I I
I I
Walter the = 2) Isabel de NN = Sir Alexander
Stewart I Graham I de Lindsay
I ____________I
I I
I Sir David de = Maria
I Lindsay I Abernethy
I __________I
I I
Egidia Stewart = Sir James de Lindsay
The relationship, 'third and fourth degree on the father's side',
actually means in this case that, on their fathers' side the third
degree relationship is that of Egidia Stewart, and therefore the
fourth degree relationship is that of Sir James Lindsay, as shown
above. ‘
[2] Aside from the various issues concerning this Earl Patrick of Dunbar,
discussed on SGM in the past, Andrew MacEwen noted that the Earldom of
Dunbar (or March) was not a male fief, but was rather inheritable by a
direct heir. We know from the SP account for Dunbar that Earl Patrick
resigned the lands and Earldom of March in favor of his cousin
[elsewhere called nephew] George Dunbar, which was confirmed by charters
dated 25 July 1368 [SP III:270]. The resignation has the hallmarks of
transferring the lands and title of the Earldom to a male of the Dunbar
family, with the possible intent (and definite effect) of disinheriting
any direct heir of Earl Patrick. Amongst other evidence, Sir Patrick
Hepburn of Hailes had a notable place in the following of Earl Patrick,
including precedence before George Dunbar in witnessing charters of
the Earl [one such charter was
‘ the charter of Patrick V of Dunbar, Earl of March and Moray confirming
that the monks of Coldingham are to hold Ederham and Nesbit free from all
annual rent, as set out in the charter of Gospatric, Earl, brother of
Dolfin [Misc.Ch. 778] and relaxing his claim for 10/-, one pair of boots
and one skin garment.
Witnesses: Lord Patrick de Hepburn, Lord of Hales, George de Dunbar,
the Earl's cousin, Alexander de Ramsey, Alexander de Rykklynton,
constable of Dunbar, Robert Leche, steward, Richard de Ellam, & many
others.
Confirmed with the assent of Agnes the countess.
At his castle of Dunbar 24 May 1367. ' [Durham University Library
Archives & Special Collections: Misc. Charter 793. Printed: Raine ND
App. CXLII]
Andrew suggests that Agnes, the otherwise unidentified 1st wife of Sir
Patrick de Hepburn, was either the daughter or granddaughter of Earl
Patrick, and his direct heir, which would explain (prior to 1368) the
precedence of Sir Patrick de Hepburn before George Dunbar. Her
(conjectured) disinheritance in favor of George Dunbar would also explain
the hostility found thereafter between the Hepburns and the Earls of
March.
[3] 'Eleonora de Bruys, Comitissa de Carrick', dispensation to marry
Patrick Hepburn, she being related to his 1st wife Agnes in the 4th
degree, April 1376 - see SP, sub Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; the text
of the dispensation is given in Andrew Stuart, Genealogical History
of the Stewarts, pp. 440-1.
Dear Tim, Will, et al.,
A review of the posts to SGM from bygone days concerning the Earls
of Dunbar would be time-consuming, but I believe would prove most
useful in producing an accurate pedigree of that family. It would
also show the need to view any source, and especially secondary
sources (including Scots Peerage) with some skepticism.
The conjecture that Agnes, 1st wife of Patrick Hepburn of Hailes
(d. aft 22 Jul 1402) was a daughter (or granddaughter) of Patrick,
Earl of Dunbar (d. 1368) and Agnes Randolph is the original theory
of Andrew MacEwen. I posted a message to SGM on 13 Oct 2005, copied
below, in which I suggested that certain dispensations and known
relationships supported this conjecture [1].
This identification may be correct, but it is not proven as yet.
The best pedigree I can produce for the Earls of Dunbar, based on what
is known, clearly does not agree with the SP version, but does (with
the caveat concerning the ‘two Earls Patrick’ conundrum) agree with
Andrew MacEwen’s view at present:
Patrick = Marjory Comyn
Earl of Dunbar I
d. 10 Oct 1308 I
_________________________I____________________
I I I
Patrick = Ermengarde John Alexander
Earl of Dunbar * I
* I
<father of, or identical I
with:> ___________ I
* I I I
Patrick, Earl of = Agnes Isabel = Sir Patrick
Dunbar Randolph Randolph I Dunbar
d. 1368 I
I
____________________I___________
I I I I I
George John Agnes <siblings>
Earl of Earl of = Sir James
Dunbar Moray Douglas
1368-1420 d. 1420
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] J. Ravilious, <Agnes, 1st wife of Sir Patrick Hepburn (d. ca. 1402): a
conjecture>, SGM, 13 Oct 2005, which reads as follows:
Wednesday, 12 October, 2005
Hello All,
In 2003, I had proposed a slight correction to the relationship given
in SP between Sir James de Lindsay and his wife Egidia Stewart [1]. No
further relevant documentation concerning this suggestion has been
found to date, but there is another conjectured relationship which this
proposal supports.
In discussing this and other matters with Andrew B. W. MacEwen, he
noted a conjecture of his own would identify Agnes, first wife of
Sir Patrick Hepburn of Hailes (d. aft 22 June 1402), as either the
daughter or granddaughter of Patrick, Earl of Dunbar (d. aft 25 Jul 1368)
and his wife Agnes Randolph [2]. By coincidence, my suggested solution
for the relationship of Sir James de Lindsay and Egidia Stewart supports
Andrew’s conjecture, if in fact Agnes (1st wife of Sir Patrick de
Hepburn) was a daughter of Earl Patrick and Agnes Randolph.
Sir Patrick de Hepburn was married (2ndly) ca. 1376 to Eleanora
Douglas, widow of (amongst others) Alexander Bruce, Earl of Carrick
(d. 1333) and thereafter known as the ‘Countess of Carrick’. For this
marriage, Sir Patrick and Countess Eleanor received a dispensation based
on affinity, as she and his first wife Agnes were related in the 4th
degree [3]. This relationship has hitherto been unresolved given Agnes’
lack of identified parentage, but Andrew MacEwen’s identification would
provide the following relationship (note: conjectured relationships
indicated _ _ _ _ _ ):
Alexander le Steward = Joanna [not Jean of Bute]
_______________________I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I I
Sir John le Stewart = Margaret NN le Steward
of Bonkil, k. 1298 I de Bonkil I
I I
I I
Thomas Randolph = Isabel Sir Alexander = NN
E of Moray I le Stewart de Lindsay I______
I_______ I
I I
Patrick De Dunbar = Agnes Archibald Douglas = Beatrix
E of Dunbar I Randolph k. 1333 I Lindsay
I_ _ I
I I
(1) Agnes = Sir Patrick = (2) Eleanora
de Hepburn C of Carrick
The foregoing is clearly a composite of conjecture, and needful of
proof. Andrew agreed that the suggested identification of Agnes, and the
relationship as identified between Agnes and Countess Eleanora of
Carrick, could be presented to the list in the hope that one or more list
members might either note relevant documentation in hand or relationships
bearing on the above, or that additional findings of list members would
serve to either confirm or disprove these assertions. If validated, the
ancestry of the Lords Hepburn and their myriad descendants (the Earls of
Bothwell, Prince William, several list members and many more besides)
would be better defined.
To that end, any relevant comment, criticism or documentation will
certainly be appreciated.
Cheers,
John *
[1] SP III:11, citing Papal Letters, iii.225, states
' a papal dispensation for this marriage was granted at Avignon
3 Ides of April 1346, which describes the spouses as within the
third and fourth degree on the father's side, and in the fourth
degree on the mother's.' In my post to SGM of 11 June 2003 entitled
<SP Correction: Sir James de Lindsay and Egidia Stewart>, I stated
in part,
‘ The following more correctly illustrates their relationship
' within the third and fourth degree on the father's side ':
Alexander le Steward = Jean of Bute
_______________________I________________
I I
James le = Egidia (Giles) NN le Steward
Steward I de Burgh I
_________I I
I I
Walter the = 2) Isabel de NN = Sir Alexander
Stewart I Graham I de Lindsay
I ____________I
I I
I Sir David de = Maria
I Lindsay I Abernethy
I __________I
I I
Egidia Stewart = Sir James de Lindsay
The relationship, 'third and fourth degree on the father's side',
actually means in this case that, on their fathers' side the third
degree relationship is that of Egidia Stewart, and therefore the
fourth degree relationship is that of Sir James Lindsay, as shown
above. ‘
[2] Aside from the various issues concerning this Earl Patrick of Dunbar,
discussed on SGM in the past, Andrew MacEwen noted that the Earldom of
Dunbar (or March) was not a male fief, but was rather inheritable by a
direct heir. We know from the SP account for Dunbar that Earl Patrick
resigned the lands and Earldom of March in favor of his cousin
[elsewhere called nephew] George Dunbar, which was confirmed by charters
dated 25 July 1368 [SP III:270]. The resignation has the hallmarks of
transferring the lands and title of the Earldom to a male of the Dunbar
family, with the possible intent (and definite effect) of disinheriting
any direct heir of Earl Patrick. Amongst other evidence, Sir Patrick
Hepburn of Hailes had a notable place in the following of Earl Patrick,
including precedence before George Dunbar in witnessing charters of
the Earl [one such charter was
‘ the charter of Patrick V of Dunbar, Earl of March and Moray confirming
that the monks of Coldingham are to hold Ederham and Nesbit free from all
annual rent, as set out in the charter of Gospatric, Earl, brother of
Dolfin [Misc.Ch. 778] and relaxing his claim for 10/-, one pair of boots
and one skin garment.
Witnesses: Lord Patrick de Hepburn, Lord of Hales, George de Dunbar,
the Earl's cousin, Alexander de Ramsey, Alexander de Rykklynton,
constable of Dunbar, Robert Leche, steward, Richard de Ellam, & many
others.
Confirmed with the assent of Agnes the countess.
At his castle of Dunbar 24 May 1367. ' [Durham University Library
Archives & Special Collections: Misc. Charter 793. Printed: Raine ND
App. CXLII]
Andrew suggests that Agnes, the otherwise unidentified 1st wife of Sir
Patrick de Hepburn, was either the daughter or granddaughter of Earl
Patrick, and his direct heir, which would explain (prior to 1368) the
precedence of Sir Patrick de Hepburn before George Dunbar. Her
(conjectured) disinheritance in favor of George Dunbar would also explain
the hostility found thereafter between the Hepburns and the Earls of
March.
[3] 'Eleonora de Bruys, Comitissa de Carrick', dispensation to marry
Patrick Hepburn, she being related to his 1st wife Agnes in the 4th
degree, April 1376 - see SP, sub Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; the text
of the dispensation is given in Andrew Stuart, Genealogical History
of the Stewarts, pp. 440-1.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Dear John ~
When the marriage of Edward Prince of Wales and Joan of Kent was
originally proposed to the Pope, a petition to the Pope indicated that
Edward and Joan were related in the 3rd degree of consanguinity, just
as you have stated. Later, the real relationship of 3rd and 2nd
degrees of kindred was revealed. We can only speculate as to why
Edward and Joan were initially said to be related in the 3rd degree,
rather than 3rd and 2nd. Surely all parties knew full well the exact
nature of kinship, as did the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. In
the end, I doubt neither set of kinships mattered much, as kings were
used to having their way with Popes about matters of consanguinity in
marriage. Maybe other 2nd and 3rd degrees dispensations can be found,
but I believe this is the only 2nd and 3rd kinship which was dispensed
in the medieval period in England.
With regard to your proposed 2nd and 3rd degree kinship for Elizabeth
de Caldicote and William Livingston, I find this proposal highly
doubtful. Due to the rarity of 2nd-3rd degree dispensations and the
fact that this couple were not of royal birth, I believe you should
examine any likely 3rd-3rd degree kinships before looking for something
which is 2nd and 3rd.
Until the 1434 document is examined, we evidently will not know if
Elizabeth Tweedie was called the "neptem" of James Douglas, living in
1389, or "neptem" of James Douglas, living in 1464. Having stared at
enough of these kinds of documents, it is entirely possible that when
quoting the earlier 1389 document, that the 1434 document stated that
Elizabeth Tweedie was the "neptem" of James Douglas living in 1389, and
that the person making the abstract of the 1434 document failed to make
it clear which James Douglas was intended in the document. Also, I
believe by 1434, the terms "neptem" in England meant niece or
grand-daughter, rather than a non-specific near female kinswoman. The
same may or may not be true for Scotland.
Lastly, if I understand the 1434 document correctly, the implication is
that Elizabeth Tweedie and Richard Brown were married in 1389, whereas
you have indicated that James Douglas and his first wife, Agnes Dunbar,
were married in 1372. If this is true, it is impossible
chronologically for James Douglas to have been Elizabeth Tweedie's
grandfather. Uncle perhaps, but not grandfather.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
John P. Ravilious wrote:
< Saturday, 6 May, 2006
<
<
< Dear Doug,
<
< I am not immediately aware as to whether there are similar
< dispensations for other English 'couples' of the period, but given
< the view as shown in the 1362 dispensation that Prince Edward and
< Joan of Kent were "related in the third degree of kindred" I don't
< know how rare we can say this was. On the Scots end of things, I
< will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
< involve a 2nd degree relationship.
<
< As to the 1434 charter, I have not seen this document to date:
< what I have seen, extracted, is what I have presented. I would
< comment that it would be unusual for James Douglas (d. 1441) to
< issue a charter to a kinswoman (Elizabeth Tweedie) and refer to
< her relationship to his father, and not to himself. To my
< recollection, such references to kinship (outside the witnesses)
< in charters of this period involve relationships between the
< granter and grantee(s). Of course, if the term <nepta> (as
< expressed in "neptem" in the charter) is held to mean "kinswoman"
< as opposed to "niece" [we can exclude the "granddaughter" version
< in this case], then one could argue that Elizabeth Tweedie's
< mother was aunt, not sister, to James Douglas (d. 1441).
<
< Cheers,
<
< John *
When the marriage of Edward Prince of Wales and Joan of Kent was
originally proposed to the Pope, a petition to the Pope indicated that
Edward and Joan were related in the 3rd degree of consanguinity, just
as you have stated. Later, the real relationship of 3rd and 2nd
degrees of kindred was revealed. We can only speculate as to why
Edward and Joan were initially said to be related in the 3rd degree,
rather than 3rd and 2nd. Surely all parties knew full well the exact
nature of kinship, as did the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. In
the end, I doubt neither set of kinships mattered much, as kings were
used to having their way with Popes about matters of consanguinity in
marriage. Maybe other 2nd and 3rd degrees dispensations can be found,
but I believe this is the only 2nd and 3rd kinship which was dispensed
in the medieval period in England.
With regard to your proposed 2nd and 3rd degree kinship for Elizabeth
de Caldicote and William Livingston, I find this proposal highly
doubtful. Due to the rarity of 2nd-3rd degree dispensations and the
fact that this couple were not of royal birth, I believe you should
examine any likely 3rd-3rd degree kinships before looking for something
which is 2nd and 3rd.
Until the 1434 document is examined, we evidently will not know if
Elizabeth Tweedie was called the "neptem" of James Douglas, living in
1389, or "neptem" of James Douglas, living in 1464. Having stared at
enough of these kinds of documents, it is entirely possible that when
quoting the earlier 1389 document, that the 1434 document stated that
Elizabeth Tweedie was the "neptem" of James Douglas living in 1389, and
that the person making the abstract of the 1434 document failed to make
it clear which James Douglas was intended in the document. Also, I
believe by 1434, the terms "neptem" in England meant niece or
grand-daughter, rather than a non-specific near female kinswoman. The
same may or may not be true for Scotland.
Lastly, if I understand the 1434 document correctly, the implication is
that Elizabeth Tweedie and Richard Brown were married in 1389, whereas
you have indicated that James Douglas and his first wife, Agnes Dunbar,
were married in 1372. If this is true, it is impossible
chronologically for James Douglas to have been Elizabeth Tweedie's
grandfather. Uncle perhaps, but not grandfather.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
John P. Ravilious wrote:
< Saturday, 6 May, 2006
<
<
< Dear Doug,
<
< I am not immediately aware as to whether there are similar
< dispensations for other English 'couples' of the period, but given
< the view as shown in the 1362 dispensation that Prince Edward and
< Joan of Kent were "related in the third degree of kindred" I don't
< know how rare we can say this was. On the Scots end of things, I
< will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
< involve a 2nd degree relationship.
<
< As to the 1434 charter, I have not seen this document to date:
< what I have seen, extracted, is what I have presented. I would
< comment that it would be unusual for James Douglas (d. 1441) to
< issue a charter to a kinswoman (Elizabeth Tweedie) and refer to
< her relationship to his father, and not to himself. To my
< recollection, such references to kinship (outside the witnesses)
< in charters of this period involve relationships between the
< granter and grantee(s). Of course, if the term <nepta> (as
< expressed in "neptem" in the charter) is held to mean "kinswoman"
< as opposed to "niece" [we can exclude the "granddaughter" version
< in this case], then one could argue that Elizabeth Tweedie's
< mother was aunt, not sister, to James Douglas (d. 1441).
<
< Cheers,
<
< John *
-
Gjest
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
Dear John,
George Dunbar, Earl of Dunbar and March and Jure uxor Earl
of Moray was a cousin as you stated of Patrick, Earl of March who married
Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray and as the son of Agnes` sister Isabel Randolph
and Sir Patrick Dunbar was further his nephew.
Source Frank Adam 'The Clans Septs and Regiments of the Scottish
Highlands p 214
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
George Dunbar, Earl of Dunbar and March and Jure uxor Earl
of Moray was a cousin as you stated of Patrick, Earl of March who married
Agnes Randolph, Countess of Moray and as the son of Agnes` sister Isabel Randolph
and Sir Patrick Dunbar was further his nephew.
Source Frank Adam 'The Clans Septs and Regiments of the Scottish
Highlands p 214
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
In message of 6 May, Therav3@aol.com wrote:
CP, IV pp. 506-8 agrees with this except that it does not insert an
extra Patrick Dunbar between Patrick who d. 1308 and Patrick who d.
1368. Those Dunbars are shown by CP, and SP, to be long lived.
The difference between SP (vol 3, pp. 257-273) and CP is primarily that
SP has Alexander as the son of the father of the Patrick who died in
1308. SP states that Alexander was the third of the brothers named in
a compact between Patrick Dunbar who died in 1289, his three sons and
the Stewarts and Macdonalds, which compact was signed at Turnberry in
1286. CP provides no evidence to show that Alexander belonged to a
later generation. SP states that its information on the Turnberry
compact comes from Stevenson's "Historical Documents", vol I, pp. 22-3.
Is there any evidence to refute this information about the Turnberry
compact? (Or it could be that the compact has vanished into thin air.)
There are no relevant corrections in Vol 9 of SP, Vol XIV of CP nor on
Chris Phillips's CP Corrigenda site at:
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cp/index.shtml
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
The best pedigree I can produce for the Earls of Dunbar, based on what
is known, clearly does not agree with the SP version, but does (with
the caveat concerning the ‘two Earls Patrick’ conundrum) agree with
Andrew MacEwen’s view at present:
Patrick = Marjory Comyn
Earl of Dunbar I
d. 10 Oct 1308 I
_________________________I____________________
I I I
Patrick = Ermengarde John Alexander
Earl of Dunbar * I
* I
father of, or identical I
with:> ___________ I
* I I I
Patrick, Earl of = Agnes Isabel = Sir Patrick
Dunbar Randolph Randolph I Dunbar
d. 1368 I
I
____________________I___________
I I I I I
George John Agnes <siblings
Earl of Earl of = Sir James
Dunbar Moray Douglas
1368-1420 d. 1420
CP, IV pp. 506-8 agrees with this except that it does not insert an
extra Patrick Dunbar between Patrick who d. 1308 and Patrick who d.
1368. Those Dunbars are shown by CP, and SP, to be long lived.
The difference between SP (vol 3, pp. 257-273) and CP is primarily that
SP has Alexander as the son of the father of the Patrick who died in
1308. SP states that Alexander was the third of the brothers named in
a compact between Patrick Dunbar who died in 1289, his three sons and
the Stewarts and Macdonalds, which compact was signed at Turnberry in
1286. CP provides no evidence to show that Alexander belonged to a
later generation. SP states that its information on the Turnberry
compact comes from Stevenson's "Historical Documents", vol I, pp. 22-3.
Is there any evidence to refute this information about the Turnberry
compact? (Or it could be that the compact has vanished into thin air.)
There are no relevant corrections in Vol 9 of SP, Vol XIV of CP nor on
Chris Phillips's CP Corrigenda site at:
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cp/index.shtml
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
In a message dated 5/6/2006 6:09:06 AM Pacific Standard Time,
therav3@aol.com writes:
On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
I already mentioned one, in the descent of the Earldom of Moray (Murray),
which is why Alexander, from the first marriage, is said not to have inherited
and instead it passed to the husband of one of the daughters by the second
marriage.
I had to adjust some of the chronology which didn't work, and still I don't
like it entirely, but it's there.
Will
therav3@aol.com writes:
On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
I already mentioned one, in the descent of the Earldom of Moray (Murray),
which is why Alexander, from the first marriage, is said not to have inherited
and instead it passed to the husband of one of the daughters by the second
marriage.
I had to adjust some of the chronology which didn't work, and still I don't
like it entirely, but it's there.
Will
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
In a message dated 5/6/2006 6:09:06 AM Pacific Standard Time,
therav3@aol.com writes:
On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
Please review the contents of this link
_http://www.jjhc.info/dunbarjames1442.htm_
(http://www.jjhc.info/dunbarjames1442.htm)
I tried to put the people in the positions they are stating, but the
chronology seems awfully short, and some primary documentation would be useful.
Will Johnson
therav3@aol.com writes:
On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
Please review the contents of this link
_http://www.jjhc.info/dunbarjames1442.htm_
(http://www.jjhc.info/dunbarjames1442.htm)
I tried to put the people in the positions they are stating, but the
chronology seems awfully short, and some primary documentation would be useful.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Agnes Dunbar again
Saturday, 6 March, 2006
Dear Tim,
The "Turnberry Band" of 1286 to which you refer was an
agreement between several Scots lords, Richard de Burgh, earl
of Ulster and Sir Thomas de Clare, which had a more mundane
basis than that attributed by subsequent nationalist (pro-Bruce)
writers. Among the parties to the agreement of 20 September
1286 were Patrick, Earl of Dunbar, and his sons Patrick, John,
and Alexander [1]. On that date, we know that Earl Patrick was
aged 72 or more [2], and his eldest son Patrick was aged 43 or
more [3]. We would reasonably place his third (known) son
Alexander as being most likely aged say 30 and 40 on that
date: this would yield a range for his birthdate between say
1246 and 1256.
George Dunbar, Earl of March (d. 1420) has been assigned
a birth date of 1340, although I have seen "circa 1336" as
well [4]. Following on the Scots Peerage version of the Dunbar
pedigree [SP III:257-273], using the earliest birthdate for
Alexander Dunbar above (say 1246) would yield 90 years (1336
less 1246), an average generational range of 45 years per
generation from Alexander as alleged grandfather to George as
alleged grandson. The later theoretical date of 1256 would
yield 80 years (1336 less 1256), an average generational range
of 40 years per generation from this Alexander to George Dunbar.
If these ranges of 90 to 80 years involved 3 generations from
Alexander to George Dunbar, the average generational ranges
would be between say 30 years (90/3) and 26.7 years (80/3),
slightly on the 'high side' of what we would expect.
Even the 'long-living' senior line of the Earls of Dunbar
display, over different 2-generation sequences, average
generational ranges of 30.5 years [5], 28.5 years [6] and say
31 years [7]. These are sequences from eldest known son to
eldest known son, which are among the shorter sequences we
would expect to see in any given family: so to, from
Alexander Dunbar to his grandson Earl George (fl.
1336/1340 - 1420), we have a sequence of eldest known son to
eldest known son, so we might reasonably expect a shorter
sequence, not a longer one. Something appears to be amiss.
The simplest explanation, given the evident chronological
unlikelihood shown above: there was an Alexander Dunbar,
younger son of Earl Patrick (fl. 1242-1308) and his wife
Marjory Comyn, who was the 'Lord Alexander, son of the Earl
of Dunbar' named in his son Sir Patrick Dunbar's charter [8],
as shown in my earlier reconstruction of the Dunbar pedigree.
The attribution of George Dunbar's grandfather as being
identical to the Alexander of the 1286 concord at Turnberry
is an unfortunate conflation of 'the name's the same' variety.
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] 'Patricius comes de Dunbar', together with his sons, entered
into a bond with Robert de Brus, Walter, earl of Menteith and
others at Turnberry, 20 Sept 1286 'to adhere to the party of
Richard de Burgh, earl of Ulster and Sir Thomas de Clare '
[Red Book of Menteith II: 219-220, citing Historical Docs.
Scotland, i:22 ].
[2] Patrick (d. 24 Aug 1289) was aged 35 upon succeeding to the
Earldom [SP III:257] and to father's lands in England, 13 Dec
1248 [CP IV:565].
[3] Patrick (d. 10 Oct 1308) was aged 47 at his father's IPM in
1289 [CP IV:506].
[4] See Leo van de Pas' website, http://www.genealogics.org
The ID number for George Dunbar is I00164961.
[5] From Patrick (fl. 1152-1232) to his grandson Patrick (fl.
1213-1289), we have a span of say 61 years, an average of
30.5 years per generation.
[6] From Patrick (fl. ca. 1185-1248) to his grandson Patrick
(fl. 1242-1308), a span of say 57 years, an average of
28.5 years per generation.
[7] From Patrick (fl. 1213-1289) to his grandson Patrick
(fl. ca. 1275, or ca. 1285, to - allegedly - 1368), a
span of between 62 and 72 years, an average of between
31 and 36 years per generation. In my next message (in
another thread), I will show why the birthdate of ca. 1285,
and generational range of say 36 years, are both evidently
in error.
[8] ' Charter of Patrick de Dunbar, son of Lord Alexander, son
of the Earl of Dunbar, granting and quitclaiming in the
Prior's court at Ayton, on Wednesday after the Feast of St
John the Baptist, to Adam de Pontefract, Prior, and the
Convent of Coldingham, ½ carrucate of land in Swinewood,
which he bought from Thomas, son of Ralph.
Witnesses: Lord Robert de Lawedre, Justiciar of Lothian,
Robert de Lawedre his son, sheriff, Henry de Prendergest,
Hugh Giffard, John de Rayngton, Henry de Swinton, Gilbert
de Lumsden, Roger de Lumsden, John de Paxton , and many
others
Given at Lower Ayton Wednesday after the Feast of St John
Baptist [26 June or 4 September] 1331 ' [Durham University
Library Archives & Special Collections: Misc. Charter 1038
{Seal: G&B 2811. Attached by parchment strip through foot of
document. Printed: Raine ND App. CCCCXXXII}]
* John P. Ravilious
Dear Tim,
The "Turnberry Band" of 1286 to which you refer was an
agreement between several Scots lords, Richard de Burgh, earl
of Ulster and Sir Thomas de Clare, which had a more mundane
basis than that attributed by subsequent nationalist (pro-Bruce)
writers. Among the parties to the agreement of 20 September
1286 were Patrick, Earl of Dunbar, and his sons Patrick, John,
and Alexander [1]. On that date, we know that Earl Patrick was
aged 72 or more [2], and his eldest son Patrick was aged 43 or
more [3]. We would reasonably place his third (known) son
Alexander as being most likely aged say 30 and 40 on that
date: this would yield a range for his birthdate between say
1246 and 1256.
George Dunbar, Earl of March (d. 1420) has been assigned
a birth date of 1340, although I have seen "circa 1336" as
well [4]. Following on the Scots Peerage version of the Dunbar
pedigree [SP III:257-273], using the earliest birthdate for
Alexander Dunbar above (say 1246) would yield 90 years (1336
less 1246), an average generational range of 45 years per
generation from Alexander as alleged grandfather to George as
alleged grandson. The later theoretical date of 1256 would
yield 80 years (1336 less 1256), an average generational range
of 40 years per generation from this Alexander to George Dunbar.
If these ranges of 90 to 80 years involved 3 generations from
Alexander to George Dunbar, the average generational ranges
would be between say 30 years (90/3) and 26.7 years (80/3),
slightly on the 'high side' of what we would expect.
Even the 'long-living' senior line of the Earls of Dunbar
display, over different 2-generation sequences, average
generational ranges of 30.5 years [5], 28.5 years [6] and say
31 years [7]. These are sequences from eldest known son to
eldest known son, which are among the shorter sequences we
would expect to see in any given family: so to, from
Alexander Dunbar to his grandson Earl George (fl.
1336/1340 - 1420), we have a sequence of eldest known son to
eldest known son, so we might reasonably expect a shorter
sequence, not a longer one. Something appears to be amiss.
The simplest explanation, given the evident chronological
unlikelihood shown above: there was an Alexander Dunbar,
younger son of Earl Patrick (fl. 1242-1308) and his wife
Marjory Comyn, who was the 'Lord Alexander, son of the Earl
of Dunbar' named in his son Sir Patrick Dunbar's charter [8],
as shown in my earlier reconstruction of the Dunbar pedigree.
The attribution of George Dunbar's grandfather as being
identical to the Alexander of the 1286 concord at Turnberry
is an unfortunate conflation of 'the name's the same' variety.
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] 'Patricius comes de Dunbar', together with his sons, entered
into a bond with Robert de Brus, Walter, earl of Menteith and
others at Turnberry, 20 Sept 1286 'to adhere to the party of
Richard de Burgh, earl of Ulster and Sir Thomas de Clare '
[Red Book of Menteith II: 219-220, citing Historical Docs.
Scotland, i:22 ].
[2] Patrick (d. 24 Aug 1289) was aged 35 upon succeeding to the
Earldom [SP III:257] and to father's lands in England, 13 Dec
1248 [CP IV:565].
[3] Patrick (d. 10 Oct 1308) was aged 47 at his father's IPM in
1289 [CP IV:506].
[4] See Leo van de Pas' website, http://www.genealogics.org
The ID number for George Dunbar is I00164961.
[5] From Patrick (fl. 1152-1232) to his grandson Patrick (fl.
1213-1289), we have a span of say 61 years, an average of
30.5 years per generation.
[6] From Patrick (fl. ca. 1185-1248) to his grandson Patrick
(fl. 1242-1308), a span of say 57 years, an average of
28.5 years per generation.
[7] From Patrick (fl. 1213-1289) to his grandson Patrick
(fl. ca. 1275, or ca. 1285, to - allegedly - 1368), a
span of between 62 and 72 years, an average of between
31 and 36 years per generation. In my next message (in
another thread), I will show why the birthdate of ca. 1285,
and generational range of say 36 years, are both evidently
in error.
[8] ' Charter of Patrick de Dunbar, son of Lord Alexander, son
of the Earl of Dunbar, granting and quitclaiming in the
Prior's court at Ayton, on Wednesday after the Feast of St
John the Baptist, to Adam de Pontefract, Prior, and the
Convent of Coldingham, ½ carrucate of land in Swinewood,
which he bought from Thomas, son of Ralph.
Witnesses: Lord Robert de Lawedre, Justiciar of Lothian,
Robert de Lawedre his son, sheriff, Henry de Prendergest,
Hugh Giffard, John de Rayngton, Henry de Swinton, Gilbert
de Lumsden, Roger de Lumsden, John de Paxton , and many
others
Given at Lower Ayton Wednesday after the Feast of St John
Baptist [26 June or 4 September] 1331 ' [Durham University
Library Archives & Special Collections: Misc. Charter 1038
{Seal: G&B 2811. Attached by parchment strip through foot of
document. Printed: Raine ND App. CCCCXXXII}]
* John P. Ravilious
-
Hal Bradley
Re: Document relating to Judith (Knapp) Hubbard's ancestors
Douglas,
Thank you for the heads up on the ipm. The A2A record you provided fits well, as Margery (Aspale) Felbrigg died ca. 1419.
The April 2006 NEHG Register provides the documentation for the line from John Stratton, husband of Anne Derehaugh, back to John Felbrigg. John was the son of Sir George Felbrigg and his wife Margery Aspale.
It will be a while before I can get to the library to check whether Sir John Aspale left a will or if there was an ipm. Unless you happen to know? Thanks.
Hal Bradley
Thank you for the heads up on the ipm. The A2A record you provided fits well, as Margery (Aspale) Felbrigg died ca. 1419.
The April 2006 NEHG Register provides the documentation for the line from John Stratton, husband of Anne Derehaugh, back to John Felbrigg. John was the son of Sir George Felbrigg and his wife Margery Aspale.
It will be a while before I can get to the library to check whether Sir John Aspale left a will or if there was an ipm. Unless you happen to know? Thanks.
Hal Bradley
Dear Hal ~
Thank you for your post. It's always good to hear from you.
I'm not familiar with your ancestress, Margery Aspale, wife of George
de Felbrigge, Knt. She could well be a daughter of Sir John de Aspale
(living 1365), but if so, she was definitely not a child of his
surviving wife, Katherine Pecche. The 1406 inquisition post mortem of
Katherine (Pecche) (de Aspale) Notbeme indicates that Katherine was
survived by two daughters and co-heirs, Mirabel Aspale (wife of William
Geddyng) and Margaret Notbeme (wife of John Hynklegh). The first born
daughter, Mirabel Aspale, is ancestral to the immigrant, Judith (Knapp)
Hubbard. The second born daughter, Margaret Notbeme, is ancestral to
the immigrant, Jane (Lawrence) Giddings.
All the same, below is a record from the A2A Catalogue dated 1419
involving Lady Margery Felbrigge, who I presume is your ancestress.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: A2A Catalogue (http://www.a2a.org.uk/search/index.asp)
Norfolk Record Office: Hare Family, Baronets of Stow Bardolph
Reference: Hare 5958 227 x 3
Charter - Attornment
Creation dates: 26 July 1419
Physical characteristics: Seal, armorial
Scope and Content
John Tendrynge, Esq. transfer of allegiance from Dame Margery Felbrigge
to William Clopton, James Andrewe, William Lampet and Andrew Bird,
chaplain
For his lands and tenements in Sprouton held of the manor of Sprouton
Wed. after St.James 7 Hy V
"Hal Bradley" wrote:
Douglas,
snip
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
CP enlargement (was Re: Agnes Dunbar again)
In message of 7 May, Therav3@aol.com wrote:
Thanks for that explanation of why SP is almost certainly wrong and CP
almost certainly right. Perhaps a minor addition is needed to CP to
account for the placing?
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Saturday, 6 March, 2006
Dear Tim,
The "Turnberry Band" of 1286 to which you refer was an
agreement between several Scots lords, Richard de Burgh, earl
of Ulster and Sir Thomas de Clare, which had a more mundane
basis than that attributed by subsequent nationalist (pro-Bruce)
writers. Among the parties to the agreement of 20 September
1286 were Patrick, Earl of Dunbar, and his sons Patrick, John,
and Alexander [1]. On that date, we know that Earl Patrick was
aged 72 or more [2], and his eldest son Patrick was aged 43 or
more [3]. We would reasonably place his third (known) son
Alexander as being most likely aged say 30 and 40 on that
date: this would yield a range for his birthdate between say
1246 and 1256.
George Dunbar, Earl of March (d. 1420) has been assigned
a birth date of 1340, although I have seen "circa 1336" as
well [4]. Following on the Scots Peerage version of the Dunbar
pedigree [SP III:257-273], using the earliest birthdate for
Alexander Dunbar above (say 1246) would yield 90 years (1336
less 1246), an average generational range of 45 years per
generation from Alexander as alleged grandfather to George as
alleged grandson. The later theoretical date of 1256 would
yield 80 years (1336 less 1256), an average generational range
of 40 years per generation from this Alexander to George Dunbar.
If these ranges of 90 to 80 years involved 3 generations from
Alexander to George Dunbar, the average generational ranges
would be between say 30 years (90/3) and 26.7 years (80/3),
slightly on the 'high side' of what we would expect.
Even the 'long-living' senior line of the Earls of Dunbar
display, over different 2-generation sequences, average
generational ranges of 30.5 years [5], 28.5 years [6] and say
31 years [7]. These are sequences from eldest known son to
eldest known son, which are among the shorter sequences we
would expect to see in any given family: so to, from
Alexander Dunbar to his grandson Earl George (fl.
1336/1340 - 1420), we have a sequence of eldest known son to
eldest known son, so we might reasonably expect a shorter
sequence, not a longer one. Something appears to be amiss.
The simplest explanation, given the evident chronological
unlikelihood shown above: there was an Alexander Dunbar,
younger son of Earl Patrick (fl. 1242-1308) and his wife
Marjory Comyn, who was the 'Lord Alexander, son of the Earl
of Dunbar' named in his son Sir Patrick Dunbar's charter [8],
as shown in my earlier reconstruction of the Dunbar pedigree.
The attribution of George Dunbar's grandfather as being
identical to the Alexander of the 1286 concord at Turnberry
is an unfortunate conflation of 'the name's the same' variety.
Thanks for that explanation of why SP is almost certainly wrong and CP
almost certainly right. Perhaps a minor addition is needed to CP to
account for the placing?
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: Ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Dear Newsgroup ~
I spoke with Andrew MacEwen yesterday, the resident expert on all
things Scottish. We discussed various issues relating to John
Ravilious' proposed 2nd & 3rd kinship between Elizabeth de Caldicote
and William Livingston. He said he wasn't familiar with the Tweedie
family per se, but he did offer these comments.
First, he said the original 1434 charter issued by James Douglas, 2nd
lord of Dalkeith, would need to be examined before anything conclusive
could be made of it.
Second, Andrew confirmed that dispensations for 2nd & 3rd degree
kinships in Scotland were exceedingly rare. He said he only knew of
two Scottish women in the medieval period who received such
dispensations, both of whom were major heiresses. The first was
Eupheme Sterwart, Countess of Strathearn, who obtained successive
dispensations to marry Albany half-brothers to whom she was related by
kindred in the 2nd and 3rd degrees and by affinity in the 3rd and 4th
degrees. Neither marriage took place. The 2nd woman was Margaret
Douglas (living 1473), "the Fair Maid of Galloway," who was wife
successively of William Douglas, 8th Earl of Douglas (died 1451), James
Douglas, 9th Earl of Douglas, and John Stewart, 1st Earl of Atholl.
Next, Andrew stated that he believed the "neptem" meant niece or
grand-daughter after 1400 in Scotland, but he wouldn't guarantee that
it didn't still mean kinswoman. I would say the same thing for
England.
Lastly, Andrew said there are two testaments for James Douglas, of
Dalkeith (died 1420) which are found in the book, Registrum Honoris de
Morton. He recommended that John Ravilious examine them for any
references to the Tweedie family.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
Douglas Richardson wrote:
I spoke with Andrew MacEwen yesterday, the resident expert on all
things Scottish. We discussed various issues relating to John
Ravilious' proposed 2nd & 3rd kinship between Elizabeth de Caldicote
and William Livingston. He said he wasn't familiar with the Tweedie
family per se, but he did offer these comments.
First, he said the original 1434 charter issued by James Douglas, 2nd
lord of Dalkeith, would need to be examined before anything conclusive
could be made of it.
Second, Andrew confirmed that dispensations for 2nd & 3rd degree
kinships in Scotland were exceedingly rare. He said he only knew of
two Scottish women in the medieval period who received such
dispensations, both of whom were major heiresses. The first was
Eupheme Sterwart, Countess of Strathearn, who obtained successive
dispensations to marry Albany half-brothers to whom she was related by
kindred in the 2nd and 3rd degrees and by affinity in the 3rd and 4th
degrees. Neither marriage took place. The 2nd woman was Margaret
Douglas (living 1473), "the Fair Maid of Galloway," who was wife
successively of William Douglas, 8th Earl of Douglas (died 1451), James
Douglas, 9th Earl of Douglas, and John Stewart, 1st Earl of Atholl.
Next, Andrew stated that he believed the "neptem" meant niece or
grand-daughter after 1400 in Scotland, but he wouldn't guarantee that
it didn't still mean kinswoman. I would say the same thing for
England.
Lastly, Andrew said there are two testaments for James Douglas, of
Dalkeith (died 1420) which are found in the book, Registrum Honoris de
Morton. He recommended that John Ravilious examine them for any
references to the Tweedie family.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Dear John ~
When the marriage of Edward Prince of Wales and Joan of Kent was
originally proposed to the Pope, a petition to the Pope indicated that
Edward and Joan were related in the 3rd degree of consanguinity, just
as you have stated. Later, the real relationship of 3rd and 2nd
degrees of kindred was revealed. We can only speculate as to why
Edward and Joan were initially said to be related in the 3rd degree,
rather than 3rd and 2nd. Surely all parties knew full well the exact
nature of kinship, as did the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. In
the end, I doubt neither set of kinships mattered much, as kings were
used to having their way with Popes about matters of consanguinity in
marriage. Maybe other 2nd and 3rd degrees dispensations can be found,
but I believe this is the only 2nd and 3rd kinship which was dispensed
in the medieval period in England.
With regard to your proposed 2nd and 3rd degree kinship for Elizabeth
de Caldicote and William Livingston, I find this proposal highly
doubtful. Due to the rarity of 2nd-3rd degree dispensations and the
fact that this couple were not of royal birth, I believe you should
examine any likely 3rd-3rd degree kinships before looking for something
which is 2nd and 3rd.
Until the 1434 document is examined, we evidently will not know if
Elizabeth Tweedie was called the "neptem" of James Douglas, living in
1389, or "neptem" of James Douglas, living in 1464. Having stared at
enough of these kinds of documents, it is entirely possible that when
quoting the earlier 1389 document, that the 1434 document stated that
Elizabeth Tweedie was the "neptem" of James Douglas living in 1389, and
that the person making the abstract of the 1434 document failed to make
it clear which James Douglas was intended in the document. Also, I
believe by 1434, the terms "neptem" in England meant niece or
grand-daughter, rather than a non-specific near female kinswoman. The
same may or may not be true for Scotland.
Lastly, if I understand the 1434 document correctly, the implication is
that Elizabeth Tweedie and Richard Brown were married in 1389, whereas
you have indicated that James Douglas and his first wife, Agnes Dunbar,
were married in 1372. If this is true, it is impossible
chronologically for James Douglas to have been Elizabeth Tweedie's
grandfather. Uncle perhaps, but not grandfather.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
John P. Ravilious wrote:
Saturday, 6 May, 2006
Dear Doug,
I am not immediately aware as to whether there are similar
dispensations for other English 'couples' of the period, but given
the view as shown in the 1362 dispensation that Prince Edward and
Joan of Kent were "related in the third degree of kindred" I don't
know how rare we can say this was. On the Scots end of things, I
will look and see what other relationships I can identify that
involve a 2nd degree relationship.
As to the 1434 charter, I have not seen this document to date:
what I have seen, extracted, is what I have presented. I would
comment that it would be unusual for James Douglas (d. 1441) to
issue a charter to a kinswoman (Elizabeth Tweedie) and refer to
her relationship to his father, and not to himself. To my
recollection, such references to kinship (outside the witnesses)
in charters of this period involve relationships between the
granter and grantee(s). Of course, if the term <nepta> (as
expressed in "neptem" in the charter) is held to mean "kinswoman"
as opposed to "niece" [we can exclude the "granddaughter" version
in this case], then one could argue that Elizabeth Tweedie's
mother was aunt, not sister, to James Douglas (d. 1441).
Cheers,
John *
-
Gjest
Re: Elizabeth Cecil / William Wentworth
In a message dated 5/6/2006 1:15:35 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
A noble aim, but how can you ever hope to prove such a thing? The
evidence simply isn't there in many, many case.
That's not to say I doubt your premise: except for a few cases, I
suspect it is likely to be true.
My "degrees" isn't the same as that to which you're referring.
For example, your brother-in-law's brother-in-law you would say stand in no
"degree" relationship to yourself. However in my system, he would be four
degrees distant.
My atomic (lowest) elements are parent, child, sibling, spouse. Each of
these it one "degree" away from the starting person. Then you simply repeat
that for each succeeding ring of relationships.
So the spouse (hopefully ex-spouse) of your spouse is two degrees from you.
The grandmother of your half-sister is three degrees away.
Without additional intermarriages, your eighth cousin is 10 degrees away,
however what I actually find, is, with enough research, you can find a marriage
to bridge this and make the relationship much closer.
Perhaps a better word would be "steps" instead of degrees to avoid confusion.
Will Johnson
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
A noble aim, but how can you ever hope to prove such a thing? The
evidence simply isn't there in many, many case.
That's not to say I doubt your premise: except for a few cases, I
suspect it is likely to be true.
My "degrees" isn't the same as that to which you're referring.
For example, your brother-in-law's brother-in-law you would say stand in no
"degree" relationship to yourself. However in my system, he would be four
degrees distant.
My atomic (lowest) elements are parent, child, sibling, spouse. Each of
these it one "degree" away from the starting person. Then you simply repeat
that for each succeeding ring of relationships.
So the spouse (hopefully ex-spouse) of your spouse is two degrees from you.
The grandmother of your half-sister is three degrees away.
Without additional intermarriages, your eighth cousin is 10 degrees away,
however what I actually find, is, with enough research, you can find a marriage
to bridge this and make the relationship much closer.
Perhaps a better word would be "steps" instead of degrees to avoid confusion.
Will Johnson
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
Dear John ~
I've been studying your conjectured Caldicote-Tweedy-Douglas
connection. I find that there are several problems.
First, you've identified Elizabeth de Caldicote's mother as Christian
de Tweedy. You say Christian was "evidently" her mother but you cite
no evidence to support this statement, other than Christian bore the
same married surname as Elizabeth's birth name. While it may well be
true that Elizabeth was Christian's daughter, I believe you need
additional evidence to support this connection besides the surnames are
the same.
Second, Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, appears to have been a
widow in 1425, as indicated by the reference from Stevenson's Scottish
Heraldic Seals, which you quote. As stated above, you have placed
Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William de Livingston, who were
dispensed to marry in 1421 as Christian's daughter. This chronology
seems reasonable enough to me.
Stevenson states that Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, was the
daughter of "Walter Twedy." He gives no source for this statement, but
it may well come from Laing, ii. 158, which he cites as a source.
Assuming that Stevenson is correct, then we may posit that Walter de
Tweedy may have been the maternal grandfather of Elizabeth de
Caldicote.
The Walter de Tweedy in question was surely the Walter de Tweedy of
Drummelzier, who was Sheriff of Peebleshire in 1373, and who was named
in proceedings in Exchequer Rolls in 1388. This information comes from
the website, http://www.tweedie.org/twe_earl.htm, which in turn cites
Original Tweedie Charters and Writs.
I. Walter de Tweedy, born say 1330/5, occurs 1373-1388.
II. Christian de Tweedy, born say 1370, living 1425, married William de
Caldicote.
III. Elizabeth de Caldicote, born say 1405, dispensed to marry in 1421
William de Livingston.
If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas.
Next, you have mentioned a 1434 charter in which James Douglas the
younger, 2nd Lord of Dalkeith, refers to an Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife
of Richard Brown, as his "neptem" (presumably niece or granddaughter
intended). This charter does not state Elizabeth de Tweedy's
parentage. You have placed Elizabeth de Tweedy as a full sister to
Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldicote, but I don't see why
you have done this. Elizabeth de Tweedy was almost certainly a
granddaughter, not daughter of Walter de Tweedy above. In fact, she
could easily have been a great-granddaughter. And, if Elizabeth de
Tweedy was married in 1434 (which I suspect is the case), it seems
impossible that she would be the sister of Christian de Tweedy, wife of
William de Caldicote, who was an aged widow in 1425.
If so, the connection between the Tweedy and Douglas families indicated
by the 1434 charter would have come at least a generation too late to
figure in the ancestry of your Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William
de Livingston. Thus, another explanation must be found to explain the
3rd degree of kinship which existed between Elizabeth de Caldicote and
William de Livingston.
Lastly, I believe there were two successive men named Walter de Tweedy.
The first one was active in the period, 1373-1388. The second Walter
de Tweedy occurs in a record in 1434, with his son and heir apparent,
James, which James was dispensed to marry in 1420. For reasons not
known to me, the Tweedie website collapses the two Walter's into one
person. The Walter who was Sheriff in 1373 would surely not be the
same person who was Walter with a son and heir, James, which James
married in 1420.
I would think that Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown, was a
daughter of the younger Walter de Tweedy, of Drummelzier, living 1434,
by his wife, _____, daughter of James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith (died
1420). Elizabeth de Tweedy's brother, James de Tweedy, would have thus
been named for his maternal grandfather, James Douglas.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
I've been studying your conjectured Caldicote-Tweedy-Douglas
connection. I find that there are several problems.
First, you've identified Elizabeth de Caldicote's mother as Christian
de Tweedy. You say Christian was "evidently" her mother but you cite
no evidence to support this statement, other than Christian bore the
same married surname as Elizabeth's birth name. While it may well be
true that Elizabeth was Christian's daughter, I believe you need
additional evidence to support this connection besides the surnames are
the same.
Second, Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, appears to have been a
widow in 1425, as indicated by the reference from Stevenson's Scottish
Heraldic Seals, which you quote. As stated above, you have placed
Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William de Livingston, who were
dispensed to marry in 1421 as Christian's daughter. This chronology
seems reasonable enough to me.
Stevenson states that Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, was the
daughter of "Walter Twedy." He gives no source for this statement, but
it may well come from Laing, ii. 158, which he cites as a source.
Assuming that Stevenson is correct, then we may posit that Walter de
Tweedy may have been the maternal grandfather of Elizabeth de
Caldicote.
The Walter de Tweedy in question was surely the Walter de Tweedy of
Drummelzier, who was Sheriff of Peebleshire in 1373, and who was named
in proceedings in Exchequer Rolls in 1388. This information comes from
the website, http://www.tweedie.org/twe_earl.htm, which in turn cites
Original Tweedie Charters and Writs.
From this information, we might generate the following pedigree:
I. Walter de Tweedy, born say 1330/5, occurs 1373-1388.
II. Christian de Tweedy, born say 1370, living 1425, married William de
Caldicote.
III. Elizabeth de Caldicote, born say 1405, dispensed to marry in 1421
William de Livingston.
If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas.
Next, you have mentioned a 1434 charter in which James Douglas the
younger, 2nd Lord of Dalkeith, refers to an Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife
of Richard Brown, as his "neptem" (presumably niece or granddaughter
intended). This charter does not state Elizabeth de Tweedy's
parentage. You have placed Elizabeth de Tweedy as a full sister to
Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldicote, but I don't see why
you have done this. Elizabeth de Tweedy was almost certainly a
granddaughter, not daughter of Walter de Tweedy above. In fact, she
could easily have been a great-granddaughter. And, if Elizabeth de
Tweedy was married in 1434 (which I suspect is the case), it seems
impossible that she would be the sister of Christian de Tweedy, wife of
William de Caldicote, who was an aged widow in 1425.
If so, the connection between the Tweedy and Douglas families indicated
by the 1434 charter would have come at least a generation too late to
figure in the ancestry of your Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William
de Livingston. Thus, another explanation must be found to explain the
3rd degree of kinship which existed between Elizabeth de Caldicote and
William de Livingston.
Lastly, I believe there were two successive men named Walter de Tweedy.
The first one was active in the period, 1373-1388. The second Walter
de Tweedy occurs in a record in 1434, with his son and heir apparent,
James, which James was dispensed to marry in 1420. For reasons not
known to me, the Tweedie website collapses the two Walter's into one
person. The Walter who was Sheriff in 1373 would surely not be the
same person who was Walter with a son and heir, James, which James
married in 1420.
I would think that Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown, was a
daughter of the younger Walter de Tweedy, of Drummelzier, living 1434,
by his wife, _____, daughter of James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith (died
1420). Elizabeth de Tweedy's brother, James de Tweedy, would have thus
been named for his maternal grandfather, James Douglas.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
-
Renia
Re: ancestry.com
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I'm a one-namer. I pay less than that for the whole kaboosh (I think).
For me, it's worth it. And there's all sorts of medieval stuff on it.
I have finally taken the plunge.
For years I've been adding bits and pieces of ancestry subscriptions,
starting at the easy $50 range, and gradually upgrading.
Now I've renewed for the full boat, "World Deluxe" which is every record they
have, everywhere, everything, everyoneOf course the price is about $300
a year.
Ask me in a month if it's worth it.
I'm a one-namer. I pay less than that for the whole kaboosh (I think).
For me, it's worth it. And there's all sorts of medieval stuff on it.
-
Gjest
Re: CP Correction: Patrick, Earl of Dunbar - "b. about 1285"
In a message dated 5/6/06 7:15:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, therav3@aol.com
writes:
<< There is no support for the statement that this Earl Patrick was
born in, or about, 1285; and every reason to infer his being aged
say 21 (slightly younger, possibly, but even more likely, slightly
older) at the date of the letter in the Close Rolls of 1297. >>
The support is that CP says he was "Aged 24 in 1308/9 having had livery of
his father's lands 10 Nov 1308"
If we can demolish that age, that might be the last pin in this pinned
together garment.
Will Johnson
writes:
<< There is no support for the statement that this Earl Patrick was
born in, or about, 1285; and every reason to infer his being aged
say 21 (slightly younger, possibly, but even more likely, slightly
older) at the date of the letter in the Close Rolls of 1297. >>
The support is that CP says he was "Aged 24 in 1308/9 having had livery of
his father's lands 10 Nov 1308"
If we can demolish that age, that might be the last pin in this pinned
together garment.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: ancestry.com
I have finally taken the plunge.
For years I've been adding bits and pieces of ancestry subscriptions,
starting at the easy $50 range, and gradually upgrading.
Now I've renewed for the full boat, "World Deluxe" which is every record they
have, everywhere, everything, everyone
Of course the price is about $300
a year.
Ask me in a month if it's worth it.
Will Johnson
For years I've been adding bits and pieces of ancestry subscriptions,
starting at the easy $50 range, and gradually upgrading.
Now I've renewed for the full boat, "World Deluxe" which is every record they
have, everywhere, everything, everyone
a year.
Ask me in a month if it's worth it.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcote (and Livi
In a message dated 5/8/06 10:54:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas. >>
Or the Walter Tweedy you have identified is not the correct father of
Christian.
Will Johnson
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas. >>
Or the Walter Tweedy you have identified is not the correct father of
Christian.
Will Johnson
-
pj.evans
Re: ancestry.com
I just took the plunge. The census images alone are probably worth it.
I've found several missing pieces already, including a passenger list
entry for one of my 3rd ggfs. I'm also digging up stuff for a friend
(more census images).
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I've found several missing pieces already, including a passenger list
entry for one of my 3rd ggfs. I'm also digging up stuff for a friend
(more census images).
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I have finally taken the plunge.
For years I've been adding bits and pieces of ancestry subscriptions,
starting at the easy $50 range, and gradually upgrading.
Now I've renewed for the full boat, "World Deluxe" which is every record they
have, everywhere, everything, everyoneOf course the price is about $300
a year.
Ask me in a month if it's worth it.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
Dear Ford,
Unknown if any blood connection between the two families but
I have seen on the internet that in November 1476 Vlad retook his throne from
Basarab Laiota with help from his kinsman Stephen III of Moldavia and from a
certain Stephen Bathory, Prince of Transylvania who in December recovered Vlad
Dracula`s body if not his head from the Turks. There was a Stephen Bathory,
Prince of Transylvania born in 1477 who was the father of Stephen, King of
Poland and of Erzebet`s father Baron George and as I have not been able to find
any other reference to the " Prince" Stephen Bathory who aided Dracula, I am
inclined to label this just a fable with no basis in fact.
Sincerely,
James
W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Unknown if any blood connection between the two families but
I have seen on the internet that in November 1476 Vlad retook his throne from
Basarab Laiota with help from his kinsman Stephen III of Moldavia and from a
certain Stephen Bathory, Prince of Transylvania who in December recovered Vlad
Dracula`s body if not his head from the Turks. There was a Stephen Bathory,
Prince of Transylvania born in 1477 who was the father of Stephen, King of
Poland and of Erzebet`s father Baron George and as I have not been able to find
any other reference to the " Prince" Stephen Bathory who aided Dracula, I am
inclined to label this just a fable with no basis in fact.
Sincerely,
James
W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Gjest
Re: Cecil Number
In a message dated 5/8/06 2:09:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< Richard Cecil (d 1553) was father of:
1. Elizabeth Cecil (d 1610) who married
2. Hugh Alington (d 1618), son of
3. George Alington, son of
4. Sir Giles Alington (d 1522), son of
5. Sir William Alington (d 1485), son of
6. Mary Cheney (d 1473), sister of
7. Elizabeth Cheney, mother of
8. Catherine Haselden, mother of
9. John Docwra (d 1531), father of
10. Thomas Docwra (1519-1602) >>
Thank you for determining Thomas Docwra's Cecil Number
This lead me to an old post by Chris Philips
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 1015341258
which provides the proof that the Elizabeth Wentworth who married William
Alington is the same person who secondly married Sir William Cheney
I had not previously known of that.
Will Johnson
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< Richard Cecil (d 1553) was father of:
1. Elizabeth Cecil (d 1610) who married
2. Hugh Alington (d 1618), son of
3. George Alington, son of
4. Sir Giles Alington (d 1522), son of
5. Sir William Alington (d 1485), son of
6. Mary Cheney (d 1473), sister of
7. Elizabeth Cheney, mother of
8. Catherine Haselden, mother of
9. John Docwra (d 1531), father of
10. Thomas Docwra (1519-1602) >>
Thank you for determining Thomas Docwra's Cecil Number
This lead me to an old post by Chris Philips
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 1015341258
which provides the proof that the Elizabeth Wentworth who married William
Alington is the same person who secondly married Sir William Cheney
I had not previously known of that.
Will Johnson
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: CP Correction: Patrick, Earl of Dunbar - "b. about 1285"
Dear Will,
Ages such as this, from an IPM, are notoriously inaccurate. The
typical language would be, "aged 24 and more", so accuracy is not a
known hallmark here. There are many cases, with separate IPMs in two
or more English counties, where different groups holding the
inquisitions come up with different ages for the same individual.
Using this stated age is I think proved inappropriate in this
case, else (as I wrote before) King Edward I of England spent too much
time writing to 11 year old boys..... Prince Michael [not Kent],
perhaps, but King Edward..... I think not.
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Ages such as this, from an IPM, are notoriously inaccurate. The
typical language would be, "aged 24 and more", so accuracy is not a
known hallmark here. There are many cases, with separate IPMs in two
or more English counties, where different groups holding the
inquisitions come up with different ages for the same individual.
Using this stated age is I think proved inappropriate in this
case, else (as I wrote before) King Edward I of England spent too much
time writing to 11 year old boys..... Prince Michael [not Kent],
perhaps, but King Edward..... I think not.
Cheers,
John
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/6/06 7:15:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, therav3@aol.com
writes:
There is no support for the statement that this Earl Patrick was
born in, or about, 1285;
I just thought of a way to do it.
Perhaps, when Patrick had "livery of his father's lands in 1308", perhaps at
that time there was some sort of notation about "Patrick aged 24". But just
perhaps they were referring, not to the son Patrick, but rather to the
*grandson* Patrick.
If we can somehow disconnect the "aged 24" from the "son of the dead Earl"
type statement, that just might make CP's account a little more whole, and yet
corrected.
Will
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Monday, 8 May, 2006
Dear Doug,
My comments are interspersed below.
You wrote:
Dear John ~
I've been studying your conjectured Caldicote-Tweedy-Douglas
connection. I find that there are several problems.
First, you've identified Elizabeth de Caldicote's mother as Christian
de Tweedy. You say Christian was "evidently" her mother but you cite
no evidence to support this statement, other than Christian bore the
same married surname as Elizabeth's birth name. While it may well be
true that Elizabeth was Christian's daughter, I believe you need
additional evidence to support this connection besides the surnames are
the same.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
As my original post stated: the Caldecote entry provided by Stevenson
re: Christiana de Caldcote (or proper Latin, de Caldcotis) "appears to provide
the link" as to the consanguinity between William Livingston and Elizabeth de
Caldcotis, when taken together with the Douglas-Tweedie links (themselves not
sufficiently documented).
In those cases where the evidence is solid, I will say so. In a case
such as this, where a conjecture is being made, I will state (as I did
concerning the chart in my post), " NOTE: this chart is conjectural. Conjectured
relationships are denoted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]. "
Second, Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, appears to have been a
widow in 1425, as indicated by the reference from Stevenson's Scottish
Heraldic Seals, which you quote. As stated above, you have placed
Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William de Livingston, who were
dispensed to marry in 1421 as Christian's daughter. This chronology
seems reasonable enough to me.
Stevenson states that Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, was the
daughter of "Walter Twedy." He gives no source for this statement, but
it may well come from Laing, ii. 158, which he cites as a source.
Assuming that Stevenson is correct, then we may posit that Walter de
Tweedy may have been the maternal grandfather of Elizabeth de
Caldicote.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
Stevenson does a good job (where possible) of identifying the
individuals whose heraldic seals he describes. The identification he provided, of
Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote as "widow of William Caldecote, daughter of
Walter Twedy" is doubtless taken from the two charters he referenced.
The arms displayed on Christiana de Caldecote's seal are evidence of her
Tweedie parentage, while not in themselves identifying her father per se.
Her seal gives, " A saltire and chief, the latter charged with a star in dexter
and two escallops. " These are not the undifferenced arms of Caldecote, which
are those given by Stevenson for her (apparent) daughter, Elizabeth (wife of
William Livingston of Kilsyth), and her (apparent) father-in-law, John de
Caldecote of Graden and Simprim, Berwicks: "A saltire and chief, the latter
charged with three escallops. " The arms of Tweedie of Drumelzier are those given
by Stevenson for James Tweedie of Drumelzier (fl. 1473):
" TWEEDIE, James, of Drummelzier. A shield of arms: A saltire
and chief, the latter charged in the center with a star.
Foliage at top and sides of shield. Legend (l.c.): SIGILLUM
IACOBI DE [TU]EDE. Diam. 1 1/l6 in. Peebles Ch., 15 Dec.
1473 (1) - Cast; do., used by Wm.
Veitch (3) - Cast. " [Stevenson, III:634]
To produce a representative seal, given the common elements (A saltire
and chief), Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote simply combined the charges used,
her own for Tweedie (" a star") and her husband's, for Caldecote ("two
escallops", with the third replaced by the Tweedie "star"). Not good heraldry, but
puts it to a nice seal.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The Walter de Tweedy in question was surely the Walter de Tweedy of
Drummelzier, who was Sheriff of Peebleshire in 1373, and who was named
in proceedings in Exchequer Rolls in 1388. This information comes from
the website, http://www.tweedie.org/twe_earl.htm, which in turn cites
Original Tweedie Charters and Writs.
I. Walter de Tweedy, born say 1330/5, occurs 1373-1388.
II. Christian de Tweedy, born say 1370, living 1425, married William de
Caldicote.
III. Elizabeth de Caldicote, born say 1405, dispensed to marry in 1421
William de Livingston.
If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
Never claimed such parentage. I mentioned Freeman's identification
including Agnes Dunbar, and then noted explicitly my problem with this, stating, "
While the possibility that Agnes Dunbar could have been the ancestress of
Elizabeth de Caldcotis is unlikely from a chronological basis,... " Further, the
chart I gave in my conjecture showed distincly that only a prior wife, or
mistress, could have been both daughter of Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d.
1420) and mother of Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote, to-wit:
" [ NOTE: this chart is conjectural. Conjectured
relationships are denoted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]
NN ~ Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith = 1) Agnes Dunbar
_ _ _ I d. 1420 _________I_______________
I I I
NN = Walter Tweedie Agnes = Sir John Sir James
[Douglas?] I of Drumelzier Douglas I Livingston 'uncle'
_ _ _ _ _I____________ d. aft I k. Homildon <*>
I I I 1421 I 1402
James Elizabeth Christian I
Tweedie 'neptem' = William I
of Sir de Caldcotis I
James I I
Douglas <*> I I
Elizabeth = William Livingston
de Caldcotis I of Kilsyth
m. bef 12 Nov 1421 I d. bef 20 Apr 1460
I
V
Sir James Douglas had a known daughter Margaret, either illegitimate or
by the unknown 'pre-Dunbar' wife. She was married before October 1372 to
Philip de Arbuthnot (or Aberbuthnott as you prefer): she further had given birth
to two or more daughters by the time of her father's will dated 30 September
1390, which provided ' for one of the daughters of Philip de Aberbuthnott, for
her maritagium, 10 l. ' [" Item do lego une filiarum Philippi de Aberbuthnow ad
suum maritagium decem libras.." - Bannatyne Misc. II:110].
If you remove the Dunbar issue, the squeeze is not quite so tight.....
Next, you have mentioned a 1434 charter in which James Douglas the
younger, 2nd Lord of Dalkeith, refers to an Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife
of Richard Brown, as his "neptem" (presumably niece or granddaughter
intended). This charter does not state Elizabeth de Tweedy's
parentage. You have placed Elizabeth de Tweedy as a full sister to
Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldicote, but I don't see why
you have done this. Elizabeth de Tweedy was almost certainly a
granddaughter, not daughter of Walter de Tweedy above. In fact, she
could easily have been a great-granddaughter. And, if Elizabeth de
Tweedy was married in 1434 (which I suspect is the case), it seems
impossible that she would be the sister of Christian de Tweedy, wife of
William de Caldicote, who was an aged widow in 1425.
My response:
I wouldn't draw too much certainty from too few facts. As you noted
before, we don't have more than the extract of the 1434 charter, so I wouldn't
infer that the Elizabeth Tweedie in question was married in 1434 - she could
have been married some time before that. Her possibly being a younger child,
much younger than Christiana, is not unreasonable, but again we are inferring too
much at this point I think.
If so, the connection between the Tweedy and Douglas families indicated
by the 1434 charter would have come at least a generation too late to
figure in the ancestry of your Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William
de Livingston. Thus, another explanation must be found to explain the
3rd degree of kinship which existed between Elizabeth de Caldicote and
William de Livingston.
Lastly, I believe there were two successive men named Walter de Tweedy.
The first one was active in the period, 1373-1388. The second Walter
de Tweedy occurs in a record in 1434, with his son and heir apparent,
James, which James was dispensed to marry in 1420. For reasons not
known to me, the Tweedie website collapses the two Walter's into one
person. The Walter who was Sheriff in 1373 would surely not be the
same person who was Walter with a son and heir, James, which James
married in 1420.
I would think that Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown, was a
daughter of the younger Walter de Tweedy, of Drummelzier, living 1434,
by his wife, _____, daughter of James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith (died
1420). Elizabeth de Tweedy's brother, James de Tweedy, would have thus
been named for his maternal grandfather, James Douglas.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Hope the foregoing is helpful. More to follow, as time allows.
Cheers,
John
Dear Doug,
My comments are interspersed below.
You wrote:
Dear John ~
I've been studying your conjectured Caldicote-Tweedy-Douglas
connection. I find that there are several problems.
First, you've identified Elizabeth de Caldicote's mother as Christian
de Tweedy. You say Christian was "evidently" her mother but you cite
no evidence to support this statement, other than Christian bore the
same married surname as Elizabeth's birth name. While it may well be
true that Elizabeth was Christian's daughter, I believe you need
additional evidence to support this connection besides the surnames are
the same.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
As my original post stated: the Caldecote entry provided by Stevenson
re: Christiana de Caldcote (or proper Latin, de Caldcotis) "appears to provide
the link" as to the consanguinity between William Livingston and Elizabeth de
Caldcotis, when taken together with the Douglas-Tweedie links (themselves not
sufficiently documented).
In those cases where the evidence is solid, I will say so. In a case
such as this, where a conjecture is being made, I will state (as I did
concerning the chart in my post), " NOTE: this chart is conjectural. Conjectured
relationships are denoted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]. "
Second, Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, appears to have been a
widow in 1425, as indicated by the reference from Stevenson's Scottish
Heraldic Seals, which you quote. As stated above, you have placed
Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William de Livingston, who were
dispensed to marry in 1421 as Christian's daughter. This chronology
seems reasonable enough to me.
Stevenson states that Christian, wife of William de Caldicote, was the
daughter of "Walter Twedy." He gives no source for this statement, but
it may well come from Laing, ii. 158, which he cites as a source.
Assuming that Stevenson is correct, then we may posit that Walter de
Tweedy may have been the maternal grandfather of Elizabeth de
Caldicote.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
Stevenson does a good job (where possible) of identifying the
individuals whose heraldic seals he describes. The identification he provided, of
Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote as "widow of William Caldecote, daughter of
Walter Twedy" is doubtless taken from the two charters he referenced.
The arms displayed on Christiana de Caldecote's seal are evidence of her
Tweedie parentage, while not in themselves identifying her father per se.
Her seal gives, " A saltire and chief, the latter charged with a star in dexter
and two escallops. " These are not the undifferenced arms of Caldecote, which
are those given by Stevenson for her (apparent) daughter, Elizabeth (wife of
William Livingston of Kilsyth), and her (apparent) father-in-law, John de
Caldecote of Graden and Simprim, Berwicks: "A saltire and chief, the latter
charged with three escallops. " The arms of Tweedie of Drumelzier are those given
by Stevenson for James Tweedie of Drumelzier (fl. 1473):
" TWEEDIE, James, of Drummelzier. A shield of arms: A saltire
and chief, the latter charged in the center with a star.
Foliage at top and sides of shield. Legend (l.c.): SIGILLUM
IACOBI DE [TU]EDE. Diam. 1 1/l6 in. Peebles Ch., 15 Dec.
1473 (1) - Cast; do., used by Wm.
Veitch (3) - Cast. " [Stevenson, III:634]
To produce a representative seal, given the common elements (A saltire
and chief), Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote simply combined the charges used,
her own for Tweedie (" a star") and her husband's, for Caldecote ("two
escallops", with the third replaced by the Tweedie "star"). Not good heraldry, but
puts it to a nice seal.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The Walter de Tweedy in question was surely the Walter de Tweedy of
Drummelzier, who was Sheriff of Peebleshire in 1373, and who was named
in proceedings in Exchequer Rolls in 1388. This information comes from
the website, http://www.tweedie.org/twe_earl.htm, which in turn cites
Original Tweedie Charters and Writs.
From this information, we might generate the following pedigree:
I. Walter de Tweedy, born say 1330/5, occurs 1373-1388.
II. Christian de Tweedy, born say 1370, living 1425, married William de
Caldicote.
III. Elizabeth de Caldicote, born say 1405, dispensed to marry in 1421
William de Livingston.
If the above pedigree fits the known facts, then I fail to see how
Walter de Tweedy can possibly have married a daughter of James Douglas
(died 1420), and his 1st wife, Agnes Dunbar, which couple were married
c. 1372. Walter de Tweedy may have married James Douglas' sister, but
he is not likely to have married his daughter. In fact, Walter de
Tweedy was almost certainly older by some years older than James
Douglas.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My response:
Never claimed such parentage. I mentioned Freeman's identification
including Agnes Dunbar, and then noted explicitly my problem with this, stating, "
While the possibility that Agnes Dunbar could have been the ancestress of
Elizabeth de Caldcotis is unlikely from a chronological basis,... " Further, the
chart I gave in my conjecture showed distincly that only a prior wife, or
mistress, could have been both daughter of Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d.
1420) and mother of Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote, to-wit:
" [ NOTE: this chart is conjectural. Conjectured
relationships are denoted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]
NN ~ Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith = 1) Agnes Dunbar
_ _ _ I d. 1420 _________I_______________
I I I
NN = Walter Tweedie Agnes = Sir John Sir James
[Douglas?] I of Drumelzier Douglas I Livingston 'uncle'
_ _ _ _ _I____________ d. aft I k. Homildon <*>
I I I 1421 I 1402
James Elizabeth Christian I
Tweedie 'neptem' = William I
of Sir de Caldcotis I
James I I
Douglas <*> I I
Elizabeth = William Livingston
de Caldcotis I of Kilsyth
m. bef 12 Nov 1421 I d. bef 20 Apr 1460
I
V
Sir James Douglas had a known daughter Margaret, either illegitimate or
by the unknown 'pre-Dunbar' wife. She was married before October 1372 to
Philip de Arbuthnot (or Aberbuthnott as you prefer): she further had given birth
to two or more daughters by the time of her father's will dated 30 September
1390, which provided ' for one of the daughters of Philip de Aberbuthnott, for
her maritagium, 10 l. ' [" Item do lego une filiarum Philippi de Aberbuthnow ad
suum maritagium decem libras.." - Bannatyne Misc. II:110].
If you remove the Dunbar issue, the squeeze is not quite so tight.....
Next, you have mentioned a 1434 charter in which James Douglas the
younger, 2nd Lord of Dalkeith, refers to an Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife
of Richard Brown, as his "neptem" (presumably niece or granddaughter
intended). This charter does not state Elizabeth de Tweedy's
parentage. You have placed Elizabeth de Tweedy as a full sister to
Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldicote, but I don't see why
you have done this. Elizabeth de Tweedy was almost certainly a
granddaughter, not daughter of Walter de Tweedy above. In fact, she
could easily have been a great-granddaughter. And, if Elizabeth de
Tweedy was married in 1434 (which I suspect is the case), it seems
impossible that she would be the sister of Christian de Tweedy, wife of
William de Caldicote, who was an aged widow in 1425.
My response:
I wouldn't draw too much certainty from too few facts. As you noted
before, we don't have more than the extract of the 1434 charter, so I wouldn't
infer that the Elizabeth Tweedie in question was married in 1434 - she could
have been married some time before that. Her possibly being a younger child,
much younger than Christiana, is not unreasonable, but again we are inferring too
much at this point I think.
If so, the connection between the Tweedy and Douglas families indicated
by the 1434 charter would have come at least a generation too late to
figure in the ancestry of your Elizabeth de Caldicote, wife of William
de Livingston. Thus, another explanation must be found to explain the
3rd degree of kinship which existed between Elizabeth de Caldicote and
William de Livingston.
Lastly, I believe there were two successive men named Walter de Tweedy.
The first one was active in the period, 1373-1388. The second Walter
de Tweedy occurs in a record in 1434, with his son and heir apparent,
James, which James was dispensed to marry in 1420. For reasons not
known to me, the Tweedie website collapses the two Walter's into one
person. The Walter who was Sheriff in 1373 would surely not be the
same person who was Walter with a son and heir, James, which James
married in 1420.
I would think that Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown, was a
daughter of the younger Walter de Tweedy, of Drummelzier, living 1434,
by his wife, _____, daughter of James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith (died
1420). Elizabeth de Tweedy's brother, James de Tweedy, would have thus
been named for his maternal grandfather, James Douglas.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Hope the foregoing is helpful. More to follow, as time allows.
Cheers,
John
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Dear John ~
I found a book on the Tweedie family this evening at the following
weblink which you might find helpful:
http://www.tweedie.com/TweedieBook.pdf
This book, pg. 38, places Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown,
as the daughter of the Walter de Tweedy, who occurs in the period,
1416-1435. In agreement with the arrangement I presented in my last
post, Elizabeth de Tweedy is specifically called the sister of James de
Tweedy, son and heir of Walter de Tweedy. On pg. 38, it is reported
that in 1436 James de Tweedy was "appointed as bailie by his uncle, Sir
James Douglas, Lord of Dalkeith, for the purpose of infefting in
Hartree, Richard Brown who married Elizabeth de Tweedie, James' sister
and niece of Sir James."
As stated above, Elizabeth de Tweedy's father, Walter de Tweedy, occurs
in the period, 1416-1435. As such, he is not likely to have been the
father of your Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldecote. The
Tweedie Book shows that this Walter de Tweedy's son and heir, James,
was dispensed to marry in 1420, whereas by your conjecture, Christian
de Tweedy had a daughter, Elizabeth de Caldecote, who was dispensed to
marry in 1421. Chronologically then, Walter de Tweedy, living
1416-1435, would thus be the same generation as Christian (de Tweedy)
de Caldecote, living 1425, especially since their respective children
married within a year of each other.
As best I can tell, there is insufficient evidence to indicate if
Walter de Tweedy, living 1416-1435, was a brother of Christian (de
Tweedy) de Caldecote, living 1425.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
I found a book on the Tweedie family this evening at the following
weblink which you might find helpful:
http://www.tweedie.com/TweedieBook.pdf
This book, pg. 38, places Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown,
as the daughter of the Walter de Tweedy, who occurs in the period,
1416-1435. In agreement with the arrangement I presented in my last
post, Elizabeth de Tweedy is specifically called the sister of James de
Tweedy, son and heir of Walter de Tweedy. On pg. 38, it is reported
that in 1436 James de Tweedy was "appointed as bailie by his uncle, Sir
James Douglas, Lord of Dalkeith, for the purpose of infefting in
Hartree, Richard Brown who married Elizabeth de Tweedie, James' sister
and niece of Sir James."
As stated above, Elizabeth de Tweedy's father, Walter de Tweedy, occurs
in the period, 1416-1435. As such, he is not likely to have been the
father of your Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldecote. The
Tweedie Book shows that this Walter de Tweedy's son and heir, James,
was dispensed to marry in 1420, whereas by your conjecture, Christian
de Tweedy had a daughter, Elizabeth de Caldecote, who was dispensed to
marry in 1421. Chronologically then, Walter de Tweedy, living
1416-1435, would thus be the same generation as Christian (de Tweedy)
de Caldecote, living 1425, especially since their respective children
married within a year of each other.
As best I can tell, there is insufficient evidence to indicate if
Walter de Tweedy, living 1416-1435, was a brother of Christian (de
Tweedy) de Caldecote, living 1425.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
-
Gjest
Re: CP Correction: Patrick, Earl of Dunbar - "b. about 1285"
In a message dated 5/8/2006 9:09:59 PM Pacific Standard Time,
therav3@aol.com writes:
Ages such as this, from an IPM, are notoriously inaccurate. The
typical language would be, "aged 24 and more", so accuracy is not a
known hallmark here.
I agree, but I'm actually stating something completely different.
That the "24" may be accurately referring to the grandson, and someone has
conflated that two persons into one.
If the IPM in question can be found, it's possible it might clear up more
than one problem, at once.
Will
therav3@aol.com writes:
Ages such as this, from an IPM, are notoriously inaccurate. The
typical language would be, "aged 24 and more", so accuracy is not a
known hallmark here.
I agree, but I'm actually stating something completely different.
That the "24" may be accurately referring to the grandson, and someone has
conflated that two persons into one.
If the IPM in question can be found, it's possible it might clear up more
than one problem, at once.
Will
-
Ford Mommaerts-Browne
Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
| Dear Ford,
| Unknown if any blood connection between the two families but
| I have seen on the internet that in November 1476 Vlad retook his throne from
| Basarab Laiota with help from his kinsman Stephen III of Moldavia and from a
| certain Stephen Bathory, Prince of Transylvania who in December recovered Vlad
| Dracula`s body if not his head from the Turks. There was a Stephen Bathory,
| Prince of Transylvania born in 1477 who was the father of Stephen, King of
| Poland and of Erzebet`s father Baron George and as I have not been able to find
| any other reference to the " Prince" Stephen Bathory who aided Dracula, I am
| inclined to label this just a fable with no basis in fact.
| Sincerely,
| James
| W Cummings
One active in 1476; another born in 1477. Might be related, since the Bathory seemed to be fond of name Stephen - but not identical. I would defer to Leo; but he has already posted that he has no link in Genealogics.
Ford
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: Vlad the impaler and the geneology of real vampires
| Dear Ford,
| Unknown if any blood connection between the two families but
| I have seen on the internet that in November 1476 Vlad retook his throne from
| Basarab Laiota with help from his kinsman Stephen III of Moldavia and from a
| certain Stephen Bathory, Prince of Transylvania who in December recovered Vlad
| Dracula`s body if not his head from the Turks. There was a Stephen Bathory,
| Prince of Transylvania born in 1477 who was the father of Stephen, King of
| Poland and of Erzebet`s father Baron George and as I have not been able to find
| any other reference to the " Prince" Stephen Bathory who aided Dracula, I am
| inclined to label this just a fable with no basis in fact.
| Sincerely,
| James
| W Cummings
One active in 1476; another born in 1477. Might be related, since the Bathory seemed to be fond of name Stephen - but not identical. I would defer to Leo; but he has already posted that he has no link in Genealogics.
Ford
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Dear John ~
I found a book on the Tweedie family this evening at the following
weblink which you might find helpful:
http://www.tweedie.com/TweedieBook.pdf
This book, pg. 38, places Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown,
as the daughter of the Walter de Tweedy, who occurs in the period,
1416-1435. In agreement with the arrangement I presented in my last
post, Elizabeth de Tweedy is specifically called the sister of James de
Tweedy, son and heir of Walter de Tweedy. On pg. 38, it is reported
that in 1436 James de Tweedy was "appointed as bailie by his uncle, Sir
James Douglas, Lord of Dalkeith, for the purpose of infefting in
Hartree, Richard Brown who married Elizabeth de Tweedie, James' sister
and niece of Sir James."
As stated above, Elizabeth de Tweedy's father, Walter de Tweedy, occurs
in the period, 1416-1435. As such, he is not likely to have been the
father of your Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldecote. The
Tweedie Book shows that this Walter de Tweedy's son and heir, James,
was dispensed to marry in 1422, whereas by your conjecture, Christian
de Tweedy had a daughter, Elizabeth de Caldecote, who was dispensed to
marry in 1421. Chronologically then, Walter de Tweedy, living
1416-1435, would thus be the same generation as Christian (de Tweedy)
de Caldecote, living 1425, especially since their respective children
married within a year of each other.
As best I can tell, there is insufficient evidence to indicate if
Walter de Tweedy, living 1416-1435, was a brother of Christian (de
Tweedy) de Caldecote, living 1425.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
I found a book on the Tweedie family this evening at the following
weblink which you might find helpful:
http://www.tweedie.com/TweedieBook.pdf
This book, pg. 38, places Elizabeth de Tweedy, wife of Richard Brown,
as the daughter of the Walter de Tweedy, who occurs in the period,
1416-1435. In agreement with the arrangement I presented in my last
post, Elizabeth de Tweedy is specifically called the sister of James de
Tweedy, son and heir of Walter de Tweedy. On pg. 38, it is reported
that in 1436 James de Tweedy was "appointed as bailie by his uncle, Sir
James Douglas, Lord of Dalkeith, for the purpose of infefting in
Hartree, Richard Brown who married Elizabeth de Tweedie, James' sister
and niece of Sir James."
As stated above, Elizabeth de Tweedy's father, Walter de Tweedy, occurs
in the period, 1416-1435. As such, he is not likely to have been the
father of your Christian de Tweedy, wife of William de Caldecote. The
Tweedie Book shows that this Walter de Tweedy's son and heir, James,
was dispensed to marry in 1422, whereas by your conjecture, Christian
de Tweedy had a daughter, Elizabeth de Caldecote, who was dispensed to
marry in 1421. Chronologically then, Walter de Tweedy, living
1416-1435, would thus be the same generation as Christian (de Tweedy)
de Caldecote, living 1425, especially since their respective children
married within a year of each other.
As best I can tell, there is insufficient evidence to indicate if
Walter de Tweedy, living 1416-1435, was a brother of Christian (de
Tweedy) de Caldecote, living 1425.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www. royalancestry. net
-
Don Stone
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Doug (and others),
If you discover that you have made a typographical error in a posting, you
tend to make another nearly identical posting with the error corrected; your
subject for the new posting may even say "[Corrected]". (You may also
cancel the original post on Googol, but you can't, of course, cancel the
versions on soc.genealogy.medieval or GEN-MEDIEVAL.)
Since the posting with the error will be in the archives of GEN-MEDIEVAL
indefinitely, and thus retrievable in response to searches, your reposting
the complete original with correction(s) is a defensible strategy. This
insures that any query that retrieves the original will also retrieve the
corrected version.
However, to avoid confusion, the corrected version should certainly be
labeled "[Corrected]". You shouldn't count on the later time stamp to
convey this. In addition, as a courtesy and convenience to current readers,
I think that it would be good to specify what the error was. For example,
the correction to which I am responding could have had a new first line,
"[Sorry. James de Tweedy was dispensed to marry in 1422, not 1420.]".
-- Don Stone, GEN-MEDIEVAL co-listowner currently on duty
Dear John ~
I found a book on the Tweedie family this evening at the following
weblink which you might find helpful:
http://www.tweedie.com/TweedieBook.pdf
[snip]
Doug (and others),
If you discover that you have made a typographical error in a posting, you
tend to make another nearly identical posting with the error corrected; your
subject for the new posting may even say "[Corrected]". (You may also
cancel the original post on Googol, but you can't, of course, cancel the
versions on soc.genealogy.medieval or GEN-MEDIEVAL.)
Since the posting with the error will be in the archives of GEN-MEDIEVAL
indefinitely, and thus retrievable in response to searches, your reposting
the complete original with correction(s) is a defensible strategy. This
insures that any query that retrieves the original will also retrieve the
corrected version.
However, to avoid confusion, the corrected version should certainly be
labeled "[Corrected]". You shouldn't count on the later time stamp to
convey this. In addition, as a courtesy and convenience to current readers,
I think that it would be good to specify what the error was. For example,
the correction to which I am responding could have had a new first line,
"[Sorry. James de Tweedy was dispensed to marry in 1422, not 1420.]".
-- Don Stone, GEN-MEDIEVAL co-listowner currently on duty
-
Gjest
Re: Possible maternal ancestry of Archbishop Christopher Ham
WJhon...@aol.com schrieb:
Hi Will, yes, you're spot on. Of all the Docwra wives [several have
royal ascents] Susan Hawkins is the one about whom the least is known.
I am now pretty sure that her mother, Frances Hawkins formerly Baker,
was the daughter of Robert Whitehead, mercer of London (PCC will 1521),
whose wife Joan I suspect remarried after his death to a Hampton - but
no proof as yet. I have been going through the probate records of the
Merchants of the Staple and unearthing quite alot of interesting
material: if it hasn't already been mined, it seems that this would be
a very valuable source of study.
I doubt much of this is of any particular interest to anyone, but I am
posting it so that the archives contains the references, in case anyone
in the future is interested.
Regards
Michael
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:24:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
From the Visitation records of Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire, we
find that Susan was the wife of Ralph Docwra of Fulbourne, Cambs, and
the daughter of "John Hawkings" of Stamford, Lincolnshire. [Likely, he
was the one of that name who was Alderman - i.e. Mayor - of Stamford in
1574].
Is this the same Ralph Docwra who was son of Thomas Docwra of Putteridge
1518-1602 and his wife Mildred Hales ?
Thanks
Will
Hi Will, yes, you're spot on. Of all the Docwra wives [several have
royal ascents] Susan Hawkins is the one about whom the least is known.
I am now pretty sure that her mother, Frances Hawkins formerly Baker,
was the daughter of Robert Whitehead, mercer of London (PCC will 1521),
whose wife Joan I suspect remarried after his death to a Hampton - but
no proof as yet. I have been going through the probate records of the
Merchants of the Staple and unearthing quite alot of interesting
material: if it hasn't already been mined, it seems that this would be
a very valuable source of study.
I doubt much of this is of any particular interest to anyone, but I am
posting it so that the archives contains the references, in case anyone
in the future is interested.
Regards
Michael
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
In a message dated 5/8/06 8:35:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:
<< Further, the chart I gave in my conjecture showed distincly that only a
prior wife, or mistress, could have been both daughter of Sir James Douglas of
Dalkeith (d. 1420) and mother of Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote, >>
I still fail to see this alleged chronological argument.
The date ranges I am using show that Agnes Dunbar fits fine as an ancestress.
So if one of you gentlemen could make your argument from chronology more
clear I would appreciate it
Thanks
Will Johnson
<< Further, the chart I gave in my conjecture showed distincly that only a
prior wife, or mistress, could have been both daughter of Sir James Douglas of
Dalkeith (d. 1420) and mother of Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote, >>
I still fail to see this alleged chronological argument.
The date ranges I am using show that Agnes Dunbar fits fine as an ancestress.
So if one of you gentlemen could make your argument from chronology more
clear I would appreciate it
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Possible maternal ancestry of Archbishop Christopher Ham
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:24:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< > >From the Visitation records of Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire, we
Is this the same Ralph Docwra who was son of Thomas Docwra of Putteridge
1518-1602 and his wife Mildred Hales ?
Thanks
Will
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< > >From the Visitation records of Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire, we
find that Susan was the wife of Ralph Docwra of Fulbourne, Cambs, and
the daughter of "John Hawkings" of Stamford, Lincolnshire. [Likely, he
was the one of that name who was Alderman - i.e. Mayor - of Stamford in
1574].
Is this the same Ralph Docwra who was son of Thomas Docwra of Putteridge
1518-1602 and his wife Mildred Hales ?
Thanks
Will
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
Dear Will ~
John Ravilious has conjectured that Elizabeth de Caldicote, who was
dispensed to marry in 1421, was the granddaughter of Walter de Tweedy,
who occurs in 1416-1435, which Walter was evidently married to a
daughter of Sir James Douglas, of Dalkeith (died 1420). This in spite
of the fact that Walter de Tweedy's known son and heir, James de
Tweedy, was dispensed to marry in 1422, and his daughter, Elizabeth de
Tweedy, probably married in 1434.
Thus, Elizabeth de Caldicote is off a generation to be the
grand-daughter of this Walter de Tweedy. Quite possibly Elizabeth de
Caldicote is the grand-daughter of an earlier Walter de Tweedy who
occurs 1373-1388. But, if so, she would obviously miss the Douglas
connection.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
John Ravilious has conjectured that Elizabeth de Caldicote, who was
dispensed to marry in 1421, was the granddaughter of Walter de Tweedy,
who occurs in 1416-1435, which Walter was evidently married to a
daughter of Sir James Douglas, of Dalkeith (died 1420). This in spite
of the fact that Walter de Tweedy's known son and heir, James de
Tweedy, was dispensed to marry in 1422, and his daughter, Elizabeth de
Tweedy, probably married in 1434.
Thus, Elizabeth de Caldicote is off a generation to be the
grand-daughter of this Walter de Tweedy. Quite possibly Elizabeth de
Caldicote is the grand-daughter of an earlier Walter de Tweedy who
occurs 1373-1388. But, if so, she would obviously miss the Douglas
connection.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry. net
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/8/06 8:35:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:
Further, the chart I gave in my conjecture showed distincly that only a
prior wife, or mistress, could have been both daughter of Sir James Douglas of
Dalkeith (d. 1420) and mother of Christiana (Tweedie) de Caldecote,
I still fail to see this alleged chronological argument.
The date ranges I am using show that Agnes Dunbar fits fine as an ancestress.
So if one of you gentlemen could make your argument from chronology more
clear I would appreciate it
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
In a message dated 5/9/06 12:54:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Nigelandbecka@bellsouth.net writes:
<< Does anyone know if there is any truth is this? They have her listed as
being born in 1415 (the year of Richard's death) and later marrying a
Thomas Musgrave (b. 1417, and the acknoweldged spouse of Joan
Stapleton). >>
Your red flag should rise at the shear obscurity of this figure. A
great-grandaughter of Edward III, marries a.... nobody?
Will Johnson
Nigelandbecka@bellsouth.net writes:
<< Does anyone know if there is any truth is this? They have her listed as
being born in 1415 (the year of Richard's death) and later marrying a
Thomas Musgrave (b. 1417, and the acknoweldged spouse of Joan
Stapleton). >>
Your red flag should rise at the shear obscurity of this figure. A
great-grandaughter of Edward III, marries a.... nobody?
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
WJhon...@aol.com schrieb:
No, why would it be 1362? The dates of the writ and IPMs were 49
Edward III, thus 1375 (1 Edward III being 1327-8). I haven't checked
the calendrical calculations here - having merely copied the printed
entry - but I presume St Michael's Day in 1375 fell on a Saturday, with
Lady Coggeshall having died the day before, and Sir Henry the day
after. Must have been a nasty bug passing around the manorhouse.
In a message dated 5/9/06 1:42:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
"Writs dated 30 September 49 Ed III: Henry de Coggeshale, knight, and
Joan his wife; Joan died the Friday before Michaelmas last; William her
son and heir is aged 18 and more; she held Well Hall at Ixning, and
land at Fordham, Cambridgeshire formerly belonging to her father,
William de Welles, knight. Joan died 27 September last and Henry 29
September.
27 Sep 1362 ?
No, why would it be 1362? The dates of the writ and IPMs were 49
Edward III, thus 1375 (1 Edward III being 1327-8). I haven't checked
the calendrical calculations here - having merely copied the printed
entry - but I presume St Michael's Day in 1375 fell on a Saturday, with
Lady Coggeshall having died the day before, and Sir Henry the day
after. Must have been a nasty bug passing around the manorhouse.
-
Gjest
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
WJhon...@aol.com schrieb:
Ah, sorry - I had already sent off the explanation.
Cheers, Michael
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:36:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:
27 Sep 1362 ?
Never mind. I figured it out
I was counting from Edward's birth instead of his accession.
Will
Ah, sorry - I had already sent off the explanation.
Cheers, Michael
-
Renia
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Well, the Queen's daughter married two nobodies.
In a message dated 5/9/06 12:54:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Nigelandbecka@bellsouth.net writes:
Does anyone know if there is any truth is this? They have her listed as
being born in 1415 (the year of Richard's death) and later marrying a
Thomas Musgrave (b. 1417, and the acknoweldged spouse of Joan
Stapleton).
Your red flag should rise at the shear obscurity of this figure. A
great-grandaughter of Edward III, marries a.... nobody?
Well, the Queen's daughter married two nobodies.
-
Gjest
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
In a message dated 5/9/06 1:42:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< "Writs dated 30 September 49 Ed III: Henry de Coggeshale, knight, and
Joan his wife; Joan died the Friday before Michaelmas last; William her
son and heir is aged 18 and more; she held Well Hall at Ixning, and
land at Fordham, Cambridgeshire formerly belonging to her father,
William de Welles, knight. Joan died 27 September last and Henry 29
September. >>
27 Sep 1362 ?
Will Johnson
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< "Writs dated 30 September 49 Ed III: Henry de Coggeshale, knight, and
Joan his wife; Joan died the Friday before Michaelmas last; William her
son and heir is aged 18 and more; she held Well Hall at Ixning, and
land at Fordham, Cambridgeshire formerly belonging to her father,
William de Welles, knight. Joan died 27 September last and Henry 29
September. >>
27 Sep 1362 ?
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:36:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:
<< 27 Sep 1362 ? >>
Never mind. I figured it out
I was counting from Edward's birth instead of his accession.
Will
writes:
<< 27 Sep 1362 ? >>
Never mind. I figured it out
I was counting from Edward's birth instead of his accession.
Will
-
Gjest
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:39:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:
<< At Essex, they held the manor of Great Sampford, the manor,
Is this the same William "of Little Stamford Hall", father of Alice
Coggeshall who married John Tyrell ?
Thanks
Will
writes:
<< At Essex, they held the manor of Great Sampford, the manor,
advowson and ferry rights at East Tilbury; William their heir was aged
18 at the feast of St Margaret last;
Is this the same William "of Little Stamford Hall", father of Alice
Coggeshall who married John Tyrell ?
Thanks
Will
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Deaths of Henry and Joan Coggeshall, 1375
In message of 9 May, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Yes, with references all over the published visitation books and in
Dict Nat Biog (though 1st edition called her Eleanor). Doubtless the
odd IPM would confirm this as she was a co-heir to land held in chief.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:39:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:
At Essex, they held the manor of Great Sampford, the manor,
advowson and ferry rights at East Tilbury; William their heir was aged
18 at the feast of St Margaret last;
Is this the same William "of Little Stamford Hall", father of Alice
Coggeshall who married John Tyrell ?
Yes, with references all over the published visitation books and in
Dict Nat Biog (though 1st edition called her Eleanor). Doubtless the
odd IPM would confirm this as she was a co-heir to land held in chief.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
In message of 9 May, Renia <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote:
Not quite nobody, one was an Olympic medallist (IIRC) and the other got
to at least James Bond's rank in the navy.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/9/06 12:54:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Nigelandbecka@bellsouth.net writes:
Does anyone know if there is any truth is this? They have her listed as
being born in 1415 (the year of Richard's death) and later marrying a
Thomas Musgrave (b. 1417, and the acknoweldged spouse of Joan
Stapleton).
Your red flag should rise at the shear obscurity of this figure. A
great-grandaughter of Edward III, marries a.... nobody?
Well, the Queen's daughter married two nobodies.
Not quite nobody, one was an Olympic medallist (IIRC) and the other got
to at least James Bond's rank in the navy.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gjest
Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Liv
In a message dated 5/9/06 2:15:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< Thus, Elizabeth de Caldicote is off a generation to be the
grand-daughter of this Walter de Tweedy. >>
I think that's too much to build on so scant a documentation trail.
Personally I would like to see more documents in which the Tweedy and Caldicote family
appear before coming to the conclusion of what generation Walter or Elizabeth
might be in.
Will
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< Thus, Elizabeth de Caldicote is off a generation to be the
grand-daughter of this Walter de Tweedy. >>
I think that's too much to build on so scant a documentation trail.
Personally I would like to see more documents in which the Tweedy and Caldicote family
appear before coming to the conclusion of what generation Walter or Elizabeth
might be in.
Will
-
Renia
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
W David Samuelsen wrote:
Why do you think that is?
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 1147213677
Renia,
if you're talking about the Princess Royal, the 2nd husband, Timothy
Laurence is not a nobody now, unlike 1st husband who is still a relative
nobody. Timothy is Rear Admiral now.
Why do you think that is?
-
W David Samuelsen
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
<http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2006-05/1147213677>
Renia,
if you're talking about the Princess Royal, the 2nd husband, Timothy
Laurence is not a nobody now, unlike 1st husband who is still a relative
nobody. Timothy is Rear Admiral now.
W. David Samuelsen
Renia,
if you're talking about the Princess Royal, the 2nd husband, Timothy
Laurence is not a nobody now, unlike 1st husband who is still a relative
nobody. Timothy is Rear Admiral now.
W. David Samuelsen
-
Gjest
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
You don't have to look so far forward to find examples of royalty marrying
commoners and then having those commeners raised to a high position. There
are examples in the medieval period.
commoners and then having those commeners raised to a high position. There
are examples in the medieval period.
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
In a message dated 5/9/06 9:20:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< As for Sir William Boleyn, I find that he was admitted to Mercers'
Company in London in 1472, and was also admitted to Lincoln's Inn in
1473. For an indication of Sir William Boleyn's approximate birthdate, >>
There is no need to approximate.
Sir William Boleyn was heir through his mother Anne Hoo, and named in the IPM
taken of Thomas Hoo who d.s.p. (or perhaps s.p.m.) in 1486. There Sir
William is aged 36 ("The Sinclairs of England", Thomas Sinclair. Trubner & Co,
London. 1887, p 323-4)
Will Johnson
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< As for Sir William Boleyn, I find that he was admitted to Mercers'
Company in London in 1472, and was also admitted to Lincoln's Inn in
1473. For an indication of Sir William Boleyn's approximate birthdate, >>
There is no need to approximate.
Sir William Boleyn was heir through his mother Anne Hoo, and named in the IPM
taken of Thomas Hoo who d.s.p. (or perhaps s.p.m.) in 1486. There Sir
William is aged 36 ("The Sinclairs of England", Thomas Sinclair. Trubner & Co,
London. 1887, p 323-4)
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
In poking around my notes on these connections, there is something very
seriously wrong in the Hoo, Etchingham, Boleyn connections. I will later today,
hopefully post a recreation of these families, but first I want to see if anyone
has the IPM of Thomas Hoo who d.s.p. or d.s.p.m. 8 Oct 1486 (or possibly BEF
or ABT this date).
Thanks
Will Johnson
seriously wrong in the Hoo, Etchingham, Boleyn connections. I will later today,
hopefully post a recreation of these families, but first I want to see if anyone
has the IPM of Thomas Hoo who d.s.p. or d.s.p.m. 8 Oct 1486 (or possibly BEF
or ABT this date).
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
I do not yet have access to the CP article on the Lord Hoo.
Charlotte has sent me a portion of it, but I cannot tell what is in CP and
what are the added notes and corrections.
If anyone has the verbatim quote from CP on Thomas, Lord Hoo d 13 Feb
1454/5 and his children, I'd appreciate seeing exactly what is said.
Thanks
Will Johnson
Charlotte has sent me a portion of it, but I cannot tell what is in CP and
what are the added notes and corrections.
If anyone has the verbatim quote from CP on Thomas, Lord Hoo d 13 Feb
1454/5 and his children, I'd appreciate seeing exactly what is said.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
In message of 10 May, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I suspect the reason why you may not have seen much of this is that
there are 7 pages on this chappie. At least on the photoreduced
version this comes down to two pages but the print is mighty small.
Anyhow I have scanned it at 400 dots per inch and put the two pages
here and here:
http://southfarm.plus.com/scans/Hoo_1.tif - 200 Kbytes
http://southfarm.plus.com/scans/Hoo_2.tif - 235 Kbytes
On one machine here it appears as a file to save to disc, on a Mac it is
white on black and similarly on a PC emulator doing W98 on the Mac -
heavens knows what these will look like on your machines. (My program
exploded when I tried to convert them to PDF so you have TIF files.)
But if you enlarge the image or print it to paper, it is surprisingly
legible.
Oh - and these two files live on a little server here. If too many try
to download at once it may jam up. But they are not large so you should
be OK.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
I do not yet have access to the CP article on the Lord Hoo.
Charlotte has sent me a portion of it, but I cannot tell what is in
CP and what are the added notes and corrections.
If anyone has the verbatim quote from CP on Thomas, Lord Hoo d 13 Feb
1454/5 and his children, I'd appreciate seeing exactly what is said.
I suspect the reason why you may not have seen much of this is that
there are 7 pages on this chappie. At least on the photoreduced
version this comes down to two pages but the print is mighty small.
Anyhow I have scanned it at 400 dots per inch and put the two pages
here and here:
http://southfarm.plus.com/scans/Hoo_1.tif - 200 Kbytes
http://southfarm.plus.com/scans/Hoo_2.tif - 235 Kbytes
On one machine here it appears as a file to save to disc, on a Mac it is
white on black and similarly on a PC emulator doing W98 on the Mac -
heavens knows what these will look like on your machines. (My program
exploded when I tried to convert them to PDF so you have TIF files.)
But if you enlarge the image or print it to paper, it is surprisingly
legible.
Oh - and these two files live on a little server here. If too many try
to download at once it may jam up. But they are not large so you should
be OK.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gjest
Re: Marriage of Sir Simon Leek and Margaret de Vaux
In a message dated 5/10/06 6:34:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< The only reference to this Vaux family comes from Roskell, in which he
states that the four daughters of Simon Leek, MP (the grandson of Sir
Simon) put forward a claim to be the heirs of one John Vaux; I haven't
yet chased up each of his references to see what the nature of this
claim was. >>
In particular I would like to know if the Sir Thomas Rempston, K G who
married Margaret Leek "second daughter", is the same Thomas Rempston of Beckering
father-in-law to Sir John Cheney of Fen Ditton.
Thanks
Will Johnson
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
<< The only reference to this Vaux family comes from Roskell, in which he
states that the four daughters of Simon Leek, MP (the grandson of Sir
Simon) put forward a claim to be the heirs of one John Vaux; I haven't
yet chased up each of his references to see what the nature of this
claim was. >>
In particular I would like to know if the Sir Thomas Rempston, K G who
married Margaret Leek "second daughter", is the same Thomas Rempston of Beckering
father-in-law to Sir John Cheney of Fen Ditton.
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
In a message dated 5/10/06 7:15:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< In the
second entry, a writ dated October 17th, 1487, it is stated that "Wm.
Boleyn, knt., aged 36 and more, is his [Thomas Hoo's] cousin and heir,
viz., son of Anne, daughter of Lord de Hoo and Hastynges, his brother."
END OF QUOTE. >>
This should be correct to [half-]brother, they were both named Thomas
by-the-way.
Will Johnson
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< In the
second entry, a writ dated October 17th, 1487, it is stated that "Wm.
Boleyn, knt., aged 36 and more, is his [Thomas Hoo's] cousin and heir,
viz., son of Anne, daughter of Lord de Hoo and Hastynges, his brother."
END OF QUOTE. >>
This should be correct to [half-]brother, they were both named Thomas
by-the-way.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
Actually, Living Descendents of Blood Royal, Vol 2, "Whitehead", pg 805-808
Count d'Angerville; World Nobility, London. 1962 appears to be stating that the
"age 20" comes from the marriage "in 1485, (aged 20)" and cites CP X, 131-3
Count d'Angerville; World Nobility, London. 1962 appears to be stating that the
"age 20" comes from the marriage "in 1485, (aged 20)" and cites CP X, 131-3
-
Gjest
Re: Marriage of Sir Simon Leek and Margaret de Vaux
Thanks for that additional information!
-
Nigelandbecka@bellsouth.n
Re: Alice Plantagenet born in 1415?
That's what I figured... Helps me out greatly, because now I can cut
all ancestors of Pedro the Cruel out of familytree maker. Luckily, I've
still got connections to the Plantagenets through Edward III's sons
Lionel and John. Thanks for all the information, ladies and
gentlemen--it is appreciated!
Nigel Bradley
all ancestors of Pedro the Cruel out of familytree maker. Luckily, I've
still got connections to the Plantagenets through Edward III's sons
Lionel and John. Thanks for all the information, ladies and
gentlemen--it is appreciated!
Nigel Bradley
-
Gjest
Re: SP Correction: Sir William Douglas and his Lindsay wife
Thursday, 11 May, 2006
Dear Alex,
As to the chronology regarding the Lindsay, Erskine and other
relevant families in the period ca. 1375-1425, this is how the
picture appears to me at present:
David Lindsay = ca 22 Feb 1374/5 Elizabeth Stewart
E of Crawford I [date of dispensation]
d aft 12 Feb 1406/7 I
__________________I__________________________
I I
Alexander Lindsay Elizabeth Lindsay
born say 1376/1385 born say 1376/1385
d. bef 8 Sept 1439 = aft 20 Dec 1400
= say 1395 [bef 1410 - CP III:509] [SP V:604], as 2nd wife
Marjory Sir Robert Erskine
I I
____I______ ____________I___________
I I I I
I David Lindsay Janet Erskine I
I born say 1400/1405 born say 1401/1405 I
I = ca 26 Feb 1422/3 = [dispensation 26 Apr I
I [CP III:509-510] 1421 - Stuart, p. 451] I
I Marjory Ogilvie Sir Walter Stewart I
I of Lennox I
I I
I______________________________ I
I I I
* Elizabeth Lindsay * Christian Lindsay Christian Erskine
born say 1395/1398 born say 1398/1403 born say 1403/08
[dispensaton to = say 1415 [based on = say 1420/1425
marry William issue of 1st marriage] Patrick Graham
Douglas] Sir William Douglas Lord Graham
presumably dsp of Lochleven
Would that we had some firmer dates (a baptismal register would
be nice) on which to hang our steel bonnets.....
Cheers,
John
you wrote:
Also you might look at Erskine in SP. There was a contract in 1400
that the Earl of Crawford would help Sir RObert Erskine regain the
earldom of Mar from the Crown. This included a betrothal of Erskine to
one of the arl's daughters, usually taken to have been Elizabeth.
There do seem to be some chronological difficulties with the Douglas
pedigree. A daughter of Earl Alexander might be too young to have all
those children before the battle of Pinkie, and it also seems to
compress later generations too much.
Dear Alex,
As to the chronology regarding the Lindsay, Erskine and other
relevant families in the period ca. 1375-1425, this is how the
picture appears to me at present:
David Lindsay = ca 22 Feb 1374/5 Elizabeth Stewart
E of Crawford I [date of dispensation]
d aft 12 Feb 1406/7 I
__________________I__________________________
I I
Alexander Lindsay Elizabeth Lindsay
born say 1376/1385 born say 1376/1385
d. bef 8 Sept 1439 = aft 20 Dec 1400
= say 1395 [bef 1410 - CP III:509] [SP V:604], as 2nd wife
Marjory Sir Robert Erskine
I I
____I______ ____________I___________
I I I I
I David Lindsay Janet Erskine I
I born say 1400/1405 born say 1401/1405 I
I = ca 26 Feb 1422/3 = [dispensation 26 Apr I
I [CP III:509-510] 1421 - Stuart, p. 451] I
I Marjory Ogilvie Sir Walter Stewart I
I of Lennox I
I I
I______________________________ I
I I I
* Elizabeth Lindsay * Christian Lindsay Christian Erskine
born say 1395/1398 born say 1398/1403 born say 1403/08
[dispensaton to = say 1415 [based on = say 1420/1425
marry William issue of 1st marriage] Patrick Graham
Douglas] Sir William Douglas Lord Graham
presumably dsp of Lochleven
Would that we had some firmer dates (a baptismal register would
be nice) on which to hang our steel bonnets.....
Cheers,
John
you wrote:
Also you might look at Erskine in SP. There was a contract in 1400
that the Earl of Crawford would help Sir RObert Erskine regain the
earldom of Mar from the Crown. This included a betrothal of Erskine to
one of the arl's daughters, usually taken to have been Elizabeth.
There do seem to be some chronological difficulties with the Douglas
pedigree. A daughter of Earl Alexander might be too young to have all
those children before the battle of Pinkie, and it also seems to
compress later generations too much.
-
JDUVALL
RE: Marriage of Sir Simon Leek and Margaret de Vaux
I'll check the pages I've copied from Payling's book to see if he lists
the sources for his discussion of the Leek family. If I find them, I'll
post them to the list.
I may have already asked this before, but is anything known of the
ancestry of this Sir John Vaux? The fact that Payling, if I recall
correctly (my notes are at home, so I'll have to verify this), indicated
that the Leeks were an old (traceable back to the time of either Henry
II or John if I'm not mistaken) family in the neighborhood, but not
particularly distinguished, and that Sir Simon's marriage to Margaret
Vaux was a real move up the social ladder (as it were) is rather
interesting in light of your original post pointing out that they were
related within a prohibited degree...
Jeff
the sources for his discussion of the Leek family. If I find them, I'll
post them to the list.
I may have already asked this before, but is anything known of the
ancestry of this Sir John Vaux? The fact that Payling, if I recall
correctly (my notes are at home, so I'll have to verify this), indicated
that the Leeks were an old (traceable back to the time of either Henry
II or John if I'm not mistaken) family in the neighborhood, but not
particularly distinguished, and that Sir Simon's marriage to Margaret
Vaux was a real move up the social ladder (as it were) is rather
interesting in light of your original post pointing out that they were
related within a prohibited degree...
Jeff
-
JTC
Re: Sonne-in-Law and Now-Wife
Thanks, Chris--
Eugene Stratton also says in "Applied Genealogy" that "now-wife"
doesn't necessarily mean a man had a previous wife; in the Dale case,
however, other evidence supports the conclusion that Edward Dale did
have a previous wife, and that she must have been the mother of
Katherine (Dale) Carter.
As Katherine is not my ancestor, I'm not going to say much about that
situation, but Diana (Skipwith) Dale was, by the laws of 17th century
VA (and I have Henings Statutes on CD-Rom) considered "feme covert,"
and legally unable to execute contracts, write a will, etc. I suppose
she could witness a document, but would have had absolutely no reason
to use her maiden name for that. In Dale's will she accepted what is
known as a "life-interest" in his estate, as opposed to exercising her
dower rights. This was a common arrangement for planters' wives, as it
gave them more income than they would have had through her dower, and
prevented the widow from walking off with full ownership of a third of
the personal property, which in 1694 included slaves (the law was
changed in 1705 to classify slaves as "real estate," partly in reaction
to this problem). This also shows that Diana Dale either did not bring
any real property into the marriage, or allowed her husband to co-opt
it (which would have been stupid, as he could have done anything he
wanted to with it, including selling it, without consulting her). If
she had any real property, she would have sought a "jointure," or
pre-nuptial agreement. Since that didn't happen, it is very likely she
had no such property. I mention this because the notion she wouldv'e
used her maiden name after marriage is extremely unlikely, and lacking
her own property, I can't think of a single reason she would have.
It's important to understand that in 1694, when Edward Dale wrote his
will, the law allowed a man to do anything he wanted to with his
estate, provided that he observed his wife's dower rights. If a wife
felt that she was short-changed in the will, she could renounce the
portion of it that applied to her and receive her dower rights instead.
The Rutmans cite only two definitions for the term "son-in-law" as I've
quoted (hence the use of the term "dual"): "step-son" and "spouse of a
child". This article is copiously footnoted with tables, statistics,
etc. and is available for purchase on amazon.com. The authors
generally support Preston Haynie and MichaelAnne Guido, which I'm sure
is a surprise to some.
There are now several good treatments of colonial women, which I found
to be eye-openers, and I think essential for any genealogist working in
colonial VA (see Marylynn Salmon's "Women and the Law of Property,"
Linda L. Sturtz's "Within Her Power," and Kathleen M. Brown's "Good
Wives Nasty Wenches & Anxious Patriarchs." These books are available
on amazon.com).
JTC
Eugene Stratton also says in "Applied Genealogy" that "now-wife"
doesn't necessarily mean a man had a previous wife; in the Dale case,
however, other evidence supports the conclusion that Edward Dale did
have a previous wife, and that she must have been the mother of
Katherine (Dale) Carter.
As Katherine is not my ancestor, I'm not going to say much about that
situation, but Diana (Skipwith) Dale was, by the laws of 17th century
VA (and I have Henings Statutes on CD-Rom) considered "feme covert,"
and legally unable to execute contracts, write a will, etc. I suppose
she could witness a document, but would have had absolutely no reason
to use her maiden name for that. In Dale's will she accepted what is
known as a "life-interest" in his estate, as opposed to exercising her
dower rights. This was a common arrangement for planters' wives, as it
gave them more income than they would have had through her dower, and
prevented the widow from walking off with full ownership of a third of
the personal property, which in 1694 included slaves (the law was
changed in 1705 to classify slaves as "real estate," partly in reaction
to this problem). This also shows that Diana Dale either did not bring
any real property into the marriage, or allowed her husband to co-opt
it (which would have been stupid, as he could have done anything he
wanted to with it, including selling it, without consulting her). If
she had any real property, she would have sought a "jointure," or
pre-nuptial agreement. Since that didn't happen, it is very likely she
had no such property. I mention this because the notion she wouldv'e
used her maiden name after marriage is extremely unlikely, and lacking
her own property, I can't think of a single reason she would have.
It's important to understand that in 1694, when Edward Dale wrote his
will, the law allowed a man to do anything he wanted to with his
estate, provided that he observed his wife's dower rights. If a wife
felt that she was short-changed in the will, she could renounce the
portion of it that applied to her and receive her dower rights instead.
The Rutmans cite only two definitions for the term "son-in-law" as I've
quoted (hence the use of the term "dual"): "step-son" and "spouse of a
child". This article is copiously footnoted with tables, statistics,
etc. and is available for purchase on amazon.com. The authors
generally support Preston Haynie and MichaelAnne Guido, which I'm sure
is a surprise to some.
There are now several good treatments of colonial women, which I found
to be eye-openers, and I think essential for any genealogist working in
colonial VA (see Marylynn Salmon's "Women and the Law of Property,"
Linda L. Sturtz's "Within Her Power," and Kathleen M. Brown's "Good
Wives Nasty Wenches & Anxious Patriarchs." These books are available
on amazon.com).
JTC
-
Gjest
Re: John Rotherham of Someries, Luton (+1492)
m...@btinternet.com schrieb:
His arms, according to the Visitation of Bedfordshire, were:
"vert, 3 bucks trippant or, over all a bend sinister"
MA-R
The History of Parliament, 1439-1509 Biography volume, provides some
interesting particulars in relation to John Rotherham of Luton, elected
MP for Canterbury in 1472, and for Bedfordshire in 1478.
His arms, according to the Visitation of Bedfordshire, were:
"vert, 3 bucks trippant or, over all a bend sinister"
MA-R
-
Gjest
Re: John Rotherham of Someries, Luton (+1492)
WJhonson@aol.com schrieb:
Will
Spot on, as usual! Alice Rotherham was Thomas St George's first wife
(and thus not ancestral to the Countess of Wessex, whose St George line
comes from Thomas' second marriage). Alice had two brothers, Sir
Thomas and George.
MA-R
In a message dated 5/11/06 2:05:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
A freeman of Canterbury by 1469, he married Alice
Forster, the daughter of John and Jane Winter of Canterbury; appointed
JP for Bedfordshire in 1472, he was Sheriff of Bucks and Beds in 1476-7
and again 1488-9; died 1492 and left a PCC will.
Is this the same John Rotheram who had a daughter Alice who married Thomas St
George of Hatley (1473-1540) ?
Will
Spot on, as usual! Alice Rotherham was Thomas St George's first wife
(and thus not ancestral to the Countess of Wessex, whose St George line
comes from Thomas' second marriage). Alice had two brothers, Sir
Thomas and George.
MA-R