Blount-Ayala

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 16 aug 2006 20:59:11

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hmmmmmmmm...

Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard -- Literally...

Well, No Surprises There, Victoria.

Perhaps that is why he is so interested in Genealogy -- particularly the
more mundane aspects thereof.

Bastards & Homosexuals Seem To Have A Particular Affinity For
Genealogy...

For Quite Obvious Reasons.

Enjoy!

DSH

It really is SO ignorant to reply to your own posts - you really are
so stupid aren't you?

I expect your father must have been SO dissappointed

The son of Admiral Wellington T Hines (war hero and pioneer of carrier
based
operations in the US Navy) Baby David's career was all mapped out for
him:
Yale, Officer Training - he was being groomed for a top slot at the
Pentagon.

But as with many great men, the son rarely lives up to expectations.

He was relieved for 'cause' on two separate occasions while serving in
the
United States Navy, the first being while assigned to Naval Security
Group
Activity Misawa, Japan, the second while assigned to CINCPAC's Intel
Division
on Oahu.

The latter incident got him reassigned to Pearl Harbor here he assumed
the duties as housing officer, quite a demotion for one whose career
had such glowing promise as a junior officer.

Never endearing, and forever the outcast, this "pompous nautical ass"
laboured hard and doggedly for his promotions up to the rank of
Commander, but he ran into the 'eye of the storm' when he tried to
pull one tantrum after another in disagreement with a very sage
Captain who would go on to become Commander, U.S.Naval Security Group
Command!

He was yanked from his operational duties on the first occasion, and
appointed XO simply for the convenience of being under close scrutiny
by the C.O, and in a position less harassing to the other 700+ members
of the command.

This was NOT a promotion.

He served only as XO while the paperwork for his transfer made it through
the
bureaucratic chain back in Washington. That didn't take all that long,
and
before anyone knew it, D. Spencer Hines and his marvellous wife (how
she's put
up with him for all these years must remain one of the world's greatest
mysteries), had departed Northern Honshu for the Hawaiian Islands.

It's one thing to butt heads with a Captain, but when told to cool your
jets
by a four-star and you still stand your ground, most wise men know that
their
careers will, at that very moment, gain great momentum and a natural
phenomenon of tailspins that have continued to this day!

In summary, in the words of a fellow officer who served with him:

" D Spencer Hines is one of the most arrogant jackasses to ever breath
and
walk upon the face of earth. He hadn't a clue what leadership was all
about,
and in the face of intelligence evaluation, he would always ask for a
point
paper when one's analysis varied from his - and that was often the case.

"A towering man, of bulk and arrogance, this red headed barbarian is
not worth the grey hairs many of your constituents seem to be letting
themselves in for.

"He is his father's son, but nothing like his father, but rather, more
a quasi-nautical south seas jester at this stage in life whose open
sores apparently continue to ooze and your group are the swabs being
used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


I agree with you, Grey. OTOH I don't think "Peter's" comment will faze DSH
any more than would a mosquito bite. And, yes, it is in very bad form to
gossip on Usenet about people's offline activities, especially since I make
up my own mind about a person's character and don't depend on other's second
hand ca-ca throwing.

- nilita

Peter

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter » 16 aug 2006 21:16:39

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:55:06 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
<poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you kindly, Grey

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

OK, areswipe, what, exactly, is" ash, trash, codswallop and lies"?
What is not factual about my post?


Are you not:
The son of Admiral Wellington T Hines (war hero and pioneer of carrier
based operations in the US Navy)



Is the following untrue? (I seem to remeber you claim membership of
some Yale drinking establishment
Baby David's career was all mapped out for him:
Yale, Officer Training - he was being groomed for a top slot at the
Pentagon.

We can all see the following is probaly true - is it?
But as with many great men, the son rarely lives up to expectations.

Do tell, is the following assertion incorrect?
He was relieved for 'cause' on two separate occasions while serving in
the United States Navy, the first being while assigned to Naval Security Group Activity Misawa, Japan, the second while assigned to CINCPAC's Intel Division on Oahu.

Houseboats I assume - or weren't you appointed housing officer in
Pearl Harbor?
The latter incident got him reassigned to Pearl Harbor here he assumed
the duties as housing officer, quite a demotion for one whose career
had such glowing promise as a junior officer.

Someone obviously knows you and your history, or did they make up the
following?
Never endearing, and forever the outcast, this "pompous nautical ass"
laboured hard and doggedly for his promotions up to the rank of
Commander, but he ran into the 'eye of the storm' when he tried to pull one tantrum after another in disagreement with a very sage Captain who would go on to become Commander, U.S.Naval Security Group
Command!


Were you?
He was yanked from his operational duties on the first occasion, and
appointed XO simply for the convenience of being under close scrutiny
by the C.O, and in a position less harassing to the other 700+ members
of the command.

Never mind
This was NOT a promotion.


He served only as XO while the paperwork for his transfer made it
through the bureaucratic chain back in Washington. That didn't take
all that long, and before anyone knew it, D. Spencer Hines and his
marvellous wife (how she's put up with him for all these years must
remain one of the world's greatest mysteries), had departed Northern
Honshu for the Hawaiian Islands.


It's one thing to butt heads with a Captain, but when told to cool
your jets by a four-star and you still stand your ground, most wise
men know that their careers will, at that very moment, gain great
momentum and a natural phenomenon of tailspins that have continued to
this day!

Perhaps you could tell us who you served with - I'm sure any officer
who described you as below could hardly fail to remember - we could
ask about, help you with some doubtless pinful memories - best get
them out of you tink mind etc.
In summary, in the words of a fellow officer who served with him:

" D Spencer Hines is one of the most arrogant jackasses to ever breath
and walk upon the face of earth. He hadn't a clue what leadership was
all about, and in the face of intelligence evaluation, he would always ask
for a point paper when one's analysis varied from his - and that was often the case.

Now I'm quite prepared to accept you are bald, but did tyou have red
hair?
"A towering man, of bulk and arrogance, this red headed barbarian is
not worth the grey hairs many of your constituents seem to be letting
themselves in for.


"He is his father's son, but nothing like his father, but rather, more
a quasi-nautical south seas jester at this stage in life whose open
sores apparently continue to ooze and your group are the swabs being
used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

--
Peter

D Spencer Hines est a deficio miles militis quod stultus
"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on his
own.

Aah, there speaks an expert

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

Aah, but is it your real name?
"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

So, if "Peter" isn't my real name, pray, do tell, what is my real
name? - I would be most interested to know, as it would contradict
what is shown on my birth certificate.
What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

They were all better men than you
Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons & Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons &

Contrasts. Ranking as a US navy housing officer?

--
Peter

D Spencer Hines est a deficio miles militis quod stultus

Peter Skelton

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter Skelton » 16 aug 2006 21:26:44

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
<gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
s


used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


It was more then we needed to hear wan't it? It wasn't new
information was it? It wasn't likely to improve anything, was it?
I guess that makes it a petty, mean deed. It's possible that, if
there were feweer PMDs in this world we'd have fewer WMDs as a
consequence.



Peter Skelton

Paul C

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Paul C » 16 aug 2006 21:45:09

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:26:39 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
<poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:

Yes, Good Points.

Well, Stockdill admits he is a bastard.

How many other bastards do we have in these groups?

Who, apart from an uptight repressed bore like yourself, actually
cares?

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 16 aug 2006 21:53:05

On 8/16/06 2:55 PM, in article fLKEg.190$M14.1757@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you kindly, Grey.

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on his
own.

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about HIMSELF. I
don't post lies about people.

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

New Subject:

What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons & Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

DSH

Assholes are assholes. I am usually patient and cut most Usenet posters a
lot of slack but I draw the line at attacks that are so detailed and
personal, they are creepy. Yuck!

OK, rant mode exited.

I think that Eisenhower's administration was significantly superior to
JFK's. He got the Interstate Highway system started, a system for which I
give thanks every time I drive to see my daughter in Springfield, IL or my
son in Jackson, TN. Ike was also a brilliant administrator, which nobody
knew about for years after his presidency. He probably was the best
president of the postwar period, after Truman and Reagan.

Kennedy's idolaters have had a reverse impact on me; I can't see that the
man did much of historic significance, if anything, during his nearly three
years in office. His Pulitzer Prize for "Profiles in Courage," which was
ghostwritten by Ted Sorenson, doesn't improve his standing in my estimation
much either. As we have discussed, he screwed up the Bay of Pigs situation
royally and narrowly avoided disaster during the Cuban Missile Crises. That
said, he wasn't a terrible president as he did create an era of good feeling
domestically and presided over a much needed tax cut. I would give his
presidency about a C.

Grey Satterfield

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 16 aug 2006 22:00:48

On 8/16/06 2:59 PM, in article jOKEg.11360$tP4.5415@clgrps12, "La N"
<nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hmmmmmmmm...

Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard -- Literally...

Well, No Surprises There, Victoria.

Perhaps that is why he is so interested in Genealogy -- particularly the
more mundane aspects thereof.

Bastards & Homosexuals Seem To Have A Particular Affinity For
Genealogy...

For Quite Obvious Reasons.

Enjoy!

DSH

[long and disgusting anti-DSH screed snipped.]

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


I agree with you, Grey. OTOH I don't think "Peter's" comment will faze DSH
any more than would a mosquito bite. And, yes, it is in very bad form to
gossip on Usenet about people's offline activities, especially since I make
up my own mind about a person's character and don't depend on other's second
hand ca-ca throwing.

- nilita

I am far from a DSH apologist, God knows! There have been times when he
might have said with reason that he was one of my favorite whipping boys.
Nevertheless, the nasty, anonymous Peter's post REALLY turned me off. There
should be limits -- even on Usenet -- and Peter far exceeded them.

Spencer's weakness can also be his strength and nobody ever questioned his
courage or ability to stick to his rhetorical guns. So I agree, Peter's
post will not modify Spencer's conduct -- good or bad -- one iota. And this
time that's all right

Grey Satterfield

Peter Skelton

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter Skelton » 16 aug 2006 22:10:26

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:53:05 -0500, Grey Satterfield
<gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 2:55 PM, in article fLKEg.190$M14.1757@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you kindly, Grey.

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on his
own.

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about HIMSELF. I
don't post lies about people.

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

New Subject:

What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons & Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

DSH

Assholes are assholes. I am usually patient and cut most Usenet posters a
lot of slack but I draw the line at attacks that are so detailed and
personal, they are creepy. Yuck!

OK, rant mode exited.

I think that Eisenhower's administration was significantly superior to
JFK's. He got the Interstate Highway system started, a system for which I
give thanks every time I drive to see my daughter in Springfield, IL or my
son in Jackson, TN. Ike was also a brilliant administrator, which nobody
knew about for years after his presidency. He probably was the best
president of the postwar period, after Truman and Reagan.

Kennedy's idolaters have had a reverse impact on me; I can't see that the
man did much of historic significance, if anything, during his nearly three
years in office. His Pulitzer Prize for "Profiles in Courage," which was
ghostwritten by Ted Sorenson, doesn't improve his standing in my estimation
much either. As we have discussed, he screwed up the Bay of Pigs situation
royally and narrowly avoided disaster during the Cuban Missile Crises. That
said, he wasn't a terrible president as he did create an era of good feeling
domestically and presided over a much needed tax cut. I would give his
presidency about a C.

The significance of Kennedy's presidency was that he was the

first of his generation to rise to the post. He, like Reagan, was
a positive symbol. They were symbols for different things, and
quite dissimillar in other ways but it's an interesting point.

Peter Skelton

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 aug 2006 22:15:05

In a message dated 8/15/06 10:13:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
paul.mackenzie@ozemail.com.au writes:

<< Genealogists have in the past confused Mary d1326, the wife of William
de Breouse d1290 Lord of Bramber and Gower, and daughter of William de
Ros of Helmsey with Mary de Breouse d1361 widow of Thomas of Brotherton,
Earl of Norfolk and Marshall of England, and daughter of Peter de
Breouse d1312, son of the said William de Breouse,and his wife Mary. >>

Paul thank you for this note.
What is the source who has corrected this erroneous identification?
I'm also, contrary to what you state above, showing this Mary as dau of
Robert, Baron Ros by Isabel d'Aubigny, rather than his father William de Ros Lord
of Helmsley by Lucy FitzPiers

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 16 aug 2006 22:19:57

On 8/16/06 3:26 PM, in article rgv6e2lk0631a7f1cs38b8dcom13re3cus@4ax.com,
"Peter Skelton" <skeltonp@cogeco.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
s

used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


It was more then we needed to hear wan't it? It wasn't new
information was it? It wasn't likely to improve anything, was it?
I guess that makes it a petty, mean deed. It's possible that, if
there were feweer PMDs in this world we'd have fewer WMDs as a
consequence.

Yep, it's pretty bad when it is so far out of line it causes me to rise to
DSH's defense (not that he really needs defending).

Grey Satterfield

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 16 aug 2006 22:24:07

In message of 16 Aug, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/16/06 1:29:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:

CP IX, 598 has her father as Piers de Brewes of Tetbury, quoting
Cal. Inq. p. m. vol. viii, no 529 (p. 577) and Cott. MS., Jul., C
vii, fo. 174. There is no correction in XIV nor on Chris Phillips'
site.


Thank you Tim. How strange, that Heraldry would not have read CP on
this point. Unless they are challenging the identification, but of
course their book, concerned with Heraldry, not with paternity
disputes, doesn't make it clear. What year was CP IX published?

1936.

Doesn't Heraldry give its sources?

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

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 aug 2006 22:25:02

In a message dated 8/16/06 1:29:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:

<< CP IX, 598 has her father as Piers de Brewes of Tetbury, quoting Cal.
Inq. p. m. vol. viii, no 529 (p. 577) and Cott. MS., Jul., C vii, fo.
174. There is no correction in XIV nor on Chris Phillips' site. >>

Thank you Tim. How strange, that Heraldry would not have read CP on this
point. Unless they are challenging the identification, but of course their book,
concerned with Heraldry, not with paternity disputes, doesn't make it clear.
What year was CP IX published?

Will

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 16 aug 2006 22:27:16

On 8/16/06 4:10 PM, in article l727e25389kutshmvlpg2qvg9cu3839ufv@4ax.com,
"Peter Skelton" <skeltonp@cogeco.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:53:05 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 2:55 PM, in article fLKEg.190$M14.1757@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you kindly, Grey.

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on his
own.

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about HIMSELF. I
don't post lies about people.

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

New Subject:

What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons & Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

DSH

Assholes are assholes. I am usually patient and cut most Usenet posters a
lot of slack but I draw the line at attacks that are so detailed and
personal, they are creepy. Yuck!

OK, rant mode exited.

I think that Eisenhower's administration was significantly superior to
JFK's. He got the Interstate Highway system started, a system for which I
give thanks every time I drive to see my daughter in Springfield, IL or my
son in Jackson, TN. Ike was also a brilliant administrator, which nobody
knew about for years after his presidency. He probably was the best
president of the postwar period, after Truman and Reagan.

Kennedy's idolaters have had a reverse impact on me; I can't see that the
man did much of historic significance, if anything, during his nearly three
years in office. His Pulitzer Prize for "Profiles in Courage," which was
ghostwritten by Ted Sorenson, doesn't improve his standing in my estimation
much either. As we have discussed, he screwed up the Bay of Pigs situation
royally and narrowly avoided disaster during the Cuban Missile Crises. That
said, he wasn't a terrible president as he did create an era of good feeling
domestically and presided over a much needed tax cut. I would give his
presidency about a C.

The significance of Kennedy's presidency was that he was the
first of his generation to rise to the post. He, like Reagan, was
a positive symbol. They were symbols for different things, and
quite dissimillar in other ways but it's an interesting point.

This is true. It's easy to forget at this late date that when Kennedy was
elected his Irish Catholicism was a very big deal; but he won anyway. Like
Reagan, JFK was an incredibly handsome, charming man who had a gorgeous
wife, to boot. That's what I meant about JFK having created an era of good
feeling. It really did make up for a lot of his failings in other areas.

Grey Satterfield

Peter

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter » 16 aug 2006 22:33:16

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:00:48 -0500, Grey Satterfield
<gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:


I am far from a DSH apologist, God knows! There have been times when he
might have said with reason that he was one of my favorite whipping boys.
Nevertheless, the nasty, anonymous Peter's post REALLY turned me off. There
should be limits -- even on Usenet -- and Peter far exceeded them.

I'm genuinely puzzled.

1. I'm not annonymous - Peter is my real name, my surname can
doubtelss be found by means of Google and my email address
2. What sort of limits would you like to see applied to Usenet posts?
Should they be be limits that met your particular sensibilities?
Should such limits change as you sensibilities change? Please do tell.
Spencer's weakness can also be his strength and nobody ever questioned his
courage or ability to stick to his rhetorical guns. So I agree, Peter's
post will not modify Spencer's conduct -- good or bad -- one iota. And this
time that's all right

Hines is so far gone that I don't expect anyone could change his
conduct - least od all me - but perhaps he will become the subject of
such ridicuile that he will stop polluting SGB (and many other NG's
apparently)
--
Cheers

Peter

Please remove the invalid to reply

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 aug 2006 22:36:03

In a message dated 8/14/06 7:06:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:

<< In brief, this is a charter of Sir James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith
(d. 1420) dated 8 May 1388, granting the lands of 'Hutone' in
Annandale to William de Caldecotis and his wife Christiana. >>

No no bad ! Now I have to redo the tree as she cannot now fit unless Leo's
est of 1344 for the birth of her grandfather is off by at least a decade.
Will Johnson

D. Patterson

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Patterson » 16 aug 2006 22:42:42

Peter wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:00:48 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:



I am far from a DSH apologist, God knows! There have been times when he
might have said with reason that he was one of my favorite whipping boys.
Nevertheless, the nasty, anonymous Peter's post REALLY turned me off. There
should be limits -- even on Usenet -- and Peter far exceeded them.


I'm genuinely puzzled.

1. I'm not annonymous - Peter is my real name, my surname can
doubtelss be found by means of Google and my email address
2. What sort of limits would you like to see applied to Usenet posts?
Should they be be limits that met your particular sensibilities?
Should such limits change as you sensibilities change? Please do tell.

Spencer's weakness can also be his strength and nobody ever questioned his
courage or ability to stick to his rhetorical guns. So I agree, Peter's
post will not modify Spencer's conduct -- good or bad -- one iota. And this
time that's all right


Hines is so far gone that I don't expect anyone could change his
conduct - least od all me - but perhaps he will become the subject of
such ridicuile that he will stop polluting SGB (and many other NG's
apparently)


So, you admit to deliberately ridiculing DSH personal reputation for the
purpose of intimidating and terrorizing DSH into forgoing his right to
exercise free speech.

Peter

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter » 16 aug 2006 22:56:10

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:42:42 -0700, "D. Patterson" <nye@fidalgo.net>
wrote:

So, you admit to deliberately ridiculing DSH personal reputation for the
purpose of intimidating and terrorizing DSH into forgoing his right to
exercise free speech.

Hines is the author of his reputation - I make no claim whatsoever for
it - it's all his own work

Hines is welcome to excercise his right to free speech, no problem
with that at all.

Do I think he should post the drivel he does - perhaps not, but
certainly not to SGB - it's all off topic.

Basically, if he's upset about it he has some choices, stop posting or
modify his ubnacceptable behaviour.

I note that you, along with a number of others, feel that my posting
about Hines was wrong - fair enough, that is your opinion and you must
be free the express it. However, I note that you (and the others)
don't refute any of what was written - even Hines managed only to call
them lies. I've asked him to contradict what was written - he has
every right to. I somehow suspect though that we will never have a
rebuttal from him as I'm sure he knows that doubtless many ex naval
colleagues will enter the debate - how do you think that would go? I
think Hines knows.
--
Cheers

Peter

Please remove the invalid to reply

Tony Hoskins

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Tony Hoskins » 16 aug 2006 23:01:02

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines
by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it
makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Thank you kindly, Grey.

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on
his
own.

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about
HIMSELF. I
don't post lies about people.

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

New Subject:

What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight
David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons &
Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

--------------------------------------------------

Need we carry on *yet again* with this embarrassing and utterly
unnecessary kind of badinage? I for one had greatly enjoyed the months
of civility and sense this forum enjoyed - until recently.

Please don't submit the rest of us to these infantilisms.



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

Gjest

Re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 aug 2006 23:02:02

Dear John and others,
According to Carl Boyer 3rd`s book "
Medieval English Ancestors of Certain Americans (2001) p 58 under Comyn, He lists
Richard and Hextilda`s children as John who d between 1152-1159 when He and wife
Hextilda gave to the monks of Saint Mary of Kelso the church of
Lyntrunrudderic (now West Linton) for the souls of his lord Earl Henry and for that of his
own son John who were buried there. Boyer lists SP I: 505 as his reference
for their five children John, William, Odo /Odinel, Simon and David, who is
given in Alan Young`s book Robert the Bruce`s Rivals: The Comyns 1212-1314,
chart p x as a son of William`s. Boyer also mentions Idonea Comyn as daughter of
Richard and Hextilda and wife to Adam Fitz Gilbert. Boyner mentions Odinel
as a witness to a charter at Kelso in 1162 and both Odinel and Simon as
witnesses in abt 1166 when He granted with Hextilda`s consent the lands of
Slipperfield in Peebles to the Augustinian friars of Holyrood. So apparently Hextilda
was the mother of all his children and Young`s estimate of a marriage in 1145
is not far off. The previous year, probably after Richard`s brother Osbert
Comyn was killed and their uncle William already Chancellor to King David I gave
up the Bishopric of Durham which He had seized with the aid of his nephews in
1142 in return for Northallerton Castle, York being granted to his nephew
Richard. Richard had at least three brothers William killed in 1142 probably
during the intial seizure, Osbert killed in 1144 above and Walter Comyn who
survived until at least 1162 and mentioned in the Kelso charter.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Peter Skelton

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Peter Skelton » 16 aug 2006 23:10:59

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:19:57 -0500, Grey Satterfield
<gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 3:26 PM, in article rgv6e2lk0631a7f1cs38b8dcom13re3cus@4ax.com,
"Peter Skelton" <skeltonp@cogeco.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
s

used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


It was more then we needed to hear wan't it? It wasn't new
information was it? It wasn't likely to improve anything, was it?
I guess that makes it a petty, mean deed. It's possible that, if
there were feweer PMDs in this world we'd have fewer WMDs as a
consequence.

Yep, it's pretty bad when it is so far out of line it causes me to rise to
DSH's defense (not that he really needs defending).

Needs defending, or is worth defending? He isn't IMO. My

objections had nothing to do with protecting DSH.

Peter Skelton

Gjest

Re: Some random thoughts on the July issue of the NEHGR

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 aug 2006 23:20:03

Dear John and others,
Also found this article interesting because
of a descent from Lydia (Eliot) Penniman via Spear ( through an irregular
connection to Ruggles) then Miller / Mueller of Waldoborough, Maine, Cushman to
Cummings.

Sincerely,

James W Cummings

Dixmont, Maine USA

D. Patterson

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Patterson » 16 aug 2006 23:39:12

Peter wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:42:42 -0700, "D. Patterson" <nye@fidalgo.net
wrote:


So, you admit to deliberately ridiculing DSH personal reputation for the
purpose of intimidating and terrorizing DSH into forgoing his right to
exercise free speech.


Hines is the author of his reputation - I make no claim whatsoever for
it - it's all his own work

Hines is welcome to excercise his right to free speech, no problem
with that at all.

Do I think he should post the drivel he does - perhaps not, but
certainly not to SGB - it's all off topic.

Basically, if he's upset about it he has some choices, stop posting or
modify his ubnacceptable behaviour.

I note that you, along with a number of others, feel that my posting
about Hines was wrong - fair enough, that is your opinion and you must
be free the express it. However, I note that you (and the others)
don't refute any of what was written - even Hines managed only to call
them lies. I've asked him to contradict what was written - he has
every right to. I somehow suspect though that we will never have a
rebuttal from him as I'm sure he knows that doubtless many ex naval
colleagues will enter the debate - how do you think that would go? I
think Hines knows.


Your actions speak louder than your words. You have admitted to using
personal attacks upon the personal reputation of the messenger to
suppress the message rather than attacking only the message and the
conduct. We do not need to refute your personal accusations regardless
of whether or not they have any merit. They are none of our business and
none of your business. If you make it your business, you will be
behaving like a poisonous old woman gossip spreading around falsehoods
along with whatever half truths there may or may not be. The next time
you think you know enough to use such gossip as a cudgel, you should
take notice of how it will impact your own reputation for honesty and
credibility. In one example, there is the case of a U.S. Naval
intelligence officer at Pearl Harbor who displeased his superior officer
and was banished from intelligence work to command a drydock in
California. His name was Joseph J. Rochefort, the U.S. naval
intelligence officer responsible for providing Nimitz with the
information needed to ambuh the Japanese fleet at the Battle of Midway.

Renia

Re: Carey Descents From Henry VIII?

Legg inn av Renia » 16 aug 2006 23:41:24

He's not a ragamuffin at all but a journalist and magazine editor and a
respected genealogist who has no fear of saying what he thinks.

D. Spencer Hines wrote:
It's good to see that Stockdull is a Tight Little Islander -- one of the
worst variants of ragamuffin Brit -- parochial to the core.

I had always suspected as much.

He's also often tight it more ways than one, I suspect.

DSH

Fortem Posce Animum


Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 16 aug 2006 23:45:58

On 8/16/06 5:10 PM, in article ft57e2120jcqesjbjmvliuk5bv9dihqoof@4ax.com,
"Peter Skelton" <skeltonp@cogeco.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:19:57 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 3:26 PM, in article rgv6e2lk0631a7f1cs38b8dcom13re3cus@4ax.com,
"Peter Skelton" <skeltonp@cogeco.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:

On 8/16/06 1:11 PM, in article 2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com,
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
s

used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*


It was more then we needed to hear wan't it? It wasn't new
information was it? It wasn't likely to improve anything, was it?
I guess that makes it a petty, mean deed. It's possible that, if
there were feweer PMDs in this world we'd have fewer WMDs as a
consequence.

Yep, it's pretty bad when it is so far out of line it causes me to rise to
DSH's defense (not that he really needs defending).

Needs defending, or is worth defending? He isn't IMO. My
objections had nothing to do with protecting DSH.

Oh, I know that Peter was not trying to defend DSH. My point was that DSH
is going to do what DSH wants to do, no matter what anyone says about him,
in his defense or otherwise. This, of course is as much of an indictment as
it is a defense.

Grey Satterfield

Renia

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Renia » 16 aug 2006 23:48:12

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular attraction
to Genealogy. Often they realize they will never have any DESCENDANTS -- so
they look BACK to ANCESTORS for personal validation and affirmation.

DSH

I suppose you come under this category, eh?

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 00:06:02

In a message dated 8/16/06 2:43:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:

<< 1936. Doesn't Heraldry give its sources? >>

Well not fact by fact, this particular entry, Table 3 states this

Thomas of Brotherton E of Norfolk mar 1136? Alice d of Roger Haleys

under Thomas is lists his dates as 1300 1338
then it says m(2) Mary (d 1362) d of William L Ros

Interesting that in the Foreword they specially say that "As for the section
covering Britain, it is impossible not to mention the inexhaustible patience
of the late Mr R P Graham-Vivian, MVo, MC, formerly Norroy and Ulster King of
Arms, Mr J P Brooke-Little, MVO the present Norroy and Ulster King of Arms, and
Mr Don Pottinger, Unicorn Pursuivant"

That's about as close as they get to a "bibliography of sources" which is
sorely missing in this work unfortunately.

Will

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 00:11:02

In a message dated 8/16/06 3:02:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:

<< Thomas of Brotherton E of Norfolk mar 1136? Alice d of Roger Haleys
under Thomas is lists his dates as 1300 1338
then it says m(2) Mary (d 1362) d of William L Ros >>


Um oops. It says 1336? not 1136? of course.

Tony Hoskins

Re: Some random thoughts on the July issue of the NEHGR

Legg inn av Tony Hoskins » 17 aug 2006 00:45:03

Eliots abounding.
On the myriad Eliot descendants. For years I've observed that descents
from the Rev. John Eliot and his sisters (particularly his sisters) are
extremely common in America. Include me in this group as a 10 greats
grandson of Mary (Eliot) Payson (1620-1679), sister of the Rev. John
Eliot.


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

Gjest

Re: Combining Royalty - West and East

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 01:21:04

---- norenxaq <norenxaq@san.rr.com> wrote:

=============
mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:

"Leo van de Pas" schrieb:



What I find fascinating is that every genealogist differs from the next,
how
they collect and also differ in their individual reasons why. After many
years I have built up a large genealogical collection, mainly for the
Western World, but I have been able to touch on other genealogies as well
and find it fascinating to see what every now and then emerges. I would
like
to provide here a genealogical line and I hope that people who can add to
the more recent generations will make contact.



Leo

I can't lay my hand on the relevant notes at present, but the
descendants of the Byzantines into the Moghul and Persian imperial
families were traced a few years ago - the results were published in
one of the American genealogical journals over three or four issues.
Unfortunately, the royal lines petered out after the early 19th
century, although relatively recent individuals were traced. If you
are interested, I'll try to dig out my notes.

Michael



this appeared in The Genealogist


By Morris Bierbrier

Paul Mackenzie

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Paul Mackenzie » 17 aug 2006 02:15:30

WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 8/15/06 10:13:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
paul.mackenzie@ozemail.com.au writes:

Genealogists have in the past confused Mary d1326, the wife of William
de Breouse d1290 Lord of Bramber and Gower, and daughter of William de
Ros of Helmsey with Mary de Breouse d1361 widow of Thomas of Brotherton,
Earl of Norfolk and Marshall of England, and daughter of Peter de
Breouse d1312, son of the said William de Breouse,and his wife Mary.

Paul thank you for this note.
What is the source who has corrected this erroneous identification?
I'm also, contrary to what you state above, showing this Mary as dau of
Robert, Baron Ros by Isabel d'Aubigny, rather than his father William de Ros Lord
of Helmsley by Lucy FitzPiers

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson



Hi Will

The reference for Mary de Breouse, widow of Thomas de Brotherton is
Complete Peerage Vol 1X pages 598-599. In the past, I thought the
citations referred to in the Complete Peerage were insufficient for this
conclusion, so I did some investigations of my own and came to the same
conclusion. {see my notes below}

As to your question concerning concerning Mary the wife of William de
Breouse I have stated what is said in Complete Peerage Vol II page 302.

I think you may be right and this was corrected in the lastest addition
of the Complete Peerage. I can't find these corrections at the moment
so I can't check it. May be Tim can help.

Regards

Paul


Notes
Mary de Brewes, Countess of Norfolk, Earl Marshall

Mary de Brewes obtained the rank of Countess of Norfolk and Earl
Marshall through her marriage to Thomas de Brotherton, the brother of
king Edward II. Mary was a widow and had been previously married to
Ralph de Cobham and had a son John Cobham. During the reign of king
Edward III it appears that Mary obtained favour as she is off mentioned
in the official communications as the king's aunt. Evenso it appears
she contributed very little to the affairs of state.

The Complete Peerage states that Mary was the daughter of Peter de
Brewes of Tetbury and in this regard cites the following references…Cal
Inq. P.M. Vol 8 p 377 No. 529, Cott MS Jul. C 7 fo. 174. The last
reference is an obscure reference and is not available to me.

The facts that I uncovered which appear relevant to Mary's parentage are
summarised below:-

A. In an I.P.M on Oliver de Ingham in 1347 it is stated that Mary,
Countess of Norfolk had a brother named Thomas de Brewes. CIPM 08:374,377.

B. In 1347 Mary, Countess of Norfolk was granted the wardship of the
lands of John de Brewes (1) d 1342 of Lee Lincoln and Wauton Surrey,
until his heir John de Brewes (2) reached lawful age. CF 1347:40.

C. In an inquiry in 1357 the lands of John de Brewes (2) were taken into
the kings hands as it was found he was insane. In that inquiry it was
stated that certain lands of his were at one time or another in the
possession of Mary, Countess of Norfolk, and a Thomas de Brewes, Knt.
CIPM 10:318-320

D. In 1357, John Cobham, the son of Mary, was granted the wardships of
the lands of Lee, Gay Burton, Scothern in Lincoln that belonged to John
de Brewes (2) who was declared an idiot. CC1354-1360:421,422

E. In a letters patent in 1363 it was stated that Thomas de Brewes , now
deceased, had been previously granted the wardships of the lands in
Wauton in Surrey which belonged to the idiot John de Brewes (2) and the
manors were still in the hands of Beatrix his wife as executrix of his
will. CP 1361-1364:416.

F. In an Inq.p.m d1361 on a Thomas de Brewes of Tetbury it was found
that two parts of the manor of Boseham, Sussex was held in the right of
his wife Beatrice, who had held the manor for her life by gift of Thomas
de Brotherton, earl of Norfolk and Marshall of England. The third part
of the manor is in the hand of the countess Marshall by way of dower
after the death of the Earl Marshall her husband. CIPM 11:028,29.

H. There exists a deed dated 1342 concerning the judgement of a plea of
dower for 1/3 of the Manor of Boseham between Mary, Countess of Norfolk
and Thomas de Brewosa and wife. A2A database, Catalogue Ref. Iveagh MSS

I. Dugdale, citing claus 16,2, m23 states that a Thomas de Brewes was
imprisoned in York for his part in the Lancaster Rebellion, but was
bailed by Ralph Cobham. See also Parliamentary Writs & Military Summons
2:589.

K. 20 Dec 1357 Thomas de Brewes, warden of the forest on this side of
the Trent was granted an exemption from the payment due by him to the
king for the keeping of the lands of John de Brewes, son and heir of
John de Brewes, an idiot in return for service so long as he holds the
office and have the keeping of the lands. He was also granted an
exemption from payment from rents due to the abbot of Lyre concerning
lands in Bromleigh, Surrey.
CP 1357 p646

L. Thomas de Brewosa, late keeper of the forest died shortly before 10
July 1361. Cal. Fine 1356-68, p195.

M. Thomas de Brewes of Tetbury died shortly before 10 June 1361. Cal.
Fine 1356-68 p 194,195, CIPM 10:28,29

N. John de Brewes (1) of Lee, the father of the John de Brewes (2), was
a brother of Thomas de Brewes of Tetbury. See CP 1445 p391.

Summarising, it is clear that the Thomas de Brewes mentioned in
reference E, was Thomas de Brewes Knt of Tetbury, as it well known that
this Thomas de Brewes had died in 1361 and had a wife named Beatrix who
survived him. It is also well known that this Thomas was the son and
heir of Peter de Brewes of Tetbury by Agnes Hussey.

It is thus clear that Mary de Brewes, Countess of Norfolk and Thomas de
Brewes Knt of Tetbury were jointly granted the wardships of the lands of
the idiot John de Brewes (references B,C,D and E) THOUGH their kinship
is not readily apparent in these references.

It is known that Mary had a brother named Thomas de Brewes (reference A)
THOUGH his identity is not readily apparent in this reference, for
example no mention is made of their parents or of any estates held by
Thomas.

It is also known that John de Brewes (1) of Lee, the father of the John
de Brewes (2), was a brother of Thomas de Brewes of Tetbury. See CP
1445 p391 and also the properties Of John descend to Hugh Cokesey.

Also, it appears that Mary de Brewes used her influence on her husband
Ralph Cobham to obtain the release of her brother Thomas de Brewes from
prison in York for his part in the Lancaster rebellion.. It appears
that Thomas de Brewes involvement with the Lancaster Rebellion was due
in part to the influence of Henry Tyers who was one of the major
participants of the Rebellion. Henry Tyers was the keeper of the lands
and the heir of Piers de Brewes, to wit said Thomas de Brewes from about
1312 to 1322. CC1313-1318:98, CC1318-1323:484, CP1307-1313:218,
CP1313-1317:499. Henry Tyers was subsequently beheaded for his part in
the Rebellion.

Ralph Cobham was the first husband of Mary de Brewes, the sister of
Thomas. Mary latter married Thomas de Brotherton and became known as
Mary, Countess of Norfolk, Earl Marshall CIPM 06:436-439, CIPM
08:374-377, CF 1347:40, CIPM 10:318-320, CIPM 11:305-314,
CC1354-1360:421-422, CP 1361-1364:416, CIPM 06:436-439.

Rosie Bevan drew my attention to facts F and H above, which suggest
firstly, that Mary de Brewes, as wife of Thomas de Brotherton used her
influence to arrange the marriage between her stepdaughter and her
brother Thomas de Brewes, and secondly there was a dispute between Mary
de Brewes and her step-daughter cum sister-in-law concerning her dower
in the the manor of Bosecam. However the chronology cannot be verified
as we do not know the dates of the marriages.

Taking all this together, I think on the balance of probabilities it is
safe to conclude that Mary de Brewes, Countess of Norfolk, Earl Marshall
and Sir Thomas de Brewes of Tetbury were most likely siblings. However,
it must be stated that it is not conclusive. I understand that notes
of the will of Thomas de Brotherton are preserved in the Collections of
Nicholas Charles, Herald, [Cott MS Jul. C 7 fo. 174]. It would be
interesting to see the the Cott. manuscript.

Q

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Q » 17 aug 2006 04:28:02

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108EFE1.2F33B%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/16/06 2:55 PM, in article fLKEg.190$M14.1757@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108DEB1.2F31F%gsatterfield@cox.net...

Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so mean-spirited, and so out of line, it makes
me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before
telling us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you kindly, Grey.

It's also a complete load of ash, trash, codswallop and lies.

"Peter" -- who is a notorious sock puppet -- just likes to retail said
lies -- he's not capable of doing any useful, substantive posting on his
own.

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about HIMSELF.
I
don't post lies about people.

This is the sort of abuse I'm used to -- because I use my Real Name.

"Peter" is far too cowardly to use HIS Real Name.

New Subject:

What are your considered opinions about the Administrations of Dwight
David
Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Successes & Failures -- Strengths & Weaknesses. Comparisons &
Contrasts.
Ranking As Presidents?

DSH

Assholes are assholes. I am usually patient and cut most Usenet posters a
lot of slack but I draw the line at attacks that are so detailed and
personal, they are creepy. Yuck!

I found it creepy too. "Peter" comes across to me as a stalker. -- Q

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 04:45:43

I say again, "Peter" is merely another little sock puppet.

DSH

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C108EFE1.2F33B%gsatterfield@cox.net...

I think that Eisenhower's administration was significantly superior to
JFK's. He got the Interstate Highway system started, a system for which I
give thanks every time I drive to see my daughter in Springfield, IL or my
son in Jackson, TN. Ike was also a brilliant administrator, which nobody
knew about for years after his presidency. He probably was the best
president of the postwar period, after Truman and Reagan.

I think that's spot on.

Jackson, Tennessee is probably a very interesting town. I drove close to it
on my way to Shiloh a few years ago. Any particular notable Historical
Sites nearby?

Springfield, Illinois is, of course Abraham Lincoln's home town. Your kids
live in interesting places.

Kennedy's idolaters have had a reverse impact on me; I can't see that the
man did much of historic significance, if anything, during his nearly
three
years in office. His Pulitzer Prize for "Profiles in Courage," which was
ghostwritten by Ted Sorenson, doesn't improve his standing in my
estimation
much either. As we have discussed, he screwed up the Bay of Pigs
situation
royally and narrowly avoided disaster during the Cuban Missile Crises.
That
said, he wasn't a terrible president as he did create an era of good
feeling
domestically and presided over a much needed tax cut. I would give his
presidency about a C.

Grey Satterfield

I think that's quite correct too.

Eisenhower has not had as many scribblers writing about him as has Kennedy.

But he was an excellent President, much underestimated at the time. I'd
rank him much closer to Truman and perhaps even above Truman. The survey I
posted had Truman as #7 and Eisenhower as #8.

Truman and ACHESON *together* made a Great Team, just as Nixon and Kissinger
did.

Fred Greenstein's _The Hidden-Hand Presidency: Eisenhower as Leader_ is one
of the best books about Ike as President.

"Some books, like some scientific theories, have the capacity to alter
people's whole way of looking at the world. Such a book is The Hidden-Hand
Presidency. To read it is to discover, among other things, that everything
you ever believed about Dwight Eisenhower as president of the United States
is wrong." -- Economist

"A fascinating exposition of Eisenhower's leadership techniques." --
Political Science Quarterly

"An important corrective to standard treatments of Ike as president." --
Journal of Politics

"A deliberately circumscribed book, but the sharp focus serves its
intellectual intensity." -- National Review

"By his painstaking analysis, Greenstein should convince even the most
unrelenting critic of Eisenhower's that the man had greater skills as Chief
Executive than have been recognized." -- New Republic

<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0801849012/sr=1-1/qid=1155785027/ref=sr_1_1/002-1090110-1204016?ie=UTF8&s=books>

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 04:58:07

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular attraction
to Genealogy.

Often they realize they will never have any DESCENDANTS -- so
they look BACK to ANCESTORS for personal validation and affirmation.

However, only a VERY ignorant pogue or poguette would think that ALL folks
who are interested in Genealogy are Homosexuals, Lesbians or Bastards.

Yes, it would take a Truly Stupid Person to believe that.

But there seem to be quite a few of them here.

How Sweet It Is!

DSH

Fortem Posce Animum

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 17 aug 2006 05:10:53

"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a great
deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service. I can't
say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it is. It would
not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young pontificating
or moralizing in older age. -the Troll

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 17 aug 2006 05:33:59

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e7r2ibgl6gfb5@corp.supernews.com...
"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a great
deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service. I can't
say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it is. It
would not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young
pontificating or moralizing in older age. -the Troll



Well, I have no doubt that Hines has "issues". But, I like your
explanation, Hippo-troll, that he has some kind of personality disorder.
I'm suspectin' that Hines is exactly the same IRL as he is on Usenet, that
he is not projecting some kind of fake net persona ..%)

- nilita

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 17 aug 2006 07:00:34

"La N" wrote in message

"hippo" wrote in message

"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a
great deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service.
I can't say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it
is. It would not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young
pontificating or moralizing in older age. -the Troll



Well, I have no doubt that Hines has "issues". But, I like your
explanation, Hippo-troll, that he has some kind of personality disorder.
I'm suspectin' that Hines is exactly the same IRL as he is on Usenet, that
he is not projecting some kind of fake net persona ..%)

You're right he can not change himself. He is confident he is right and
everyone else is wrong, fools, and or weak. For folks with no natural
empathy, personality and values are learned, but without the humanity to
temper what is learned, if that makes sense. Form without substance may be a
better way to put it. It isn't his fault or a disorder, but rather a
personality type, which in an extreme form, creates a very difficult person
to live and work with.

I know a man like him. He can't understand why he has a 200+% annual
turnover in personnel and puts it down to lazy and incompetent workers. It
doesn't occur to him that it's wrong to send a 65 year old female office
worker on a seven block walk each way in summer heat to get his shirts out
of the laundry. I'd have fired any manager of mine who pulled a stunt like
that and they knew it. -the Troll

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 07:12:44

Hilarious!

Hines has never sent a 65-year-old female office worker on a seven-block
walk each way in summer heat to get his shirts out of the laundry -- or even
a 25-year-old female office worker.

"Hippo" has slipped his leash again and is just venting his spleen -- some
frustrations in his own life no doubt.

Sad...

Of course, "Hippo" hides behind a pseudonym -- in order to throw rocks
incognito.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e81g6ajlqrlf3@corp.supernews.com...

I know a man like him. He can't understand why he has a 200+% annual
turnover in personnel and puts it down to lazy and incompetent workers. It
doesn't occur to him that it's wrong to send a 65 year old female office
worker on a seven block walk each way in summer heat to get his shirts out
of the laundry. I'd have fired any manager of mine who pulled a stunt like
that and they knew it. -the Troll

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Signature Blocks & Anally Retentive Brits

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 08:15:09

This tempest in a teapot is VASTLY amusing.

Frankly, I WANT to read people's signature blocks, et alia, at the end of
their posts.

They are often the most interesting part of the post, bear repetition for
emphasis and are revelatory of character, intelligence, insouciance, moral
courage and savor-faire.

So, slicing them off with some electronic cookie-cutter is a decidedly Bad
Idea.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Leticia Cluff

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Leticia Cluff » 17 aug 2006 08:16:54

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:57:14 +0100, Peter
<usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:


Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Grey Satterfield


A number of points, which I suppose may be rather superfluous now taht
you've killfiled me (assuming of course you actaully know what "plonk"
means and you haven't buggered off for a quart of electric soup):

1. What I posted above (and what you apparently found so objectionable
you failked to snip any of it) has been posted many times, on many
NG's
2. The halfwit Hines has never contradicted any of it.
3. People that live in glasshouses (or Hawaii) shouldn't throw stones.
4. I wait your rebuttal of the points made. However I shan't hold my
breath


Perhaps it would be useful to remind people (including Grey) how this
started.

Roy Stockdill posted some information about the circumstances of his
birth on soc.genealogy.britain. It was certainly a relevant post in
that forum and he was making a point that was relevant to an ongoing
discussion there.

One statement in that post, "So I was born illegitimate," was taken by
D. Spencer Hines and changed into the message header "Stockdill Tells
Us He Is A Bastard."

Note the snide change from the adjective "illegitimate" to the
name-calling noun "a bastard," a word with far more negative
connotations than just "illegitimate."

Note also the fact that Hines posted his new message with the abusive
header to a large number of groups where it is of no relevance
whatsoever:

alt.books.tom-clancy (of all places), alt.history.british,
sci.military.naval, soc.history.medieval, soc.history.war.misc,
us.military.army

Note also the snide and abusive content of Hines's first messages
(which he silently snipped when he protested against Peter's post):

Hmmmmmmmm...

Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard -- Literally...

Well, No Surprises There, Victoria.


and

Bastards & Homosexuals Seem To Have A Particular Affinity For
Genealogy...

For Quite Obvious Reasons.

Enjoy!


Note how the homophobic Hines extended his attack to comprise both
"Bastards & Homosexuals."

Hines removed those self-incriminating lines and pleaded:

Please recall I only reported what Roy Stockdill reported about HIMSELF.


But he wasn't innocently reporting, he was maliciously spreading
gossip across Usenet. He was taking a person's honest admission and
gloatingly turning it into an accusation.

He deserves no sympathy.

Tish

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Signature Blocks & Anally Retentive Brits

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 08:18:25

Recte:

This tempest in a teapot is VASTLY amusing.

Frankly, I WANT to read people's signature blocks, et alia, at the end of
their posts.

They are often the most interesting part of the post, bear repetition for
emphasis and are revelatory of character, intelligence, insouciance, moral
courage and savoir-faire.

So, slicing them off with some electronic cookie-cutter is a decidedly Bad
Idea.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Gjest

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 08:26:06

Renia wrote:
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular attraction
to Genealogy. Often they realize they will never have any DESCENDANTS -- so
they look BACK to ANCESTORS for personal validation and affirmation.

DSH

Unfortunately, for DSH, this assertion that homosexuals and lesbians
are incapable of having children is not only factually incorrect, but
is an ignorant but widely held misconception (to pardon the pun).

There have been many closetted homosexual men and women over the years
who marry under family and peer pressure to have children, only later
to divorce and take on lives that suited their particular natural
instincts. There are also gays and lesbians who are parents by the
artificial insemination, or whereby semen is given by gay men to
lesbian friends who go on to concieve and have familes. Whether this is
seen as moral or amoral is a decision of emotion. They conceieve, and
that's a fact.

I suppose you come under this category, eh?

I hope he doesn't come under anything except his own name. That is
enough shame as it is.

##minty...

Gjest

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 08:30:30

D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular attraction
to Genealogy.

Funny thing is, the majority of people interested in geneaology are
"straights", me included.

Often they realize they will never have any DESCENDANTS -- so
they look BACK to ANCESTORS for personal validation and affirmation.

DSH with the same igorant assertion. There are plenty of lesbians
getting sperm donated by gaymen to have children.

However, only a VERY ignorant pogue or poguette would think that ALL folks
who are interested in Genealogy are Homosexuals, Lesbians or Bastards.


You wrote what you wrote, so you must be that pogue you speak of.

Yes, it would take a Truly Stupid Person to believe that.

But there seem to be quite a few of them here.

How Sweet It Is!

DSH

I see you're mentally and morally bankrupt as ever.

##minty..

pigdos

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av pigdos » 17 aug 2006 09:31:46

Spencer was in the Navy? And he can't stop writing about homosexuals? Tell
me that doesn't speak volumes...

--
Doug
"Peter" <usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote in message
news:2rn6e21fi7edmsqm70pb0o8evo2eb04fgq@4ax.com...
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:05:04 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hmmmmmmmm...

Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard -- Literally...

Well, No Surprises There, Victoria.

Perhaps that is why he is so interested in Genealogy -- particularly the
more mundane aspects thereof.

Bastards & Homosexuals Seem To Have A Particular Affinity For Genealogy...

For Quite Obvious Reasons.

Enjoy!

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum

It really is SO ignorant to reply to your own posts - you really are
so stupid aren't you?

I expect your father must have been SO dissappointed

The son of Admiral Wellington T Hines (war hero and pioneer of carrier
based
operations in the US Navy) Baby David's career was all mapped out for
him:
Yale, Officer Training - he was being groomed for a top slot at the
Pentagon.


But as with many great men, the son rarely lives up to expectations.


He was relieved for 'cause' on two separate occasions while serving in
the
United States Navy, the first being while assigned to Naval Security
Group
Activity Misawa, Japan, the second while assigned to CINCPAC's Intel
Division on Oahu.


The latter incident got him reassigned to Pearl Harbor here he assumed
the duties as housing officer, quite a demotion for one whose career
had such glowing promise as a junior officer.


Never endearing, and forever the outcast, this "pompous nautical ass"
laboured hard and doggedly for his promotions up to the rank of
Commander, but he ran into the 'eye of the storm' when he tried to
pull one tantrum after another in disagreement with a very sage
Captain who would go on to become Commander, U.S.Naval Security Group
Command!


He was yanked from his operational duties on the first occasion, and
appointed XO simply for the convenience of being under close scrutiny
by the C.O, and in a position less harassing to the other 700+ members
of the command.


This was NOT a promotion.


He served only as XO while the paperwork for his transfer made it
through
the bureaucratic chain back in Washington. That didn't take all that
long,
and before anyone knew it, D. Spencer Hines and his marvellous wife
(how
she's put up with him for all these years must remain one of the
world's
greatest mysteries), had departed Northern Honshu for the Hawaiian
Islands.


It's one thing to butt heads with a Captain, but when told to cool
your jets by a four-star and you still stand your ground, most wise
men
know that their careers will, at that very moment, gain great
momentum and a natural phenomenon of tailspins that have continued to
this
day!


In summary, in the words of a fellow officer who served with him:


" D Spencer Hines is one of the most arrogant jackasses to ever breath
and
walk upon the face of earth. He hadn't a clue what leadership was all
about,
and in the face of intelligence evaluation, he would always ask for a
point
paper when one's analysis varied from his - and that was often the
case.


"A towering man, of bulk and arrogance, this red headed barbarian is
not worth the grey hairs many of your constituents seem to be letting
themselves in for.


"He is his father's son, but nothing like his father, but rather, more
a quasi-nautical south seas jester at this stage in life whose open
sores apparently continue to ooze and your group are the swabs being
used to absorb all that ails this sick man during his transition to
senior citizenship!"

--
Peter

D Spencer Hines est a deficio miles militis quod stultus

Doug Thompson

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Doug Thompson » 17 aug 2006 11:46:17

On 16/8/06 21:14, in article 565.48a33cd.3214d699@aol.com,
"WJhonson@aol.com" <WJhonson@aol.com> wrote:

Paul thank you for this note.
What is the source who has corrected this erroneous identification?

Paul has supplied a good summary of the evidence that supports the theory
that Mary, Countess Marshall, was a daughter of Peter de Braose of Tetbury.

There is a very simple reason why we know she was NOT the Mary de Ros, widow
of William de Braose. This Mary died in 1326 and her IPMs were all taken
that year. ( CIPM 5:458,459)

Doug Thompson

--
http://freespace.virgin.net/doug.thomps ... /stage.htm

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 17 aug 2006 13:46:40

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message

[.]

Hines has never sent a 65-year-old female office worker on a seven-block
walk each way in summer heat to get his shirts out of the laundry -- or
even
a 25-year-old female office worker.

[.]

No, instead you indulge yourself in personal attacks on, and insults to,
everyone within range on Usenet and break its posting conventions. This guy
routinely, and publicly, insults his employees for minor infractions, when
the 'rule book' clearly says to praise in public and criticize in
private. -the Troll

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 17 aug 2006 14:07:31

In message of 17 Aug, Paul Mackenzie <paul.mackenzie@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/15/06 10:13:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
paul.mackenzie@ozemail.com.au writes:

Genealogists have in the past confused Mary d1326, the wife of
William de Breouse d1290 Lord of Bramber and Gower, and daughter
of William de Ros of Helmsey with Mary de Breouse d1361 widow of
Thomas of Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk and Marshall of England, and
daughter of Peter de Breouse d1312, son of the said William de
Breouse,and his wife Mary.

Paul thank you for this note.
What is the source who has corrected this erroneous identification?
I'm also, contrary to what you state above, showing this Mary as dau
of Robert, Baron Ros by Isabel d'Aubigny, rather than his father
William de Ros Lord of Helmsley by Lucy FitzPiers

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson


The reference for Mary de Breouse, widow of Thomas de Brotherton is
Complete Peerage Vol 1X pages 598-599. In the past, I thought the
citations referred to in the Complete Peerage were insufficient for this
conclusion, so I did some investigations of my own and came to the same
conclusion. {see my notes below}

As to your question concerning concerning Mary the wife of William de
Breouse I have stated what is said in Complete Peerage Vol II page 302.

I think you may be right and this was corrected in the lastest addition
of the Complete Peerage. I can't find these corrections at the moment
so I can't check it. May be Tim can help.

Where CP II, 302, said "He m. 3rdly, in or before 1271, Mary, da. of
William de Ross of Helmsley (LORD ROS)", CP XIV, 111 has "(line 16) for
'William' read 'Robert' and delete '[LORD ROS]'.

Chris Phillips' site has nothing further on this.

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

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 17 aug 2006 14:17:31

On 8/16/06 11:10 PM, in article 12e7r2ibgl6gfb5@corp.supernews.com, "hippo"
<hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote:

"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a great
deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service. I can't
say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it is. It would
not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young pontificating
or moralizing in older age. -the Troll

If I didn't know better, I would suspect that hippo was making the moral
equivalency argument here. :)

Grey Satterfield

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 17 aug 2006 14:22:21

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C109D69B.2F455%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/16/06 11:10 PM, in article 12e7r2ibgl6gfb5@corp.supernews.com,
"hippo"
hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote:


"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a
great
deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service. I
can't
say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it is. It
would
not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young
pontificating
or moralizing in older age. -the Troll

If I didn't know better, I would suspect that hippo was making the moral
equivalency argument here. :)


Hines gets sent to the Penalty Box! And Peter can return to play. He has
done his time.

- nilita

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 17 aug 2006 14:31:50

On 8/17/06 2:16 AM, in article j348e290u8d1qjmis16d5k6h5hv1o9kmmm@4ax.com,
"Leticia Cluff" <tish.nospam.cluff@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:57:14 +0100, Peter
usenetINVALID@nidum.plus.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:39:45 -0500, Grey Satterfield
gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote:


Disgusting! The foregoing scurrilous screed about D. Spencer Hines by
"Peter" is so personal, so meanspirited, and so out of line, it makes me
sympathize with DSH. "Peter" might want to think about that before telling
us more than we want to know about anybody else.

Oh, yeah: *PLONK!*

Perhaps it would be useful to remind people (including Grey) how this
started.

Roy Stockdill posted some information about the circumstances of his
birth on soc.genealogy.britain. It was certainly a relevant post in
that forum and he was making a point that was relevant to an ongoing
discussion there.

One statement in that post, "So I was born illegitimate," was taken by
D. Spencer Hines and changed into the message header "Stockdill Tells
Us He Is A Bastard."

Note the snide change from the adjective "illegitimate" to the
name-calling noun "a bastard," a word with far more negative
connotations than just "illegitimate."

Note also the fact that Hines posted his new message with the abusive
header to a large number of groups where it is of no relevance
whatsoever:

alt.books.tom-clancy (of all places), alt.history.british,
sci.military.naval, soc.history.medieval, soc.history.war.misc,
us.military.army

Note also the snide and abusive content of Hines's first messages
(which he silently snipped when he protested against Peter's post):

My thanks to Leticia for explaining how all of this started. It was pretty
bad but comes as no surprise because in the years that I have been observing
Spencer being Spencer there isn't a whole lot, if anything, he could do that
would surprise me.

Despite Spencer's frequent excesses, Peter's detailed and shockingly
personal recounting of Spencer's career as a naval officer turned me off --
profoundly. If there is anybody who might deserve such treatment it would
be D. Spencer Hines, but not even Spencer deserves that, it seems to me.

As the Senate Counsel, Joseph Welch famously said to Senator Joe McCarthy in
the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearings, "Have you no sense of decency, sir at long
last? Have you no sense of decency?" I would also ask if Peter has any
sense of decency.

Grey Satterfield

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 17 aug 2006 14:38:21

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C109D9F6.2F457%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/17/06 2:16 AM, in article j348e290u8d1qjmis16d5k6h5hv1o9kmmm@4ax.com,
Despite Spencer's frequent excesses, Peter's detailed and shockingly
personal recounting of Spencer's career as a naval officer turned me
off --
profoundly. If there is anybody who might deserve such treatment it would
be D. Spencer Hines, but not even Spencer deserves that, it seems to me.


You know? I've seen that story - and variations thereof - posted by
different people at different times. It's to the point that each new time
it comes down the pike, I say to myself ... "oops; Hines offended somebody
big time AGAIN, and here comes his biography!"

- nilita

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 14:45:03

Thursday, 17 August, 2006


Dear Will,

While not meaning to 'mess up' anyone's charts, I am fairly
certain that Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith (d. 1420) was born
before dispensation for his parents' marriage, which occurred
before 12 Oct 1344 [1]. It is all the more interesting as there
was a charter of his uncle, Sir William the 'Knight of Liddesdale'
dated at Dalkeith, 14 Dec 1351, granting to the young James the
lands of Aberdower, witnessed by Sir William's uncle Andrew de
Douglas and his natural brother William de Douglas 'Andrea de
Douglas avunculo meo, Willielmo de Douglas seniore fratre meo')[2].
What then to make of Sir James' birth year......?

As to the Caldecot (or de Caldecotis) family, below is my
current reconstruction. There are of course uncertainties:
assuming for example that Marion (or Mariota) de Crawford was
the mother of Elena de Caldecotis, we don't know that she was
also the mother of William. If we can learn more about 'Hutone'
(or "Hutton under the Moor") in Dumfriesshire, this might be
resolved, as well as the Crawford family involved (my current
guess would be Crawford of Auchinames).

Cheers,

John *



NOTES [to post]:

[1] This, previously cited is from Bliss, Calendar of
Papal Letters III:165

" 1344.
4 Id. Oct. To the bishop of St. Andrews. Faculty to
Avignon. grant dispensation to John de Duglas, knight,
(f. 140d.) and Agnes de Grame to intermarry, they having
lived together and had offspring, notwithstanding
the assertion made that Agnes was aunt of a woman
with whom John had cohabited, Agnes being
ignorant of the said impediment. A penance is to
be enjoined on John, and two chaplaincies of 10
marks each are to be founded within two years.
Their past and future offspring is to be
declared legitimate.
[Cal. Pet. i.79; Theiner, 282.] "


[2] The Prose Works of Sir Walter Scott, VII:219. This can be
viewed at the following URL:

http://books.google.com/books?vid=0Xeyp ... &pg=PA219&
lpg=PA219&dq=andrea+douglas+avunculo&ie=ISO-8859-1




1 John de Caldcotis
----------------------------------------
Death: aft 1387[1]

of Graden and Simprim, co. Berwicks. and Hutton, co. Dumfries.

heraldic seal of John de Caldecotis:
' CALDECOTE, John, of Grayden and Sympryne (Berwickshire). A shield
of arms: A saltire and chief, the latter charged with three escallops.
Legend (l.c.): S IOHANNIS [DE] CALDCOTYS. Diam 7/8 in.
Laing, ii. 157. Reg. Ho. Ch., No. 193, c. 1387-8 - Cast;
No. 194, c. A.D. 1388 - Cast. ' [Stevenson, II:268[1]]

' John de Caldicotis, lord of Hutton under the Moor ', as styled by
Cameron Smith concerning his daughter Elena:
" There is however a charter preserved in HM Register House which
mentions the late William de Boys, lord of Hallathys in Annandale under
the year 1379. His spouse, who had survived him, was Elena de
Caldicotis, daughter of John de Caldicotis, lord of Hutton under the
Moor. her mother was Mariota (Marion) de Crawford, daughter of the
late Thomas de Crawford, Elena's grandfather on the mother's side.
" The lands had been destined to the heirs of Elena's marriage, but
these rights she then resigned at the date mentioned, so presumably the
lands remained with the Caldicoties family or their assignees. (There
is no evidence that the lord of Halleaths had left any heir by his
marriage with Elena.)" [Alex Maxwell Findlater, <Caldecotis>[2]]

__________________________

possibly a descendant of ' Caldecote, Geffrey de (del counte de
Edenburgh).' - swore allegiance to King Edward I at Berwick,
1296 [Ragman Roll[3] ]

~ 'Galfrid of Caldcote', one of the auditors for Robert de Brus in
his claim to the Scots throne, 2 June 1292 [Crawfurd, p. 20[4]]

Spouse: Marion de Crawford
Father: Thomas de Crawford (possibly of Auchinames)

Children: Elena
William (-<1424)


1.1 Elena de Caldcotis
----------------------------------------

Concerning Elena de Caldcotis and her family, she was identified
by Cameron Smith as
" Elena de Caldicotis, daughter of John de Caldicotis, lord of
Hutton under the Moor. " [Alex Maxwell Findlater, <Caldecotis>[2]]

Spouse: William de Boys
Death: ca 1379[2]
Marr: bef 1379[2]


1.2 William de Caldcotis
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 6 Jan 1424[1]

of Graden and Simprim, co. Berwicks. and Hutton, co. Dumfries.

' our dear William de Caldcotis and Christiana, his dear wife '
[" dilect(' n'ris Will'o de Caldcot(' 't cristiane dilce spo[n]se
sue "], had charter from James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith [her
grandfather, not so identified] of the lands of Hutone in Annandale,
witnessed by Sir Henry Douglas (brother of Sir James), John
Livingston of Callendar and others, dated at Dalkeith,
8 May 1388 [Reg. Honoris de Morton II:164-5, no. 187[5]]

he evidently d. before 6 Jan 1424/5 [his wife identified as
' Caldecote, Christiana, widow of William Caldecote ' in a charter
of that date - Scottish Heraldic Seals, II:268[1]]
________________________________

re: his wife:

' Kyrstiane de Caldcottis ', her heraldic seal is identified on a
charter of 8 Jan. 1424-5:
' Caldecote, Christiana, widow of William Caldecote, daughter of
Walter Twedy. A shield of arms: A saltire and chief, the latter
charged with a star in dexter and two escallops. Legend (l.c.):
KYRSTIANE DE CALDCOTTIS. Diam. 1 3/16 in. Laing, ii. 158.
Reg. Ho. Ch., 6 Jan. 1424-5, two of same date - Cast. ' [Scottish
Heraldic Seals, II:268[1]]

Spouse: Christiana Tweedie
Death: aft 6 Jan 1424[1]
Father: Walter Tweedie, of Drumelzier
Mother: NN Douglas
Marr: bef 8 May 1388[5]

Children: Elizabeth (->1459)


1.2.1 Elizabeth de Caldcotis
----------------------------------------
Death: aft 8 Nov 1459[1]

had a third of the lands of Graden, co. Berwicks. as her maritagium
or inheritance[6]

' dilecti filii nobilis viri Willelmi de Leuynston Domicelli et delict
in Christo filie nobilis mulieris Elisabeth de Caldcotis Domicelle',
postnuptial dispensation granted 12 Nov 1421, they being related in
the 3rd degree of consanguinity ["tertio consanguinitatis
gradu" - Stuart p. 453[7]]

her heraldic seal is identified on a charter of 8 Nov. 1459:
' Caldecote, Elizabeth, daughter of William Caldecote of Grayden,
wife of William Livingston of Balcastel (or of Kilsyth). A shield
of arms: A saltire and chief, the latter charged with three escallops.
Foliage at top and sides of shield. Legend (l.c.): S ELISABETH DE
LEVINGSTON. Diam. 1 1/16 in. Laing, ii. 159. Reg. Ho. Ch., No.
357 (2), 8 Nov. 1459 - Cast. ' [Scottish Heraldic Seals, II:268[1]]

her arms according to E. Livingston:
' a saltire and chief, the latter charged with three escallops'
[Livingston, citing seal in Laing, ii. 159][6]

Spouse: William Livingston of Balcastell and Kilsyth
Death: bef 20 Apr 1460[8],[6]
Father: Sir John Livingston of Callendar(-1402)
Mother: Agnes Douglas (->1421)
Marr: bef 12 Nov 1421[6],[7]

Children: Edward (-<1482)
William (->1481)
Alexander


1. John Horne Stevenson, K.C. and Marguerite Wood, Ph.D., Scottish
Heraldic Seals: Royal, Official, Ecclesiastical, Collegiate, Burghal,
Personal, Glasgow: printed by Robert MacLehose & Coy., Limited at the
University Press, 1940 (Vol. II).
2. Alex Maxwell Findlater, "Caldecotis," 20 June 2006,
GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com, cites Cameron Smith, Trans Dumfries &
Galloway etc Vol XXIII, 1940-44, p 77, article on Boys, and other
sources.
3. "Clan Stirling," http://www.clanstirling.org/uploads/ragmanrolls.pdf
provides .pdf file of the names of those who swore allegiance to
Edward I of England at Berwick, 1296 (the 'Ragman Rolls').
4. George Crawfurd, "The History of the Shire of Renfrew," Paisley:
Printed and sold by Alex. Weir, 1782, (originally, Edinburgh :
Printed by James Watson, 1710), [also as cited by Burke; and Paisley
Herald article, F of Barrochan], ' containing a genealogical history
of the royal house of Stewart,..'.
5. Thomas Thomson, ed., "Registrum Honoris de Morton," Vol. II - Ancient
Charters, Edinburgh: J. Constable, for the Bannatyne Club, 1853, full
title: ' Registrum Honoris de Morton A series of Ancient Charters
of the Earldom of Morton with other Original Papers in Two Volumes ',
completed, with preface by Cosmo Innes.
6. Edwin Brockholst Livingston, "The Livingstons of Callendar and their
Principal Cadets: The history of an old Stirlingshire family,"
Edinburgh: T. and A. Constable, 1920, .pdf images provided by
Genealogy.com, http://www.genealogy.com/, re: the Livingstons of
Kilsyth (cf. Chapter IX, THE LIVINGSTONS, VISCOUNTS OF KILSYTH),
pp. 210 et seq.
7. Andrew Stuart, "Genealogical History of the Stewarts," : from the
earliest period of their authentic history to the present times,
London: Printed for A. Strahan, and T. Cadell Jun. and W. Davies,
in the Strand, 1798, .pdf image files provided by Genealogy.com
http://www.genealogy.com, includes texts of dispensations relevant to the
Stewart family.
8. Sir James Balfour Paul, ed., "The Scots Peerage," Edinburgh: David
Douglas, 1904-1914 (9 volumes).

Doug McDonald

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Doug McDonald » 17 aug 2006 14:57:50

hippo wrote:
.
I'm suspectin' that Hines is exactly the same IRL as he is on Usenet, that
he is not projecting some kind of fake net persona ..%)

You're right he

[Hines]

can not change himself. He is confident he is right and
everyone else is wrong, fools, and or weak.

And he is generally right.

He would do well as a TV competitor of O'Reilly, who also
is generally (but not as universally as Hines) right.

Doug McDonald

Julian Richards

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Julian Richards » 17 aug 2006 15:57:15

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:38:21 GMT, "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com>
wrote:

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C109D9F6.2F457%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/17/06 2:16 AM, in article j348e290u8d1qjmis16d5k6h5hv1o9kmmm@4ax.com,
Despite Spencer's frequent excesses, Peter's detailed and shockingly
personal recounting of Spencer's career as a naval officer turned me
off --
profoundly. If there is anybody who might deserve such treatment it would
be D. Spencer Hines, but not even Spencer deserves that, it seems to me.


You know? I've seen that story - and variations thereof - posted by
different people at different times. It's to the point that each new time
it comes down the pike, I say to myself ... "oops; Hines offended somebody
big time AGAIN, and here comes his biography!"

There is also DSH's home address that gets posted on occasion,
presumably to help the North Koreans with their missile targeting.
--

Julian Richards

http://www.richardsuk.f9.co.uk
Website of "Robot Wars" middleweight "Broadsword IV"

THIS MESSAGE WAS POSTED FROM SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 16:08:28

Thank you kindly, Doug.

Being Right far too often does tend to infuriate some people.

But it's perennially amusing to see how they run in circles and bite their
tails when flummoxed.

You have my respect as the Real Chemist here and the model Harvard Graduate
of skill, intelligence, savoir-faire and a tactile, discriminating sense of
Judgment and Good Taste.

You are also the Model Texan -- a Man of Integrity, True Grit and Fortitude,
but certainly no blowhard.

Most folks don't know all that, because you are modest and don't post as
often as do many who are your inferiors.

For the record, "Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a sock puppet.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:ec1sha$pqj$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

hippo wrote:
.
I'm suspectin' that Hines is exactly the same IRL as he is on Usenet,
that he is not projecting some kind of fake net persona ..%)

You're right he

[Hines]

can not change himself. He is confident he is right and everyone else is
wrong, fools, and or weak.

And he is generally right.

He would do well as a TV competitor of O'Reilly, who also
is generally (but not as universally as Hines) right.

Doug McDonald

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 17 aug 2006 16:14:01

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:ec1sha$pqj$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
hippo wrote:
.
I'm suspectin' that Hines is exactly the same IRL as he is on Usenet,
that he is not projecting some kind of fake net persona ..%)

You're right he

[Hines]

can not change himself. He is confident he is right and everyone else is
wrong, fools, and or weak.

And he is generally right.

He would do well as a TV competitor of O'Reilly, who also
is generally (but not as universally as Hines) right.


Suuuure .....

There are some people who say Ann Coulter is always right, and others who
say that Michael Moore right.

Sez more about the "complimenters" than the objects of their adoration.

- nilita

Welsh Rarebit

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is Illegitimate

Legg inn av Welsh Rarebit » 17 aug 2006 16:21:31

"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KE%Eg.215$M14.2204@eagle.america.net...
Thank you kindly, Doug.

Being Right far too often does tend to infuriate some people.


Hilarious!

Hines can't even get his word order correct.

He meant to write
Being Far Right too often does tend to infuriate some people.

Vince

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is Illegitimate

Legg inn av Vince » 17 aug 2006 16:26:39

Welsh Rarebit wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KE%Eg.215$M14.2204@eagle.america.net...
Thank you kindly, Doug.

Being Right far too often does tend to infuriate some people.


Hilarious!

Hines can't even get his word order correct.

He meant to write
Being Far Right too often does tend to infuriate some people.





tsk

you meant to write

"Being too far Right often does tend to infuriate some people.

Vince

a.spencer3

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av a.spencer3 » 17 aug 2006 16:33:11

"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KE%Eg.215$M14.2204@eagle.america.net...
Thank you kindly, Doug.

Being Right far too often does tend to infuriate some people.

But it's perennially amusing to see how they run in circles and bite their
tails when flummoxed.

You have my respect as the Real Chemist here and the model Harvard
Graduate
of skill, intelligence, savoir-faire and a tactile, discriminating sense
of
Judgment and Good Taste.

You are also the Model Texan -- a Man of Integrity, True Grit and
Fortitude,
but certainly no blowhard.

Most folks don't know all that, because you are modest and don't post as
often as do many who are your inferiors.


Oh Gawd ... I hope Doug is being as sick as the rest of us ..........

Twit.

Surreyman

D. Spencer Hines

Stockdill Is Correct Here

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 16:36:49

Stockdill Is Correct Here & Makes A Well-Founded Argument.

'Nuff Said.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

""Roy Stockdill"" <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:44E47307.14319.A4F81D@localhost...

From: "Lyndon" <lyndontmail-newsgroups@yahoo.co.uk

Personally, I am with those who say you cannot apologise for history
and should not attempt to re-write it. -- Jenny
I don't understand why some people regard this as a re-write of
history. If we were re-writing history we would probably try to deny
that it happened in the first place. What we are doing is adding
another chapter to history. We are adding this new chapter in order to
confirm to descendants of those killed for 'cowardice' that we no
longer consider that what many of them did was cowardly. Future
historians will be able to look back on what happened and have a clear
picture of what happened in WW1 and what happened in 2006. As long as
they have this picture, history hasn't been re-written, just added to.

You may have a point, but surely the real concern here is that some of
the living descendants of those pardoned may now endeavour to jump
on the "culture of blame" bandwagon and demand compensation for
what happened to the men executed for alleged cowardice, which would
amount to a rewriting of history.

As I have pointed out previously, we already have the descendants of
slaves who were transported to America attempting to claim
compensation for what happened to their ancestors two or three
centuries ago.

How far do you go in recognising and putting right the sins of history?
Where does it all end? I never knew my paternal grandfather because
he died at only 45, many years before I was born, after contracting
anthrax in a Bradford wool mill, which was an occupational hazard of the
time for woollen workers. Should I endeavour to track down the
descendants of the mill owner and sue them for negligence or, at very
least, demand an apology for what happened to my grandfather? Should
we ask the French to recognise that William the Conqueror's invasion of
England and slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people was a crime
against humanity? If they agree and apologise, then the historians could
add a chapter in 2006 to "1066 and all that" but it would be a nonsense!

As Stephen Glover points out in today's D Mail, it is "an enormous piece
of arrogance" to thrust our values of today onto another age and try to
reshape the past. People did what they thought was right at the time by
the standards and social mores of the time, and we have to accept that,
not decide with the benefit of hindsight almost a century later that they
were wrong.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 16:45:39

Nonsense.

I said nothing of the sort.

Take Reading Comprehension 101 again.

Note OFTEN -- NOT always, in what I wrote below -- and don't try to put your
words in my mouth or anyone else's.

You are quite capable of choking on them yourself.

John 5:14

DSH

Deus Vult

<nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155799566.743372.101480@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Renia wrote:

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular
attraction to Genealogy. Often they realize they will never have any
DESCENDANTS -- so they look BACK to ANCESTORS for
personal validation and affirmation.

DSH

Unfortunately, for DSH, this assertion that homosexuals and lesbians
are incapable of having children is not only factually incorrect, but
is an ignorant but widely held misconception (to pardon the pun).

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Signature Blocks & Anally Retentive Brits

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 16:56:48

Nonsense.

His signature block is often the Best Part of a Stockdill post.

Leave it in.

DSH

"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:inj8e2pl8pupc2cknb36h4mah9jagi3tdf@4ax.com...

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:01:07 +0000 (UTC), roy.stockdill@btinternet.com
("Roy Stockdill") enriched this group when s/he wrote:

From: Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net

I hope that one of the things we can count on is that there will never
be a reintroduction of the death penalty - certainly not for
cowardice.

Still, the past is the past, we cannot undo what happened. We just
need to learn form it and move forward.

The death penalty for alleged cowardice was abolished in 1930.

The reason the generals demanded it in WWI was that they feared mass
mutiny and desertion from the ranks without the threat of the firing
squad. However, as a writer in today's D Mail points out, in less than a
decade after the abolition Britain was at war again and cowardice and
desertion barely arose in WWII.

A very valid point.

Roy Stockdill
Guild of One-Name Studies: http://www.one-name.org
Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History:
http://www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html

"There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and
that is not being talked about."
OSCAR WILDE

Roy, could I ask you to add a "-- " line in before you [sic] sig, it makes
life so much easier for people using proper software to read and reply
to messages.

--
Bob.

Gjest

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 17:17:04

<nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155799830.788947.89150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Funny thing is, the majority of people interested in geneaology are
"straights", me included.

Then you won't mind going straight to the killfiles with your good

buddy Hines, you cross-posting spamhead.

PLONK!

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Signature Blocks & Anally Retentive Brits

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 17:31:50

This tempest in a teapot is VASTLY amusing.

Frankly, I WANT to read people's signature blocks, et alia, at the end of
their posts.

They are often the most interesting part of the post, bear repetition for
emphasis and are revelatory of character, intelligence, insouciance, moral
courage and savoir-faire.

So, slicing them off with some electronic cookie-cutter is a decidedly Bad
Idea.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 20:40:05

In a message dated 8/16/06 6:29:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
paul.mackenzie@ozemail.com.au writes:

<< Rosie Bevan drew my attention to facts F and H above, which suggest
firstly, that Mary de Brewes, as wife of Thomas de Brotherton used her
influence to arrange the marriage between her stepdaughter and her
brother Thomas de Brewes, and secondly there was a dispute between Mary
de Brewes and her step-daughter cum sister-in-law concerning her dower
in the the manor of Bosecam. However the chronology cannot be verified
as we do not know the dates of the marriages. >>

Just to make sure this is clear. Are you saying the "Beatrix" is a COBHAM, a
daughter of Ralph's by a previous marriage? Or are you saying that Beatrix
is a PLANTAGENET daughter of Thomas of Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk, by his
first wife Alice Hayles ?

Will

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 21:01:02

In a message dated 8/17/06 6:14:07 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tim@powys.org
writes:

<< Where CP II, 302, said "He m. 3rdly, in or before 1271, Mary, da. of
William de Ross of Helmsley (LORD ROS)", CP XIV, 111 has "(line 16) for
'William' read 'Robert' and delete '[LORD ROS]'. >>

Tim thanks for looking that up, then apparently the corrected entry would say
"da of Robert de Ross of Helmsley"

Which is interesting because the Robert I have is "1st Baron Ros, Lord of
Belvoir"
It seems possible that yet again I have the wrong Robert if CP doesn't give
him any sort of title like this, unless of course they are just implying that
IN 1271 he was not Lord but he should have been since his father died "abt
1264" ("Living Descendents: Hudgins"). So it still seems to be a bit muddy.
Perhaps I'm missing a yet older sibling of his who succeeded first and then d.s.p.

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 21:11:10

In a message dated 8/17/06 5:42:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:

<< 1 John de Caldcotis
----------------------------------------
Death: aft 1387[1] >>

If the lands previously held by John, were regranted to his son William in
1388 wouldn't this imply that John is now dead ?
Will Johnson

Peter MEAZEY

Silly season

Legg inn av Peter MEAZEY » 17 aug 2006 21:52:12

So DSH is having fun, that's great. A tempest in a teapot, now that is
what I call a really brilliant and uniquely memorable metaphor ! I
laughed so much I nearly fell off my potty...
While we're on the subject, does anyone know if a serious historical
study has ever been done on anal retention among early immigrants to the
North American colonies ? I would just love to see a good Freudian
run-down on the Pilgrim Fathers and Pennsylvania and all those puritan
weirdos :-)
Do we have sales figures for toilet paper in Salem, Massachusetts ? If
not, why not ?
And how much more of this bullshit do we have to put up with ?

Gjest

Re: Silly season

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 22:26:02

In a message dated 8/17/06 12:45:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
meazey@wanadoo.fr writes:

<< Do we have sales figures for toilet paper in Salem, Massachusetts ? If
not, why not ? >>

If you mean during Puritan times, I think toilet paper is a relatively new
invention. I'll leave it up to your imagination what they did before.
Will Johnson

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 22:35:03

In a message dated 8/17/06 12:43:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:

<<
http://books.google.com/books?vid=0dNx6 ... as+giffard >>


John Brandon has posted an interesting document here. There is a line going
from the marriage of William Lord Braose ob 1290 by his first wife Isabel de
Clare to "Alice d of Thomas de Moulton". It seems this link should be to her
husband just called William VII ob 1336

Also this document has William ob 1290's final wife Mary married to Thomas of
Brotherton and Ralph Cobham and ob 1326 which we discussed this is a
different Mary altogether. And here she is called "d of Wm Lord de Roos" and also
"dowress"

Will Johnson

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 17 aug 2006 22:47:18

"Grey Satterfield" wrote in message

in article "hippo" wrote:

[.]

In defense of Peter, abusive military leaders are detested by their
subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. They are because they do a
great
deal of harm within their commands and discredit to their service. I
can't
say that is the case here, but it sounds like Peter believes it is. It
would
not be unlike finding a schoolyard bully you knew when young
pontificating
or moralizing in older age. -the Troll

If I didn't know better, I would suspect that hippo was making the moral
equivalency argument here. :)

You need to put yourself in the place of old Peter, given the temptation.
:^) -the Troll

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 17 aug 2006 22:48:48

"La N" wrote in message

Hines gets sent to the Penalty Box! And Peter can return to play. He has
done his time.

I like this referee arrangement. :^) -the Troll

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 22:51:02

In a message dated 8/17/06 1:33:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:

<< <<

http://books.google.com/books?vid=0dNx6 ... as+giffard >> >>

There is something else interesting here.
Isabel de Clare, dau of Gilbert, E of Gloucester is here given as the first
wife of William de Brewes ob 1290

Checking genealogics and stirnet NEITHER of them show this marriage, which
must have been early and ended in divorce as the only Isabel dau of Gilbert E
Gloucester must be the same one who d 1333 after marrying at least Guy de
Beauchamp E Warwick and Maurice, 2nd Lord Berkeley

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 aug 2006 22:56:02

In a message dated 8/17/06 1:48:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:

<< There is something else interesting here.
Isabel de Clare, dau of Gilbert, E of Gloucester is here given as the first
wife of William de Brewes ob 1290 >>

Check that, this must be Isabel dau of the earlier Gilbert.
So this wife Isabel must be the one b 8 Nov 1226, but again the marriage must
have ended in divorce as by May 1240 she had married Robert Bruce Lord of
Annandale (d 1295)

Doug Thompson

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Doug Thompson » 17 aug 2006 23:03:11

On 17/8/06 21:54, in article 51a.77273280.3216315f@aol.com,
"WJhonson@aol.com" <WJhonson@aol.com> wrote:

In a message dated 8/17/06 1:48:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, WJhonson@aol.com
writes:

There is something else interesting here.
Isabel de Clare, dau of Gilbert, E of Gloucester is here given as the first
wife of William de Brewes ob 1290

Check that, this must be Isabel dau of the earlier Gilbert.
So this wife Isabel must be the one b 8 Nov 1226, but again the marriage must
have ended in divorce as by May 1240 she had married Robert Bruce Lord of
Annandale (d 1295)

Will


This article is from 1848 and many of the points in it are now known to be
incorrect.

You say

" genealogics and stirnet NEITHER of them show this marriage"

That's because they are up to date with more recent knowledge.

William (IV) 's first marriage was to Aline de Multon - shown as a wife of
his son on this pedigree.


Doug Thompson

--
http://freespace.virgin.net/doug.thomps ... /stage.htm

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 17 aug 2006 23:17:35

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

"Hippo" has been fooled, euchred and flummoxed.

Great Entertainment!

DSH

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e9ovb47sj6fa4@corp.supernews.com...

You need to put yourself in the place of old Peter, given the temptation.
:^) -the Troll

Gjest

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 00:05:03

Adding details of this extended family I find another problem.
Stirnet here
http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/briti ... htm#grey2w

Says that Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord of Drayton d 1343
married Joan de Beauchamp dau of Thomas de Beauchamp, 3rd Earl of Warwick
and by him had
Ralph Basset dvp c 1335 who m Alice dau of Nicholas Lord Audley
by which two children.

This is impossible.
Thomas de Beauchamp 3rd Earl of Warwick has dates
14 Feb 1314 - 13 Nov 1369
he could not have had a daughter (Joan) who was old enough to be a
grandmother by the date of death of her son Ralph c 1335.

I tried to simply shift Joan up a generation to Guy Beauchamp, 2nd Earl by
his wife Alice de Toeni but this is not likely to be the case. Guy and Alice
did not marry until 1309/10 and Guy died 1315. While it's just possible for
Joan to squeek by in this generation, she'd be at least two decades younger than
her husband and possibly as much as fifty years younger.

Comments appreciated.
Will Johnson

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Margaret Nuthill nee Breous

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 18 aug 2006 00:13:15

In message of 17 Aug, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

Adding details of this extended family I find another problem.
Stirnet here
http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/briti ... htm#grey2w

Says that Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord of Drayton d 1343
married Joan de Beauchamp dau of Thomas de Beauchamp, 3rd Earl of Warwick
and by him

her?

CP II, 3 says he dsp 10 May 1390. No correction in XIV, nor on Chris
Phillips' site.

had Ralph Basset dvp c 1335 who m Alice dau of Nicholas Lord Audley by
which two children.

This Ralph was the father of the one above. CP II, pp. 2-3.

This is impossible.

Not suprising really.

Thomas de Beauchamp 3rd Earl of Warwick has dates
14 Feb 1314 - 13 Nov 1369
he could not have had a daughter (Joan) who was old enough to be a
grandmother by the date of death of her son Ralph c 1335.

I tried to simply shift Joan up a generation to Guy Beauchamp, 2nd
Earl by his wife Alice de Toeni but this is not likely to be the case.
Guy and Alice did not marry until 1309/10 and Guy died 1315. While
it's just possible for Joan to squeek by in this generation, she'd be
at least two decades younger than her husband and possibly as much as
fifty years younger.

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

Gjest

Re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 00:35:04

In a message dated 8/17/06 3:25:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:

<< My own suggestion for dating the marriage of Richard Comyn
and Hextilda would be: "before 1159". >>

Which is a problem if his eldest son Odinel was a witness to a charter IN
1162 when he was.... 3 or 4 ?

Will Johnson

hippo

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av hippo » 18 aug 2006 00:38:08

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

He's pretty articulate for a bit of yarn and felt. -the Troll

Gjest

re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 00:41:02

Thursday, 16 August 2006


Dear James,

Thanks for your reply yesterday, and the related details from
Carl Boyer III's book. I've not seen this particular work, but
I had not noted reference in Alan Young's book concerning either
Odinel or Simon, so they seemed 'new' to me. Much appreciated.

I do find a problem with the chronology, mainly due to the
matter of Hextilda's 2nd marriage and her alleged issue by Earl
Malcolm mac Madadh.

1. It does appear that his son and successor, Earl Henry
of Athol (d. bef 1211) was a son of Hextilda [1]:
therefore unless there were illegitimate issue, the
younger sons of Earl Malcolm (Simon, Gillechattan,
Duncan and Malise) were also the issue of Hextilda.

2. If Richard Comyn in fact d. in 1182 as is accepted,
no issue of the 2nd marriage of Hextilda could readily
be placed before before the very end of 1182 at the
earliest, and more likely say 1183/4. For a minimum
of 5 sons (no daughters known), we'd likely see a
period of births from say 1183/4 to say 1188/9 at least,
and possibly beyond 1190.

3. This would work back to placing Hextilda's birth as no
earlier than say 1142/43, and (given possible births say
1190 or later) possibly 1144 or later, assuming she was
still giving birth as late as 45 years of age.

It is possible that John Comyn was Hextilda's son, but this
would place the date of the gift of the church of West Linton to
Kelso in a narrower range of say 1157/69, assuming (A) Hextilda
was born as early as 1142, (B) Richard Comyn and Hextilda were
married ca. 1154 or soon thereafter, and (C) John Comyn was born
between say 1156 and 1159, and dying soon thereafter. The
marriage date of 1145 estimated by Alan Young appears virtually
impossible.

My own suggestion for dating the marriage of Richard Comyn
and Hextilda would be: "before 1159".

Cheers,

John



NOTES

[1] Cf. SGM archives, esp. Chris Phillips, <Malcolm 2nd Earl of
Atholl>, SGM, 11 Aug 2002. Chris states in part, as to
Hextilda being the mother of Henry of Athol:

' SP refers to a description of Alexander Comyn and John Comyn as
'cognati', kinsmen on his mother's side, of earl Patrick, the son of earl Henry's
daughter Isabel. SP interprets this an indication that Henry's wife Margaret may
have been a Comyn. But as John Ravilious pointed out, these Comyns were
descendants of Hextilda's first marriage, so this could be explained by Henry being
Hextilda's son.'




On 16 Aug 2006 Jwc1 wrote:


Dear John and others,
According to Carl Boyer 3rd`s book "
Medieval English Ancestors of Certain Americans (2001) p 58 under Comyn, He
lists
Richard and Hextilda`s children as John who d between 1152-1159 when He and
wife
Hextilda gave to the monks of Saint Mary of Kelso the church of
Lyntrunrudderic (now West Linton) for the souls of his lord Earl Henry and
for that of his
own son John who were buried there. Boyer lists SP I: 505 as his reference
for their five children John, William, Odo /Odinel, Simon and David, who is
given in Alan Young`s book Robert the Bruce`s Rivals: The Comyns 1212-1314,
chart p x as a son of William`s. Boyer also mentions Idonea Comyn as daughter
of
Richard and Hextilda and wife to Adam Fitz Gilbert. Boyner mentions Odinel
as a witness to a charter at Kelso in 1162 and both Odinel and Simon as
witnesses in abt 1166 when He granted with Hextilda`s consent the lands of
Slipperfield in Peebles to the Augustinian friars of Holyrood. So apparently
Hextilda
was the mother of all his children and Young`s estimate of a marriage in 1145
is not far off. The previous year, probably after Richard`s brother Osbert
Comyn was killed and their uncle William already Chancellor to King David I
gave
up the Bishopric of Durham which He had seized with the aid of his nephews in
1142 in return for Northallerton Castle, York being granted to his nephew
Richard. Richard had at least three brothers William killed in 1142 probably
during the intial seizure, Osbert killed in 1144 above and Walter Comyn who
survived until at least 1162 and mentioned in the Kelso charter.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Gjest

Re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 01:15:03

Dear Will,

Which goes back to the theory of an earlier marriage of
Richard Comyn (possibly to a lady of the de Umfreville
family ?). If the 1162 date is correct (I'm not certain
if the 'ca 1166' date for the Holyrood charter is solid),
it would appear that Odinel (at least) was the son of a
prior marriage.

Perhaps an expert on 'minimum age of witnessing' might
chime in here....

Cheers,

John

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 01:26:02

Dear Will,

The implication from Stevenson is that John de
Caldecotis was alive in 1387 [1]. The charter from Sir
James Douglas to William de Caldecotis and his wife
Christiana (nee Tweedie) is dated 8 May 1388 [2].

My suggestion for John de Caldecotis is either "after
1387", or more precisely you might go for "before 8 May
1388".

Cheers,

John



NOTES

[1] heraldic seal of John de Caldecotis, from Stevenson
II:268 is described as follows:

' CALDECOTE, John, of Grayden and Sympryne (Berwickshire). A shield of
arms: A saltire and chief, the latter charged with three escallops. Legend
(l.c.): S IOHANNIS [DE] CALDCOTYS. Diam 7/8 in. Laing, ii. 157. Reg. Ho. Ch.,
No. 193, c. 1387-8 - Cast; No. 194, c. A.D. 1388 - Cast. ' [Stevenson, II:268]


[2] Reg. Honoris de Morton II:164-5, no. 187.

Tony Hoskins

Re: Kill-file instructions

Legg inn av Tony Hoskins » 18 aug 2006 02:11:02

Dear Nat, Tim, and Diana,

Many thanks for the information on eliminating the insupportable online
static. Ah, *peace restored*!

Much obliged.

Tony

Nathaniel Taylor <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net> 08/17/06 04:44PM

In article <s4e43cc3.008@CENTRAL_SVR2>,

hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us ("Tony Hoskins") wrote:

Wonder if someone would kindly let me know just how to initiate a
kill-file. Haven't a clue, but it seems a sad necessity.
Much appreciated.

Dear Tony: How to do this, technically, is specific to whatever
software
you use either to read the messages as e-mails from the rootsweb list
server, or as Usenet newsgroup messages. Either way, one feature I use

to filter out useless material, is to kill any message (i.e. 'mark as
read' or 'send to trash') in which the 'newsgroups' header contains a
comma--that is, any message which is crossposted to the Usenet group
soc.genealogy.medieval as well as one or more other Usenet groups
(since
they must be separated by commas in the 'newsgroups' header). This
filters out almost everything posted by, *and in response to*, one of
our most predictable off-topic crossposting trolls--and his
justifiable,
if rude, legion of assailants.

Nat Taylor
http://www.nltaylor.net

Gjest

Re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 02:31:02

Dear John R and Will,
Richard Comyn recieved the lands of
Staincroft, Walwick, Thornton and Henshaw in Tynedale on his marriage to Hextilda,
daughter of Uchtred, Waltheof`s son between 1144 and 1152 by Earl Henry of
Huntingdon who died in 1152. It was subsequently confirmed by King Henry II and
Henry III. Hextilda`s mother Bethoc who had the land of the Rule of Bethoc,
which lay on the banks of the Rule in Roxburgh, passed on her death between 1150-
1170 to Hextilda and Richard. Uchtred died before Bethoc and She married 2nd
Radulf, son of Donegall of Nithsdale who died in 1185 without inheriting
Bethoc`s lands.
(Young - The Comyns pp 15-16) It is interesting that
Hextilda and Richard may have had a son Odinel, yet the name was probably not
exclusive to the Umfreville family, just as Idonea wasn`t exclusive to the
Longespees. William Comyn was Chancellor before the Battle of the Standard in 1138
when He and David I were captured.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 02:45:03

In a message dated 8/17/06 4:24:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:

<< My suggestion for John de Caldecotis is either "after
1387", or more precisely you might go for "before 8 May
1388". >>

What I was suggesting was why cannot we say 1387/8 ?
It seems most precise. Personally I've never liked "bef" and "aft" when we
actually have a range. Seems a bit vague :)

Will

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 18 aug 2006 03:26:56

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e9vf5ioolpg50@corp.supernews.com...
"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

He's pretty articulate for a bit of yarn and felt. -the Troll

Heheheh ... and he sure keeps Hines' tootsies warm ...%)


- nilita

John P. Ravilious

Re: Odinel and Simon Comyn, sons of Richard Comyn (d. 1182)

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 18 aug 2006 03:39:09

Dear James,

Thanks for that reminder re: the 1152 date as a terminus.

If Hextilda was married to Richard Comyn in 1152 or before (or
at least was contracted to marry him at that time), she was I think
most likely aged 10 or younger at the time - as a major heiress, no
doubt she was a prize whose maturity Richard Comyn would have been
happy to await.

The death date for John Comyn (1159 or before) does not
appear to be a problem, as loose as the dating currently is. If the
1162 contract date involving Odinel Comyn is valid, I think that would
push his birth date back far enough to involve a wife of Richard Comyn
prior to Hextilda. I agree, there is nothing exclusive about the
name Odinel - but it does provide a clue (if a weak one at present).
The name Osbert (that of Richard Comyn's brother) likewise proves
nothing by itself, but I think may have been brought in through the
Giffard connection.

I will (hopefully) work out detailed timelines for the
careers of Richard Comyn, Hextilda, and Earl Malcolm of Athol, and post
same for review and comment in the next day or so.

Cheers,

John



Jwc1870@aol.com wrote:
Dear John R and Will,
Richard Comyn recieved the lands of
Staincroft, Walwick, Thornton and Henshaw in Tynedale on his marriage to Hextilda,
daughter of Uchtred, Waltheof`s son between 1144 and 1152 by Earl Henry of
Huntingdon who died in 1152. It was subsequently confirmed by King Henry II and
Henry III. Hextilda`s mother Bethoc who had the land of the Rule of Bethoc,
which lay on the banks of the Rule in Roxburgh, passed on her death between 1150-
1170 to Hextilda and Richard. Uchtred died before Bethoc and She married 2nd
Radulf, son of Donegall of Nithsdale who died in 1185 without inheriting
Bethoc`s lands.
(Young - The Comyns pp 15-16) It is interesting that
Hextilda and Richard may have had a son Odinel, yet the name was probably not
exclusive to the Umfreville family, just as Idonea wasn`t exclusive to the
Longespees. William Comyn was Chancellor before the Battle of the Standard in 1138
when He and David I were captured.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

John P. Ravilious

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 18 aug 2006 03:44:58

Dear Will,

I use 'before' and 'after' dates for a few reasons. For one,
many times we have 'circa' dates which are as close as we can get, but
these are I think clearly vague - if this is as accurate as a date can
get, well, so be it. But, when we have an IPM, a charter, or other
evidence that makes it clear an event (birth, marriage, death) has
already occurred, or has definitely not yet occurred, this can be used
to at least anchor the date with a definite terminus, and certain
documentation.

The other operational reason, my database will accept an
'about' or 'circa' date, but not one such as '1387/8'. Therefore, when
I have a date that I can show is a terminus, I will give same to show
an event occurred 'before' or 'after' that date.

Cheers,

John



WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 8/17/06 4:24:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3 writes:

My suggestion for John de Caldecotis is either "after
1387", or more precisely you might go for "before 8 May
1388".

What I was suggesting was why cannot we say 1387/8 ?
It seems most precise. Personally I've never liked "bef" and "aft" when we
actually have a range. Seems a bit vague :)

Will

Gjest

Re: Genealogics update Lytton of Knebworth

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 03:51:02

Thank you Will for that most interesting post.
As a followup, on Leo's great site here
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 9&tree=LEO
we see
Sir Robert Lytton of Knebworth b abt 1512, and mentiond in 1545
He was evidently the eldest son because he is making documents "of Knebworth"
before his brother Rowland appears.

That Robert and Rowland are brothers is proven by a document in their Family
archives in A2A which specifically states that Rowland his brother was his
heir male.

Robert had only daughters as Leo is showing. One of these Helen sues for a
portion of an estate and she is granted "Canwykes". Helen has married John
Brockett and they sue as a couple 19 Jan 1552/3.

Leo does not show Robert's death date, however Robert's will is extant in the
Family papers dated 1 July 1550 and probated 30 Mar 1551. Combining the
death date of 1550/1 with his birth in 1512 allows setting a range on the
daughters births of 1529/51.

Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 18 aug 2006 03:54:14

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

"Hippo" has been fooled, euchred and flummoxed -- and doesn't even realize
it.

Great Entertainment!

DSH

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e9ovb47sj6fa4@corp.supernews.com...

You need to put yourself in the place of old Peter, given the temptation.
:^) -the Troll

Gjest

Re: Genealogics update Lytton of Knebworth

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 04:15:03

Continuing on in this vein, Leo's excellent website here
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 4&tree=LEO

shows us Judith Lytton, dau of Rowland Lytton by his wife Anne St John
This Judith, Leo shows, married Sir Thomas Barrington of Barrington Hall, 2nd
Bart

but this was not her only marriage.
She married first to George Smyth, Esq of Annables about Oct 1614 as this
post-nuptial settlement details.

Will Johnson
---------------------
Hertfordshire Archives and Local Studies: Manorial records, Title deeds, and
estate and family papers of the Smyth family of the Manor of Annables,
Harpenden, 1318 - c1900

Manorial records, Title deeds, and estate and family papers of the Smyth
family of the Manor of Annables, Harpenden, 1318-C1900
Catalogue Ref. DE/Si
Creator(s): Smyth family of Harpenden, Hertfordshire

TITLE DEEDS AND ESTATE PAPERS

FILE - Settlement after the marriage of George Smith with Judith, daughter of
Sir Rowland Lytton - ref. DE/Si/41572 - date: 20 Oct 1614
[from Scope and Content] Covenants between George Smyth of Annables, esquire,
1st, and Sir Henry Wallopp of Farleigh Wallop, Hants, knight, Sir John Luke
of Annables, knight and William Lytton of Knebworth, esquire, son of Sir
Rowland Lytton of the same, knight, 2nd, for the settlement of the following: the
manor of Annables otherwise Kinsbourne Hall etc and a messuage called Turnors
and land in Harpenden; a messuage called Acthorpe in South Elkington, Lincoln,
and Lynge pasture otherwise the Sheepe walke and other lands in North
Elkington, Lincolnshire. Signature. 3 seals (armorial)

Peter Stewart

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 18 aug 2006 04:35:16

The explanation below is sensible - however, in this case an indication that
the person was living in 1387 does not warrant giving "aft 1387" for his
death: someone can die late at night on 31 December and still have been
alive and dead within the same calendar year.

Vagueness in these matters is very common in genealogy. The simplest way to
state the period of death for someone who was apparently living in 1377 and
certainly deceased by 8 May 1388 is either "1377/bef 8 May 1388" if the year
is not certain, or "1388 bef 8 May" if it is known that he was alive earlier
in this calendar year.

Peter Stewart


"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1155869098.352293.114170@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Dear Will,

I use 'before' and 'after' dates for a few reasons. For one,
many times we have 'circa' dates which are as close as we can get, but
these are I think clearly vague - if this is as accurate as a date can
get, well, so be it. But, when we have an IPM, a charter, or other
evidence that makes it clear an event (birth, marriage, death) has
already occurred, or has definitely not yet occurred, this can be used
to at least anchor the date with a definite terminus, and certain
documentation.

The other operational reason, my database will accept an
'about' or 'circa' date, but not one such as '1387/8'. Therefore, when
I have a date that I can show is a terminus, I will give same to show
an event occurred 'before' or 'after' that date.

Cheers,

John



WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 8/17/06 4:24:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Therav3
writes:

My suggestion for John de Caldecotis is either "after
1387", or more precisely you might go for "before 8 May
1388".

What I was suggesting was why cannot we say 1387/8 ?
It seems most precise. Personally I've never liked "bef" and "aft" when
we
actually have a range. Seems a bit vague :)

Will

Peter Stewart

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 18 aug 2006 04:52:25

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:UzaFg.13851$rP1.11431@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
The explanation below is sensible - however, in this case an indication
that the person was living in 1387 does not warrant giving "aft 1387" for
his death: someone can die late at night on 31 December and still have
been alive and dead within the same calendar year.

Vagueness in these matters is very common in genealogy. The simplest way
to state the period of death for someone who was apparently living in 1377
and certainly deceased by 8 May 1388 is either "1377/bef 8 May 1388" if
the year is not certain, or "1388 bef 8 May" if it is known that he was
alive earlier in this calendar year.

Sorry for the repeated typo - this should read "The simplest way to state
the period of death for someone who was apparently living in 1387 and
certainly deceased by 8 May 1388 is either "1387/bef 8 May 1388" if the year
is not certain, or "1388 bef 8 May" if it is known that he was alive earlier
in this calendar year.

Peter Stewart

Gjest

Re: Lady Anne Villiers

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 05:31:02

On Leo's great web site here
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.ph ... 6&tree=LEO
we see Anne Villiers
dau of Christopher Villiers, 1st Earl of Anglesey by his wife Elizabeth
Sheldon

Anne has no birthrange however, there is a A2A document which touches on her
age, establishing that she was born 1617/31

Will Johnson
----------------------
Warwickshire County Record Office: Feilding family of Newnham Paddox [CR
2017/M1 - CR 2017/F263]
FEILDING OF NEWNHAM PADDOX
Catalogue Ref. CR 2017
Creator(s): Feilding family of Newnham Paddox, Warwickshire

DEEDS AND LEASES
WARWICKSHIRE
MONKS KIRBY
The Manors of Newnham and Monks Kirby
Monks Kirby
FILE - Declaration of trusts of the Monks Kirby estate from Mary, Countess of
Buckingham to Sir Ralph Freeman, Sir Clement Cotterell, Bartin Hough alias
Woodkeeper and Gregory Julian by which it was stated that as Lord Denbigh did
not pay £6,310 as covenanted in D15, the estate was to be held by Sir Ralph and
the others in trust for Mary for life and afterwards by new trustees who were
to raise £3000 from it for Lady Anne Villiers when she reached the age of 14;
but if she should have died before this date, the property was to go to Basil,
Lord Feilding and his heirs and in default of this to his brother, George
Earl of Desmond, 10th April. Original and copy. - ref. CR 2017/D16/1-2 - date:
1631

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 05:35:03

In a message dated 8/17/06 7:58:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time, therav3@aol.com
writes:

<< The other operational reason, my database will accept an
'about' or 'circa' date, but not one such as '1387/8'. Therefore, when
I have a date that I can show is a terminus, I will give same to show
an event occurred 'before' or 'after' that date. >>

Aha, that explains it. I use PAF as my software and it allows dates like
1387/8 as well as bef 1388 and aft 1387.

I have thrown it hardballs that it didn't know how to deal with, but those
are rare. It does have a problem with a BC date range however.

Will

Gjest

Re: William de Caldecotis, and Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 08:46:02

In a message dated 8/17/2006 8:44:11 PM Pacific Standard Time,
p_m_stewart@msn.com writes:

Vagueness in these matters is very common in genealogy. The simplest way to
state the period of death for someone who was apparently living in 1377 and
certainly deceased by 8 May 1388 is either "1377/bef 8 May 1388" if the year
is not certain, or "1388 bef 8 May" if it is known that he was alive earlier
in this calendar year.


Well true, my own software program does not allow these hybrids.
The PAF software I use however, can do something like 1 Jan 1377 - 7 May 1388
It converts it into a weird thing 1/7 Jan/May 1377/8
which may or may not make sense to someone viewing it.

An alternate way is to state it as "from 1 Jan 1377 to 7 May 1388"
which although it makes the impression that the person had an abnormally
long death, it at least conveys the information that the range of possibilities
is known.

Will

Gjest

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 12:29:20

asclero@zdnetonebox.com wrote:
nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155799830.788947.89150@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...


Funny thing is, the majority of people interested in geneaology are
"straights", me included.

Then you won't mind going straight to the killfiles with your good
buddy Hines, you cross-posting spamhead.

PLONK!

Hippocrite.

##minty..

Gjest

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 aug 2006 12:38:02

D. Spencer Hines wrote:
nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155799566.743372.101480@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Renia wrote:

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a particular
attraction to Genealogy. Often they realize they will never have any
DESCENDANTS -- so they look BACK to ANCESTORS for
personal validation and affirmation.

DSH

Unfortunately, for DSH, this assertion that homosexuals and lesbians
are incapable of having children is not only factually incorrect, but
is an ignorant but widely held misconception (to pardon the pun).
Nonsense.

I said nothing of the sort.

Take Reading Comprehension 101 again.

Note OFTEN -- NOT always, in what I wrote below -- and don't try to put your
words in my mouth or anyone else's.

You are quite capable of choking on them yourself.

John 5:14

DSH

Deus Vult


If homosexuals "will never have any descendents", that would imply they
would not have any children, which is patently untrue. It is you who
has the incomprehensibility problem you idiotic febrile pogue.

##minty...

Welsh Rarebit

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Welsh Rarebit » 18 aug 2006 13:14:06

<nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155901082.421614.51380@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
nibblenot@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1155799566.743372.101480@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Renia wrote:

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Homosexuals, including Lesbians of course, ALSO have a
particular
attraction to Genealogy. Often they realize they will never
have any
DESCENDANTS -- so they look BACK to ANCESTORS for
personal validation and affirmation.

DSH

Unfortunately, for DSH, this assertion that homosexuals and
lesbians
are incapable of having children is not only factually incorrect,
but
is an ignorant but widely held misconception (to pardon the pun).
Nonsense.

I said nothing of the sort.

Take Reading Comprehension 101 again.

Note OFTEN -- NOT always, in what I wrote below -- and don't try to
put your
words in my mouth or anyone else's.

You are quite capable of choking on them yourself.

John 5:14

DSH

Deus Vult


If homosexuals "will never have any descendents", that would imply
they
would not have any children, which is patently untrue. It is you who
has the incomprehensibility problem you idiotic febrile pogue.


Hines tried to get out of this mistake by pointing out that he used the
word OFTEN, not ALWAYS. That doesn't wash, of course since the 'often'
in his sentence qualified the verb 'realize', while the bit about having
descendants was qualified by the word 'never'. Look again, Spence:

'Often they realize they will never have any DESCENDANTS'

So you weren't putting words in his mouth, minty.You couldn't have - his
foot was already there.


Malachi 2:3

Grey Satterfield

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av Grey Satterfield » 18 aug 2006 13:56:13

On 8/17/06 9:54 PM, in article DZ9Fg.245$M14.2401@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e9ovb47sj6fa4@corp.supernews.com...

You need to put yourself in the place of old Peter, given the temptation.
:^) -the Troll

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

"Hippo" has been fooled, euchred and flummoxed -- and doesn't even realize
it.

Great Entertainment!

DSH

Even hippo, whose judgment is usually quite good, isn't right all the time.
:)

Grey Satterfield

La N

Re: Stockdill Tells Us He Is A Bastard

Legg inn av La N » 18 aug 2006 14:01:40

"Grey Satterfield" <gsatterfield@cox.net> wrote in message
news:C10B231D.2F657%gsatterfield@cox.net...
On 8/17/06 9:54 PM, in article DZ9Fg.245$M14.2401@eagle.america.net, "D.
Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote:

"hippo" <hippo@south-sudan.net> wrote in message
news:12e9ovb47sj6fa4@corp.supernews.com...

You need to put yourself in the place of old Peter, given the
temptation.
:^) -the Troll

"Peter" is not a Real Person but merely a little sock puppet.

"Hippo" has been fooled, euchred and flummoxed -- and doesn't even
realize
it.

Great Entertainment!

DSH

Even hippo, whose judgment is usually quite good, isn't right all the
time.
:)


That's true. But Hippo gains extra points for his thoughts in this thread
....%)

- nilita

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»