Matrimony deals do usually mean the time period into the and that amarriage must took put

Matrimony deals do usually mean the time period into the and that amarriage must took put

step 1. Yet, inside the genealogy and family history, we knowthat for every single rule there is certainly a different. A vexing section ofgenealogy would be the fact no one extremely understands just how to make use of brand new exceptions orrules with any definitive adjective for example constantly, perhaps, probably,likely, etc. It will be fascinating if the truth be told there other examples ofjointures being produced a-year or a couple immediately following a well-known relationships go out.

2. Is there a keen extant dispensation to the relationships away from ElizabethClifford and you will Sir Ralph Bowes who were 3rd cousins through Henry Fitzhugh,third Lord Fitzhugh otherwise fourth cousins, just after taken off brand new 5th LordClifford? Who would narrow down their relationships go out.


Allegedly, in the event the a beneficial dispensation is actually desired and you may offered, it can havebeen because of the among the many following, and could can be found in this new correspondingregister publication, if it endures:

Thomas Savage, Archbishop out-of York 1501-1507Christopher Bainbridge, Bishop out of Durham 1507-1508, Archbishop away from York1508-1514William Senhouse, Bishop regarding Durham 1502-1505Thomas Ruthall, Bishop from Durham 1509-1523Richard Leyburn, Bishop off Carlisle 1502-1508John Penny, Bishop out of Carlisle 1509-1520

5. In case your 10th Lord Clifford really does wed at the beginning of 1487 [say January] andhas E afterwards in that seasons, do the brand new chronology perhaps not work?

John possession?

Age created inside the late 1487, Henry born in 1488/nine, Joan into the ,etc. filling out the fresh new brands of the publish off . If the (a) thechronology nonetheless performs; and you will (b) their unique matrimony portion was not reduced; thenwe have only the fresh 1505 pedigree regarding Henry VII’s that is from inside the oppositionto the supposition you to definitely she are a valid child.

6. About your 1505 pedigree: Could be the Clifford daughters brand new onlyknown Henry VII interactions omitted? Have there been anyone else? In this case,would not that mirror poorly with this document as the a source?

From evaluations We have made from the fresh c.1505 Henry VII Connections pedigreeswith the 1480-1500 Visitation of North pedigrees, that are

About c.1505 Interactions pedigrees, the new Clifford children are maybe not listedin a great Clifford pedigree, but alternatively in the St. John pedigree. As the I’mnot accustomed new St. John family relations, after the is the information asit looks in the c.1505 pedigree, because obtained from the latest 1834 Coll. Best. etGen. blog post. New phrasing for the quotations is exactly because it seems inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).

“No. XII.”Away from my personal Lord Welles child, Sir Richard Rod, Mistress Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317 Hollywood, SC women sexy, 318.”Margaret Duchess regarding Somerset got about three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she got “My Woman new King’s Mommy.” who’d “The newest Queen.” whohad “Prince “Of the “Sir Oliver Saint John, earliest husband.” she had step three daus & dos sons:

An excellent. “Edith, married so you’re able to Geoffrey Pole of Buckinghamshire.” They had:A1. “Sir Richard Pole, Knt. married with the Woman Margaret, dau. off theDuke off Clarence.” That they had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, married so you’re able to Ralph Verney, Esq.” That they had: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[a new youngster, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He’d five college students:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” who’d “Five daughters and oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. so you’re able to Harry Lord Clifford.” That they had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, young buck and you may heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, wedded so you can Thomas Kent, Esq. out of Lincolnshire.”B4. “Good Nun out of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, married in order to Sir Richard Frognall.” They had:C1. “Edmond Frognall and his awesome brethren and you can sistren.” Which have issueindicated, but not entitled.C2. “E, married so you can Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Age, wedded first for the Lord Zouche; shortly after to the LordScrope away from Bolton.” Issue:D1. [of the Zouche] ” Catesby.” They’d:”E. George. John. William.”D2. [because of the Scrope] ” Conyers.” Having issueindicated however entitled.

Margaret Duchess from Somerset, because of the “Lionel Lord Welles, history partner.”had: “John Viscount Welles, married Cecily, dau. off K. Edward IV.” andthey got “E.”

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.