step one. Yet ,, inside the family history, most of us knowthat for each and every code there can be a different. A great vexing part ofgenealogy is that not one person very knows how to put on the exceptions orrules that have people definitive adjective for example constantly, perhaps, probably,likely, etc. It will be fascinating in the event the here most other examples ofjointures being made a-year or one or two once a well-known matrimony big date.
dos. Is there an enthusiastic extant dispensation on relationships out of ElizabethClifford and Sir Ralph Bowes who had been third cousins thru Henry Fitzhugh,3rd Lord Fitzhugh otherwise next cousins, just after taken from the fresh 5th LordClifford? That would narrow down its relationships big date.
Arthur
Allegedly, in the event the a dispensation was sought and you will granted, it would havebeen by one of many after the, that can come in the latest correspondingregister book, when it endures:
Thomas Savage, Archbishop out-of York 1501-1507Christopher Bainbridge, Bishop off Durham 1507-1508, Archbishop off York1508-1514William Senhouse, Bishop away from Durham 1502-1505Thomas Ruthall, Bishop off Durham 1509-1523Richard Leyburn, Bishop regarding Carlisle 1502-1508John Penny, Bishop away from Carlisle 1509-1520
5. If for example the 10th Lord Clifford do get married during the early 1487 [state January] andhas E after in that year, really does the fresh new chronology maybe not works?
John palms?
Irska stranica za upoznavanje besplatno
E produced within the later 1487, Henry created in 1488/9, Joan in the ,etc. filling in the newest names of the send away from . When the (a) thechronology however works; and you may (b) their particular marriage piece was not low; thenwe simply have the new 1505 pedigree out of Henry VII’s that’s for the oppositionto this new supposition that she was a valid daughter.
six. Regarding your 1505 pedigree: Are definitely the Clifford daughters new onlyknown Henry VII connections omitted? Were there someone else? Therefore,would not one to mirror improperly about document once the a source?
Away from contrasting I have made from the newest c.1505 Henry VII Relationships pedigreeswith brand new 1480-1500 Visitation of the North pedigrees, that are
Regarding the c.1505 Interactions pedigrees, brand new Clifford children are not listedin a good Clifford pedigree, but alternatively throughout the St. John pedigree. Once the I’mnot always the fresh St. John household members, following is the information asit seems on c.1505 pedigree, since taken from the fresh new 1834 Coll. Greatest. etGen. post. New phrasing for the quotations is precisely as it looks inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).
“No. XII.”Away from my personal Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Rod, Domme Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess out-of Somerset got three husbands.” Because of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she got “My personal Lady the latest King’s Mother.” who had “The fresh new Queen.” whohad “Prince “Because of the “Sir Oliver Saint John, earliest husband.” she had step three daus & dos sons:
A good. “Edith, wedded to help you Geoffrey Pole of Buckinghamshire.” That they had:A1. “Sir Richard Rod, Knt. married with the Lady Margaret, dau. off theDuke off Clarence.” They had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, wedded so you’re able to Ralph Verney, Esq.” They had: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[another type of child, unnamed].”
B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He had five youngsters:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” that has “Five daughters and you will oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. to help you Harry Lord Clifford.” They had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, child and you may heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, wedded so you’re able to Thomas Kent, Esq. of Lincolnshire.”B4. “An effective Nun out of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”
C. “Dame Mary, wedded to Sir Richard Frognall.” They had:C1. “Edmond Frognall and his brethren and you can sistren.” That have issueindicated, however titled.C2. “E, wedded in order to Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”
D. “Age, wedded very first to your Lord Zouche; immediately following towards the LordScrope regarding Bolton.” Issue:D1. [by the Zouche] ” Catesby.” That they had:”E. George. John. William.”D2. [because of the Scrope] ” Conyers.” Having issueindicated yet not named.
Margaret Duchess regarding Somerset, by the “Lionel Lord Welles, last partner.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. off K. Edward IV.” andthey had “Elizabeth.”