Relationship contracts do will mean the time period inside the and therefore amarriage need to have chosen to take place

Relationship contracts do will mean the time period inside the and therefore amarriage need to have chosen to take place

1. But really, inside the genealogy and family history, everyone knowthat for every single code there clearly was an exemption. A vexing area ofgenealogy would be the fact not one person really knows just how to use this new exclusions orrules with any decisive adjective instance always, maybe, most likely,most likely, etc. It might be fascinating in the event the around almost every other examples ofjointures are generated a-year otherwise one or two after a well-known relationship big date.

2. Can there be a keen extant dispensation to your wedding out of ElizabethClifford and Sir Ralph Bowes who had been third cousins via Henry Fitzhugh,3rd Lord Fitzhugh or fourth cousins, once removed from this new fifth LordClifford? Who does restrict their marriage date.


Allegedly, if the good dispensation try desired and you may granted, it can havebeen by one of many pursuing the, and will appear in new correspondingregister book, if this endures:

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

5. Should your tenth Lord Clifford do wed during the early 1487 [say January] andhas E after because seasons, does this new chronology maybe not really works?

John palms?

Age produced inside late 1487, Henry created into the 1488/9, Joan inside ,etcetera. completing the labels of send off . If (a) thechronology however really works; and you can (b) her relationship piece wasn’t low; thenwe have only the fresh 1505 pedigree of Henry VII’s that is into the oppositionto new supposition one she is actually a valid child.

6. Regarding the 1505 pedigree: Will be the Clifford daughters the newest onlyknown Henry VII connections omitted? Have there been other people? If that’s the case,won’t one to reflect improperly about file given that a resource?

Out-of comparisons We have created from the c.1505 Henry VII Relations pedigreeswith the new 1480-1500 Visitation of one’s Northern pedigrees, being

Regarding c.1505 Affairs pedigrees, the latest Clifford children are perhaps not listedin an effective Clifford pedigree, but rather from the St. John pedigree. While the I’mnot familiar with this new St. John members of the family, adopting the ‘s the recommendations asit appears from the c.1505 pedigree, as the taken from the 1834 Coll. Most useful. etGen. article. The new phrasing in the quotations is strictly as it appears inthe 1834 blog post (pp. 310-311).

“Zero. XII.”From my Lord Welles child, Sir Richard Pole, Mistress Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess away from Somerset got around three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she had “My Woman the brand new King’s Mom.” who had “This new Queen.” whohad “Prince “From the “Sir Oliver Saint John, first husband.” she got 3 daus & dos sons:

An excellent. “Edith, married so you can Geoffrey Pole away from Buckinghamshire.” They had:A1. “Sir Richard Rod, Knt. married into Lady Margaret, dau. out of theDuke away from Clarence.” That they had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, wedded so you’re able to Ralph Verney, Esq.” They had: “John Verney.—– [youngster, unnamed]. ——-[a unique child, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He had four children:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” who had “Five daughters and you may oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. so you’re able to Harry Lord Clifford.” They had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, child and you can heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Elizabeth, married so you can Thomas Kent, Esq. out of Lincolnshire.”B4. “An effective Nun out of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, wedded so you’re able to Sir Richard Frognall.” They’d:C1. “Edmond Frognall with his brethren and you will sistren.” With issueindicated, but not called.C2. “Age, married so you can Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Elizabeth, wedded very first to the Lord Zouche; immediately following into LordScrope from Bolton.” Issue:D1. [of the Zouche] ” Catesby.” They’d:”Elizabeth. George. John. William.”D2. [of the Scrope] ” Conyers.” With issueindicated but not called.

Margaret Duchess from Somerset, by “Lionel Lord Welles, past partner.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. regarding K. Edward IV.” andthey had “Age”

Join the ConversationLeave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *