Marriage deals manage often indicate the time period when you look at the and therefore amarriage ought to have taken set

1. Yet, when you look at the family history, we-all knowthat per signal there is certainly an exclusion. A good vexing area ofgenealogy is the fact not one person extremely understands how to apply this new exceptions orrules that have any definitive adjective such always, maybe, most likely,likely, an such like. It will be interesting in the event the around almost every other advice ofjointures becoming generated a year or several immediately following a known marriage big date.

2. Could there be an extant dispensation on wedding away from ElizabethClifford and you may Sir Ralph Bowes who had been 3rd cousins thru Henry Fitzhugh,third Lord Fitzhugh or fourth cousins, immediately after taken out of the new 5th LordClifford? Who would restrict the relationships big date.

Arthur

Allegedly, in the event the an effective dispensation is actually sought for and you can supplied, it could havebeen because of the one of the following, and may even come in the fresh new correspondingregister publication, if it endures:

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

5. In the event your 10th Lord Clifford does wed at the beginning of 1487 [say January] andhas Elizabeth later where 12 months, really does the new chronology träffa vackra Asiatiska kvinnor som letar efter män från ditt område not functions?

John arms?

E born during the later 1487, Henry produced inside 1488/nine, Joan inside ,etcetera. filling out the brand new names of your own publish of . In the event the (a) thechronology nonetheless work; and you can (b) their wedding bit was not lowest; thenwe just have the brand new 1505 pedigree off Henry VII’s that is in the oppositionto the brand new supposition one she was a valid daughter.

six. Regarding your 1505 pedigree: Certainly are the Clifford daughters this new onlyknown Henry VII affairs omitted? Were there anybody else? In this case,would not you to echo improperly about this file given that a resource?

From evaluations I have produced from the fresh c.1505 Henry VII Affairs pedigreeswith the fresh 1480-1500 Visitation of your own North pedigrees, which are

In the c.1505 Interactions pedigrees, the new Clifford youngsters are perhaps not listedin a Clifford pedigree, but instead regarding St. John pedigree. Since I’mnot regularly the latest St. John members of the family, following ‘s the pointers asit looks throughout the c.1505 pedigree, because obtained from brand new 1834 Coll. Better. etGen. blog post. The fresh phrasing within the quotations is precisely since it looks inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).

“Zero. XII.”Regarding my Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Rod, Mistress Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess from Somerset got about three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she had “My Lady this new King’s Mommy.” who had “The King.” whohad “Prince “By “Sir Oliver Saint John, basic husband.” she had step 3 daus & dos sons:

An effective. “Edith, married to Geoffrey Rod out-of Buckinghamshire.” They had:A1. “Sir Richard Pole, Knt. married into Lady Margaret, dau. off theDuke of Clarence.” They’d: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, married so you can Ralph Verney, Esq.” They’d: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[an alternative child, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He’d four pupils:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” that has “Five daughters and you will oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. in order to Harry Lord Clifford.” They’d “Jane. Mabill.Henry, son and you will heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Elizabeth, married in order to Thomas Kent, Esq. away from Lincolnshire.”B4. “A beneficial Nun from Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, married in order to Sir Richard Frognall.” They had:C1. “Edmond Frognall along with his brethren and you can sistren.” Having issueindicated, yet not named.C2. “Age, wedded to help you Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Age, wedded earliest on the Lord Zouche; immediately after towards the LordScrope away from Bolton.” Issue:D1. [from the Zouche] ” Catesby.” They’d:”E. George. John. William.”D2. [by Scrope] ” Conyers.” That have issueindicated not titled.

Margaret Duchess away from Somerset, because of the “Lionel Lord Welles, history husband.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. out-of K. Edward IV.” andthey had “Elizabeth.”

Marriage deals manage often indicate the time period when you look at the and therefore amarriage ought to have taken set

Leave a Reply

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