step 1. Yet ,, inside the family history, all of us knowthat for every single code there clearly was an exception. An excellent vexing point ofgenealogy would be the fact no-one really knows just how to utilize the brand new exclusions orrules with one definitive adjective including always, perhaps, probably,likely, etc. It might be fascinating in the event the indeed there almost every other examples ofjointures are made per year otherwise a couple of immediately after a known wedding time.
dos. Could there be a keen extant dispensation with the relationships out-of ElizabethClifford and you may Sir Ralph Bowes have been 3rd cousins via Henry Fitzhugh,3rd Lord Fitzhugh or 4th cousins, just after removed from the latest 5th LordClifford? Who does restrict their wedding date.
Arthur
Allegedly, in the event that a great dispensation try tried and supplied, it could havebeen from the one of several pursuing the, that can come in the fresh correspondingregister publication, whether or not it survives:
Thomas Savage, Archbishop away from York 1501-1507Christopher Bainbridge, Bishop regarding Durham 1507-1508, Archbishop from York1508-1514William Senhouse, Bishop out of Durham 1502-1505Thomas Ruthall, Bishop from Durham 1509-1523Richard Leyburn, Bishop of Carlisle 1502-1508John Cent, Bishop of Carlisle 1509-1520
5. If for example the 10th Lord Clifford really does get married at the beginning of 1487 [say January] andhas Age later on where 12 months, really does the fresh chronology perhaps not works?
John arms?
Age produced in later 1487, Henry created inside 1488/9, Joan into the ,etc. completing the brands of your own send out-of . In the event the (a) thechronology however functions; and you can (b) their wedding piece was not reduced; thenwe only have new 1505 pedigree off Henry VII’s that’s in the oppositionto the brand new conjecture you to she is actually a valid daughter.
6. Regarding your 1505 pedigree: Will be Clifford daughters the newest onlyknown Henry VII relationships omitted? Are there someone else? In that case,wouldn’t that echo poorly on this file once the a resource?
Away from contrasting I have produced from new c.1505 Henry VII Affairs pedigreeswith the 1480-1500 Visitation of North pedigrees, being
On c.1505 Affairs pedigrees, the new Clifford youngsters are not listedin a Clifford pedigree, but alternatively regarding St. John pedigree. Given that I’mnot always the brand new St. John family members, after the is the recommendations asit seems on c.1505 pedigree, because the obtained from this new 1834 Coll. Greatest. etGen. post. The newest phrasing during the quotations is strictly because it seems inthe 1834 blog post (pp. 310-311).
«Zero. XII.»Of my personal Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Rod, Domme Verney, SirJohn St. John, with other.»f.288, 296, 317, 318.»Margaret Duchess of Somerset had about three husbands.» From the «John Duke ofSomerset» she got «My Lady the newest King’s Mom.» who’d «The fresh King.» whohad «Prince «From the «Sir Oliver Saint John, basic partner.» she had 3 daus & 2 sons:
A good. «Edith, wedded to help you Geoffrey Pole of Buckinghamshire.» They had:A1. «Sir Richard Pole, Knt. wedded for the Lady Margaret, dau. from theDuke out-of Clarence.» That they had: «Harry. «A2. «Alianor, wedded to help you Ralph Verney, Esq.» That they had: «John Verney.—– [youngster, unnamed]. ——-[an alternate youngster, unnamed].»
B. «John Ssint John, esq.» He’d five people:B1. «Sir John Saint John, Knight.» who’d «Four daughters and you can oneson.»B2. «Anne, wedd. in order to Harry Lord Clifford.» They had «Jane. Mabill.Henry, son and you may heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.»B3. «Age, wedded to Thomas Kent, Esq. out of Lincolnshire.»B4. «An effective Nun away from Shaftesbury.»B5. «Oliver Saint John.»
C. «Dame Mary, married to help you Sir Richard Frognall.» That https://kissbrides.com/hr/europeandate-recenzija/ they had:C1. «Edmond Frognall and his awesome brethren and you can sistren.» With issueindicated, although not titled.C2. «Age, married so you can Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.»
D. «Age, wedded first into Lord Zouche; shortly after towards the LordScrope out-of Bolton.» Issue:D1. [by the Zouche] » Catesby.» They had:»Elizabeth. George. John. William.»D2. [of the Scrope] » Conyers.» With issueindicated however named.
Margaret Duchess regarding Somerset, because of the «Lionel Lord Welles, past spouse.»had: «John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. out-of K. Edward IV.» andthey got «E.»
