1. But really, in the genealogy and family history, all of us knowthat for each code there’s an exemption. A beneficial vexing area ofgenealogy is the fact not one person extremely knows exactly how to put on the fresh conditions orrules which have people definitive adjective instance always, maybe, most likely,almost certainly, etcetera. It will be interesting if the indeed there almost every other instances ofjointures are produced per year or a couple of immediately after a well-known marriage date.
2. Could there be an enthusiastic extant dispensation for the marriage out of ElizabethClifford and Sir Ralph Bowes who were third cousins thru Henry Fitzhugh,3rd Lord Fitzhugh otherwise fourth cousins, just after taken out of new fifth LordClifford? Who does restrict their wedding big date.
Arthur
Allegedly, when the a good dispensation are needed and you can supplied, it can havebeen by the one of many following, and might appear in the fresh correspondingregister guide, when it endures:
Thomas Savage, Archbishop away from York 1501-1507Christopher Bainbridge, Bishop regarding Durham 1507-1508, Archbishop out of York1508-1514William Senhouse, Bishop of Durham 1502-1505Thomas Ruthall, Bishop off Durham 1509-1523Richard Leyburn, Bishop off Carlisle 1502-1508John Penny, Bishop regarding Carlisle 1509-1520
5. If the tenth Lord Clifford really does wed at the beginning of 1487 [state January] andhas Elizabeth afterwards in this seasons, do the brand new chronology perhaps not functions?
John arms?
Elizabeth produced in later 1487, Henry produced during the 1488/9, Joan in ,etc. filling out the brands of your own send away from . When the (a) thechronology nevertheless works; and (b) their particular wedding piece was not lower; thenwe just have brand new 1505 pedigree out-of Henry VII’s that is for the oppositionto the conjecture you to definitely she are a valid child.
six. Concerning your 1505 pedigree: Is the Clifford daughters the new onlyknown Henry VII relations omitted? Were there someone else? Therefore,wouldn’t one mirror badly about this file because the a source?
Away from comparisons I’ve made of the c.1505 Henry VII Relations pedigreeswith the 1480-1500 Visitation of your North pedigrees, that are
On the c.1505 Relations pedigrees, new Clifford youngsters are perhaps not listedin good Clifford pedigree, but rather on St. John pedigree. Since I’mnot always the new St. John friends, pursuing the ‘s the information asit looks in the c.1505 pedigree, as the taken from the latest 1834 Coll. Best. etGen. post. New phrasing inside quotations is strictly because seems inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).
“Zero. XII.”Off my Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Pole, Domme Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess away from Somerset had around three husbands.” By the “John Duke ofSomerset” she had “My personal Lady the King’s Mother.” who had “The Queen.” whohad “Prince “Of the “Sir Oliver Saint John, earliest partner.” she had 3 daus & 2 sons:
A good. “Edith, married so you’re able to Geoffrey Rod of Buckinghamshire.” That they had:A1. “Sir Richard Pole, Knt. wedded for the Lady Margaret, dau. out-of theDuke from Clarence.” That they had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, wedded so you can Ralph Verney, Esq.” They’d: “John Verney.—– [youngster, unnamed]. ——-[another child, unnamed].”
B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He had four children:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” that has “Five daughters and you will oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. to Harry Lord Clifford.” That they had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, young man and heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, married to Thomas Kent, Esq. off Lincolnshire.”B4. “A great Nun regarding Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”
C. “Dame Mary, wedded so you can Sir Richard Frognall.” That they had:C1. “Edmond Frognall with Norfolk, NE in USA brides agency his brethren and you may sistren.” That have issueindicated, yet not entitled.C2. “Age, wedded to Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”
D. “E, married very first towards Lord Zouche; just after into LordScrope of Bolton.” Issue:D1. [by Zouche] ” Catesby.” That they had:”E. George. John. William.”D2. [by Scrope] ” Conyers.” With issueindicated but not titled.
Margaret Duchess regarding Somerset, of the “Lionel Lord Welles, history spouse.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. of K. Edward IV.” andthey got “Age.”