Wedding contracts would often suggest the timeframe into the and that amarriage ought to took lay

Wedding contracts would often suggest the timeframe into the and that amarriage ought to took lay

step 1. Yet ,, into the genealogy, all of us knowthat per code there is certainly an exclusion. A great vexing part ofgenealogy would be the fact no body really knows how to put on new conditions orrules having any decisive adjective such usually, perhaps, most likely,more than likely, an such like. It might be fascinating in the event that there most other advice ofjointures getting produced annually or a few immediately following a known relationship go out.

2. Could there be an enthusiastic extant dispensation on relationship out of ElizabethClifford and you will Sir Ralph Bowes who have been 3rd cousins thru Henry Fitzhugh,3rd Lord Fitzhugh or last cousins, once taken off this new fifth LordClifford? Who narrow down its wedding day.

Arthur

Presumably, if a good dispensation are sought for and supplied, it might havebeen by among the many adopting the, and may even come in the latest correspondingregister book, whether or not it survives:

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

5. If your 10th Lord Clifford do wed in early 1487 [state January] andhas Elizabeth after because year, do the chronology maybe not functions?

John arms?

E produced within the later 1487, Henry created inside the 1488/9, Joan into the ,etc. filling out the fresh new labels of your publish off . When the (a) thechronology nevertheless functions; and (b) her relationship section was not lowest; thenwe simply have the fresh 1505 pedigree regarding Henry VII’s which is during the oppositionto the fresh new supposition you to definitely she is actually a valid child.

six. About your 1505 pedigree: Are definitely the Clifford daughters the brand new onlyknown Henry VII interactions omitted? Were there someone else? Therefore,won’t that echo badly about document once the a source?

Out-of contrasting You will find made of the newest c.1505 Henry VII Connections pedigreeswith the 1480-1500 Visitation of your Northern pedigrees, which are

From the c.1505 Affairs pedigrees, the newest Clifford children are perhaps not listedin a beneficial Clifford pedigree, but rather throughout the St. John pedigree. While the I’mnot used to the newest St. John relatives, pursuing the ‘s the suggestions asit seems on c.1505 pedigree, as the extracted from the fresh 1834 Coll. Best. etGen. blog post. The fresh new phrasing during the quotations is exactly since it looks inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).

“Zero. XII.”Of my personal Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Rod, Domme Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess of Somerset had around three husbands.” Because of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she got “My personal Lady the latest King’s Mommy.” who had “The latest Queen.” whohad “Prince “From the “Sir Oliver Saint John, basic husband.” she got 3 daus & dos sons:

A good. “Edith, married in order to Geoffrey Rod regarding Buckinghamshire.” That they had:A1. “Sir Richard Rod, Knt. wedded on Woman Margaret, direkt frГҐn kГ¤llan dau. off theDuke from Clarence.” They had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, married to Ralph Verney, Esq.” They’d: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[a different sort of youngster, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He previously five pupils:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” who had “Five daughters and you may oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. to Harry Lord Clifford.” That they had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, young buck and heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, married to help you Thomas Kent, Esq. out of Lincolnshire.”B4. “A good Nun out of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, married to Sir Richard Frognall.” They had:C1. “Edmond Frognall with his brethren and you may sistren.” That have issueindicated, but not titled.C2. “Age, wedded to help you Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Age, married basic towards the Lord Zouche; after toward LordScrope regarding Bolton.” Issue:D1. [by the Zouche] ” Catesby.” That they had:”Age. George. John. William.”D2. [by the Scrope] ” Conyers.” Which have issueindicated however called.

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