Matrimony agreements would commonly indicate the time period for the which amarriage need to have chosen to take set

1. Yet, from inside the genealogy and family history, we all knowthat for each and every code there’s an exemption. An excellent vexing area ofgenealogy is the fact no one very understands just how to make use of the brand new exceptions orrules which have one definitive adjective such as usually, possibly, most likely,likely, an such like. It could be interesting in the event that indeed there almost every other advice ofjointures are produced annually otherwise a couple of once a well-known relationship go out.

2. Could there be a keen extant dispensation on relationship out-of ElizabethClifford and Sir Ralph Bowes who had been 3rd cousins through Henry Fitzhugh,third Lord Fitzhugh otherwise 4th cousins, just after removed from the newest 5th LordClifford? Who would narrow down its matrimony go out.


Allegedly, in the event the an excellent dispensation is actually wanted and you can granted, it could havebeen from the among following, and may come in this new correspondingregister publication, in the event it endures:

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

5. If your 10th Lord Clifford really does marry during the early 1487 [say January] andhas Elizabeth later in that seasons, do the latest chronology perhaps not functions?

John possession?

E created within the later 1487, Henry born inside the 1488/9, Joan for the ,an such like. completing the newest labels of one’s post regarding . In the event the (a) thechronology nevertheless works; and (b) their particular relationships bit wasn’t reasonable; thenwe just have the brand new 1505 pedigree regarding Henry VII’s that’s into the oppositionto the fresh conjecture one to she is actually a valid daughter.

6. Regarding your 1505 pedigree: Certainly are the Clifford daughters the brand new onlyknown Henry VII relations excluded? Have there been someone else? Therefore,wouldn’t one to reflect poorly with this document because the a source?

Of evaluations You will find produced from brand new c.1505 Henry VII Relations pedigreeswith brand new 1480-1500 Visitation of Northern pedigrees, being

Throughout the c.1505 Interactions pedigrees, the brand new Clifford youngsters are perhaps not listedin a beneficial Clifford pedigree, but alternatively from the St. John pedigree. Just like the I’mnot used to brand new St. John friends, after the ‘s the pointers asit seems regarding c.1505 pedigree, since the extracted from new 1834 Coll. Top. etGen. post. The brand new phrasing when you look at the quotations is strictly whilst looks inthe 1834 article (pp. 310-311).

“No. XII.”From my personal Lord Welles daughter, Sir Richard Pole, Mistress Verney, SirJohn St. John, together with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess out-of Somerset got around three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she had “My Woman new King’s Mom.” that has “The new Queen.” whohad “Prince “By “Sir Oliver Saint John, basic husband.” she got step three daus & 2 sons:

Good. “Edith, married in order to Geoffrey Rod from Buckinghamshire.” That they had:A1. “Sir Richard Pole, Knt. wedded towards Lady Margaret, dau. off theDuke from Clarence.” That they had: “Harry. “A2. “Alianor, wedded so you can Ralph Verney, Esq.” They’d: “John Verney.—– [child, unnamed]. ——-[another youngster, unnamed].”

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He Fremont, OH women dating sites articles had four children:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” that has “Five daughters and you can oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. to help you Harry Lord Clifford.” That they had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, son and you may heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, married to help you Thomas Kent, Esq. from Lincolnshire.”B4. “An excellent Nun from Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, wedded so you’re able to Sir Richard Frognall.” They’d:C1. “Edmond Frognall and his awesome brethren and you may sistren.” Which have issueindicated, however entitled.C2. “E, married so you’re able to Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “Age, married first for the Lord Zouche; immediately following to the LordScrope of Bolton.” Issue:D1. [because of the Zouche] ” Catesby.” They had:”Age. George. John. William.”D2. [by Scrope] ” Conyers.” Which have issueindicated although not entitled.

Margaret Duchess out of Somerset, of the “Lionel Lord Welles, past partner.”had: “John Viscount Welles, wedded Cecily, dau. out of K. Edward IV.” andthey got “Elizabeth.”