Wedding contracts carry out tend to suggest the period of time during the and that amarriage need to took lay

step 1. Yet ,, during the genealogy, we knowthat for every laws there was an exemption. A great vexing part ofgenealogy would be the fact nobody very understands just how to utilize the newest exceptions orrules having any definitive adjective eg always, maybe kissbrides.com click this over here now, probably,likely, etcetera. It will be fascinating if the indeed there almost every other examples ofjointures being produced annually or one or two once a known wedding big date.

2. Could there be a keen extant dispensation towards relationships off ElizabethClifford and you will Sir Ralph Bowes who had been third cousins thru Henry Fitzhugh,third Lord Fitzhugh otherwise next cousins, immediately following taken off the fresh fifth LordClifford? Who narrow down its relationship day.

Arthur

Allegedly, if the an excellent dispensation was wanted and provided, it might havebeen because of the one of several adopting the, that can appear in the fresh correspondingregister guide, in the event it endures:

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

5. When your 10th Lord Clifford do wed at the beginning of 1487 [say January] andhas E later in this season, does the brand new chronology not work?

John palms?

Elizabeth created inside late 1487, Henry produced in 1488/nine, Joan when you look at the ,etcetera. filling out the newest brands of one’s upload out of . If (a) thechronology nevertheless really works; and you can (b) their unique relationships section wasn’t lowest; thenwe have only new 1505 pedigree regarding Henry VII’s that’s into the oppositionto the supposition you to definitely she are a legitimate daughter.

six. Regarding the 1505 pedigree: Certainly are the Clifford daughters this new onlyknown Henry VII affairs omitted? Were there other people? In this case,won’t one reflect poorly about document because the a source?

Out-of evaluations We have produced from the new c.1505 Henry VII Affairs pedigreeswith the brand new 1480-1500 Visitation of North pedigrees, which can be

In the c.1505 Interactions pedigrees, the newest Clifford youngsters are maybe not listedin an effective Clifford pedigree, but rather regarding the St. John pedigree. Because I’mnot accustomed the fresh St. John members of the family, following the is the information asit appears throughout the c.1505 pedigree, due to the fact extracted from this new 1834 Coll. Top. etGen. blog post. This new phrasing in quotations is precisely because it seems inthe 1834 blog post (pp. 310-311).

“Zero. XII.”Of my personal Lord Welles child, Sir Richard Rod, Mistress Verney, SirJohn St. John, with other.”f.288, 296, 317, 318.”Margaret Duchess off Somerset got three husbands.” Of the “John Duke ofSomerset” she had “My personal Woman the fresh new King’s Mommy.” who’d “This new Queen.” whohad “Prince “Of the “Sir Oliver Saint John, first spouse.” she had step three daus & dos sons:

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

B. “John Ssint John, esq.” He’d five youngsters:B1. “Sir John Saint John, Knight.” that has “Five daughters and you may oneson.”B2. “Anne, wedd. in order to Harry Lord Clifford.” That they had “Jane. Mabill.Henry, young man and heir. Anne. Thomas. Alianor.”B3. “Age, married to help you Thomas Kent, Esq. out of Lincolnshire.”B4. “A Nun out-of Shaftesbury.”B5. “Oliver Saint John.”

C. “Dame Mary, married so you’re able to Sir Richard Frognall.” That they had:C1. “Edmond Frognall and his brethren and you may sistren.” With issueindicated, although not titled.C2. “E, wedded to Sir William Gascoigne, Knt.”

D. “E, wedded first to your Lord Zouche; after into LordScrope out of Bolton.” Issue:D1. [of the Zouche] ” Catesby.” That they had:”E. George. John. William.”D2. [by the Scrope] ” Conyers.” With issueindicated although not named.

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