On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 1:47:36 AM UTC+1, Chris Hampson wrote: > In Walter Chetwynd's History of Pirehill Hundred, the primary text says that both a father and son married women named Maud (with details of their fathers). In parallel with this is the text from a earlier book where these two women are named Matilda (same fathers are named). Clearly the same people, but was it normal for Maud to be Matilda, or vice versa? Yes. Matilda is the latinised version of the English Maud.

In Walter Chetwynd's History of Pirehill Hundred, the primary text says that both a father and son married women named Maud (with details of their fathers). In parallel with this is the text from a earlier book where these two women are named Matilda (same fathers are named). Clearly the same people, but was it normal for Maud to be Matilda, or vice versa?

I have a couple of questions about the Clifford line pertaining to: Sir Lewis de Clifford (d. 1404) and his wife Eleanor de Mowbray (d. 1387) 1st question: I’ve been using Plantagenet Ancestry for research. It states on p. 401 that Lewis and Eleanor had one son: Lewis Clifford. Is this the same Lewis Clifford that married Anne Moleyns (dau. Of William de Moleyns and Margery)? If not, do you have any information about that particular Lewis Clifford? I’ve also seen that the Lewis, who was married to Anne Moleyn, father’s name was William de Clifford (whose parents were Lewis de Clifford and Eleanor de Mowbray). According to Plantagenet Ancestry, Lewis and Eleanor had 1 son: Lewis. So unless the book is wrong, that is obviously not right. I’m not sure about the dates I have for any of these, so thought I’d turn to you for some help. 2nd Question: I’ve been researching Sir Lewis de Clifford (d. 1404), in the hopes of finding an answer to my first question. I have been finding contradicting information regarding the identity of his parents. A couple sources list Robert de Clifford/Isabel de Berkeley as his parents with Roger de Clifford as a brother. A couple other sources list Roger de Clifford (5th Lord Clifford)/Maud de Beauchamp. Can anyone clarify which, if any, is correct? I’m beginning to think there might be more than 2 Lewis Clifford’s getting mixed up in this family line… Thank you for your help in advance.

Dear Newsgroup ~ Complete Peerage 8 (1932): 518–520 (sub Marmion) has a good account of Sir John Marmion, 1st Lord Marmion, who died in 1322. Regarding his marriage, the following information is provided: "He married Isabel." END OF QUOTE. The source given for this limited information is a record taken from the Patent Rolls, cited by Complete Peerage as follows: "On 23 July 1310 he [John Marmion] had license to alienate in mortmain a messuage, two bovates of lands, and 44s. 4d. rent in Winteringham and Beelsby for the maintenance of a chaplain to celebrate divine service daily in the chapel of St. Nicholas, Winteringham, for the souls of the grantor, Isabel his wife, of Alexander Peck, and their ancestors and successors." END OF QUOTE. The actual record may be viewed in Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1307-1313 (1894), pg. 271, which may be viewed at the following weblink: http://www.archive.org/stream/calendarpatentr08offigoog#page/n279/mode/2up Beyond this, Complete Peerage provides no further particulars regarding Isabel, wife of Sir John Marmion. VCH Sussex 7 (1940): 54 cites British Library, Additional Manuscript 39,373, folio 181, which refers to a Common Pleas lawsuit dated 1301, in which Ralph de Playz is described as the former husband of Isabel, wife of John Marmion. By this source, we learn that Isabel, wife of John Marmion, was previously the wife of Ralph (or Ranulph) de Plaiz, of Iford, Sussex, who died shortly before 6 Nov. 1283. Insofar as when the marriage of Sir John Marmion and his wife, Isabel, took place, it appears that they married sometime after 14 September 1287, when Isabel, widow of Ralph de Plaiz, sued the king in a plea regarding presentation to the church of Great Oakley, Essex. References: Justices Itinerant, JUST 1/1256, image 220f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/Just1/Just1no1256/aJUST1no1256fronts/IMG_0220.htm). Justices Itinerant, JUST 1/1256, image 222f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/Just1/Just1no1256/aJUST1no1256fronts/IMG_0222.htm). Sir John Marmion and his wife, Isabel, were presumably married by 1292, as their son and heir, John Marmion, was born about 1292, he being aged 30 at his father's death in 1322. Feudal Aids 2 (1900): 129 records that in 1303 John Marmion held the manor of Great Oakley, Essex, "in the name of dower" of Richard de Plays, son and heir of Giles de Plays. See the following weblink: https://books.google.com/books?id=8SgMAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA129 >From these records, we learn that Sir John Marmion and his wife, Isabel, were definitely married before 1303. Complete Peerage does not indicate that Isabel Marmion was assigned dower following the death of Sir John Marmion in 1322. But she clearly survived him, as in Trinity term 1325 Isabel, widow of John Marmyoun, sued John Marmyoun regarding services demanded by Alexander de Fryvill and Joan his wife, Ralph le Botiller, and Henry Hillary and Joan his wife for a tenement in Willingham, Lincolnshire. See the following weblink: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/257, image 13d (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no257/bCP40no257dorses/IMG_0013.htm). In Trinity term 1327 [and Trinity and Michaelmas terms 1328] Richard de Amcotes, parson of the church of Scawby, Lincolnshire, and Robert de Loudham, executors of the will of Isabel Marmyun, sued Emma Cerf, of Cathreton, in the Court of Common Pleas in a Lincolnshire plea regarding the detention of chattels. Reference: Index of Placita de Banco 1327–1328 1 (PRO Lists and Indexes 32) (1910): 325, which may be viewed at the following weblink: https://archive.org/stream/indexofplacitade01newy#page/324/mode/2up See also Court of Common Pleas, CP40/270, image 190f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT2/E3/CP40no270/aCP40no270fronts/IMG_0190.htm). >From the above lawsuits, we learn that Isabel, Lady Marmion was living in Trinity term 1325, and that she died testate sometime before Trinity term 1327. For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Sir John Marmion, 1st Lord Marmion, and his wife, Isabel: Christopher Batt, Henry, Thomas & William Batte, William Bladen, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, Thomas Booth, Thomas Bressey, Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Edward Carleton, Kenelm Cheseldine, Grace Chetwode, Henry Corbin, Thomas Dudley, John Fenwick, John Fisher, Muriel Gurdon, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Anne & Katherine Marbury, Anne Mauleverer, Joseph & Mary Need, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Thomas Rudyard, Richard Saltonstall, Mary Johanna Somerset, James Taylor, Margaret Touteville. Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

On 16/05/2017 8:55 AM, Peter Stewart wrote: > > > There are other examples of inheritance bypassing a half-blood > claimant in similar circumstances. I should have written "a half-blood potential claimant ..." in order to avoid the implication that Liudolf of Brunswick actually tried to claim the duchy of Swabia as his mother's heir. Peter Stewart

Em terça-feira, 16 de maio de 2017 15:56:57 UTC+1, taf escreveu: > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:44:47 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > > > US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Robert Abell, p.2: Abell, Robert > > (-June 1663) & Joanna__(-1682+), m/2 William Hyde of Norwich, Ct 1667; by > > 1639 Weymouth/Rehoboth. > > > > New England Great Migration Begins, p.3 for Robert Abell:Joanna married > > second at Rehoboth 4 June 1667 William Hyde of "New Norwich" [ReVR 3, citing > > original 1:44]; she removed to Norwich with her new husband, and outlived > > him as well. > > > > American Marriages before 1699: Joanna Abell and William Hide 4 June 1667 > > Rehoboth, Massachusetts. > > > > The Abell Family in America by Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell (The > > Tuttle Publishing Co., Inc) p.46: Joanna, after the death of Robert Abell; > > m2nd in Rehoboth June 4, 1667, William Hyde, who probably came to America in > > 1633 with the Reverend Thomas Hooker...William Hyde was one of the original > > proprietors of Norwich, Connecticut in 1660. He d. at Norwich, January 6, > > 1681. > > > > Hope these are good sources. Thank you for looking at my post. > > Yes, I hope they are too, but hope is not a very sound basis. It is important to undertand why they say this. > > Of the two marriage books, I am familiar with one of them, but don't recall which - it is generally good, but it does contain some speculative material, and most importantly, its format does not permit the reported marriages to be supported by documentation or explanation. > > The Great Migration project works are top of the line, so the question is, what exactly do the Rehoboth VR say about Hyde and his wife - are they explicit that she was Robert's widow? Is there any further support, such as probate or land records that make it clear (although if it names her as Joanna Abell, and there are no other documented Abells in Rehoboth, and the one we know of, Robert, had a known wife Joanna and died a few years before this marriage, then it is solid enough, but it would be good to know). > > The Abell book (p. 52) simply makes a bold statement that Robert's widow married William Hyde. > > One thing you want to be careful of is making a circular argument. The Abell book quotes the document in which Caleb called William Hyde his father, so that may be the basis for their conclusion that Hyde married Robert's widow. > Caleb's land document naming Hyde as his 'Father' can be used to prove one additional relationship, but only if the other is documented elsewhere - it proves Caleb was son of Robert if you can separately show that Hyde married Robert's widow, or it can prove Hyde married Robert's widow if you can independently show Caleb was son of Robert, but it can't at the same time prove both that Caleb was son of Robert and that Robert's widow married Hyde. > > taf We know Robert Abell was owner of a cafe or tavern however how could he just be that if he was greatgrandson of two knights through his mother.

What about Samuel Hyde son of Joanna and her second husband William? Is that provable? James Wester [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: taf <[email protected]> To: gen-medieval <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, May 16, 2017 11:00 am Subject: Re: Caleb Abell, possible child of Robert Abell, gateway immigrant On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:44:47 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Robert Abell, p.2: Abell, Robert > (-June 1663) & Joanna__(-1682+), m/2 William Hyde of Norwich, Ct 1667; by > 1639 Weymouth/Rehoboth. > > New England Great Migration Begins, p.3 for Robert Abell:Joanna married > second at Rehoboth 4 June 1667 William Hyde of "New Norwich" [ReVR 3, citing > original 1:44]; she removed to Norwich with her new husband, and outlived > him as well. > > American Marriages before 1699: Joanna Abell and William Hide 4 June 1667 > Rehoboth, Massachusetts. > > The Abell Family in America by Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell (The > Tuttle Publishing Co., Inc) p.46: Joanna, after the death of Robert Abell; > m2nd in Rehoboth June 4, 1667, William Hyde, who probably came to America in > 1633 with the Reverend Thomas Hooker...William Hyde was one of the original > proprietors of Norwich, Connecticut in 1660. He d. at Norwich, January 6, > 1681. > > Hope these are good sources. Thank you for looking at my post. Yes, I hope they are too, but hope is not a very sound basis. It is important to undertand why they say this. Of the two marriage books, I am familiar with one of them, but don't recall which - it is generally good, but it does contain some speculative material, and most importantly, its format does not permit the reported marriages to be supported by documentation or explanation. The Great Migration project works are top of the line, so the question is, what exactly do the Rehoboth VR say about Hyde and his wife - are they explicit that she was Robert's widow? Is there any further support, such as probate or land records that make it clear (although if it names her as Joanna Abell, and there are no other documented Abells in Rehoboth, and the one we know of, Robert, had a known wife Joanna and died a few years before this marriage, then it is solid enough, but it would be good to know). The Abell book (p. 52) simply makes a bold statement that Robert's widow married William Hyde. One thing you want to be careful of is making a circular argument. The Abell book quotes the document in which Caleb called William Hyde his father, so that may be the basis for their conclusion that Hyde married Robert's widow. Caleb's land document naming Hyde as his 'Father' can be used to prove one additional relationship, but only if the other is documented elsewhere - it proves Caleb was son of Robert if you can separately show that Hyde married Robert's widow, or it can prove Hyde married Robert's widow if you can independently show Caleb was son of Robert, but it can't at the same time prove both that Caleb was son of Robert and that Robert's widow married Hyde. taf ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 18:13:37 UTC+1, Douglas Richardson wrote: > My comments are interspersed below. DR > > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 1:27:27 AM UTC-6, Peter Howarth wrote: > > < I am not convinced that the harness pendant with the arms 'quarterly plain and < fretty, over all on a bend sable, three mullets', as described, "probably > < shows the arms of Alan Elsfield". > > > < Firstly, we have no exact date for the pendant beyond an estimated period of > < seventy years (1250-1320) when such things were in high fashion. Alan de > < Elsfield is unknown except for mention in three rolls of arms dated by Gerald < Brault to approximately 1285-1296.[1] > > This is not a correct statement. See further below. > > > I would also stress the point made by Mrs Szymanski that Alan de Elsfield's use of a variation of the Despenser arms does not, of itself, indicate any kinship with that family. > > Alan de Elsfield was in fact related to Hugh le Despenser, presumably the elder: > > Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds 4 (1902): 48 (Sir Alan de Elsefeld [Elsfield] styled “kinsman” by Hugh le Despenser in undated grant). > > See the following weblink: > > https://books.google.com/books?id=H1I4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48 > > Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah Thank you very much for the additional reference to Alan de Elsfield. It's unfortunate that it doesn't help any with the dating either of the pendant or of Alan himself. It does however give a tantalising genealogical connection between Alan and a Hugh le Despenser, something which the arms on their own don't necessarily give. So I'm happy to leave it to genealogists to discover the connection. Peter Howarth

The will of Peter (or Piers) Drayton of St. Michael Cornhill, London, written in 1518, and proven 2 August 1518. He was son and heir of Robert Drayton of St. Mildred Poultry, London, by his (1st) wife Jane d/o Piers (or Peter) Peckham Esq., of Denham, Bucks. , Peter Drayton died in 1518. His sister Jane, wid. of (1st) Richard Lucy and (2nd) William Wriothesley, York Herald, became heir. Religious affiliation: Catholic. PROB 11/19/121 In the name of God, and our Lady, and my patron St. Michael, I, Peter DRAYTON clerk, being of perfect memory and good mind, thanks to God, make this my last will and testament. First, I bequeath my soul to the mercy of God; and my body to be buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s church in Cornhill at the coming in of the door of the quere*, or else in any other place as God pleases to dispose. Also, I give to buy an altar cloth to the high altar, £6 13s 4p. Also, I give to be distributed amongst poor people within my parish, £6 13s 4p willing that poor householders and most impotent persons shall be principally relieved by it. And the funeral costs discharged and all my debts paid, I will that my sister Jane YORK widow, shall have the one half of the residue of my goods, and the other half to be distributed equally to her three children, Thomas, Anne, and Edward, by her discretion so that they be ruled by her, or else to obtain no part of it but all to be hers freely. And I will that if they be ruled by her that then Anne, her daughter, have her portion at the time of her marriage or else at the age of 21 years; and Thomas and Edward, her sons, at the age of 24 years, or else sooner as she shall please. And if that any of them depart this world afore they have received their portion, then I will that the said portion shall be freely pertaining to Jane, my sister (their mother) aforenamed. And I ordain the said Jane YORK widow, my sister, sole and only exex of this my last will and testament. In witness of the which I have written this testament and subscribed it the year of our Lord 1518. The testament of the abovesaid deceased, having etc., was proved before the Lord at Lambeth on the 2nd day of August Anno Domini 1518, by the oath of Jane YORK widow, the exex named in the same testament, for that the same exex expressly refused to assume the burden of the execution of the said testament, and administration was granted of the goods and debts of the said deceased to the foresaid Jane YORK by way of an intestacy, sworn on the Holy Gospels to well and faithfully admin, and to exhibit a full inventory before the Feast of St. Bartholomew the Apostle next to come, and also to render a plain and true account.

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:56:57 AM UTC-7, taf wrote: > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:44:47 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > > > US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Robert Abell, p.2: Abell, Robert > > (-June 1663) & Joanna__(-1682+), m/2 William Hyde of Norwich, Ct 1667; by > > 1639 Weymouth/Rehoboth. > > > > New England Great Migration Begins, p.3 for Robert Abell:Joanna married > > second at Rehoboth 4 June 1667 William Hyde of "New Norwich" [ReVR 3, citing > > original 1:44]; she removed to Norwich with her new husband, and outlived > > him as well. > > > > American Marriages before 1699: Joanna Abell and William Hide 4 June 1667 > > Rehoboth, Massachusetts. > > > > The Abell Family in America by Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell (The > > Tuttle Publishing Co., Inc) p.46: Joanna, after the death of Robert Abell; > > m2nd in Rehoboth June 4, 1667, William Hyde, who probably came to America in > > 1633 with the Reverend Thomas Hooker...William Hyde was one of the original > > proprietors of Norwich, Connecticut in 1660. He d. at Norwich, January 6, > > 1681. > > > > Hope these are good sources. Thank you for looking at my post. > > Yes, I hope they are too, but hope is not a very sound basis. It is important to undertand why they say this. > > Of the two marriage books, I am familiar with one of them, but don't recall which - it is generally good, but it does contain some speculative material, and most importantly, its format does not permit the reported marriages to be supported by documentation or explanation. > > The Great Migration project works are top of the line, so the question is, what exactly do the Rehoboth VR say about Hyde and his wife - are they explicit that she was Robert's widow? Is there any further support, such as probate or land records that make it clear (although if it names her as Joanna Abell, and there are no other documented Abells in Rehoboth, and the one we know of, Robert, had a known wife Joanna and died a few years before this marriage, then it is solid enough, but it would be good to know). > > The Abell book (p. 52) simply makes a bold statement that Robert's widow married William Hyde. > > One thing you want to be careful of is making a circular argument. The Abell book quotes the document in which Caleb called William Hyde his father, so that may be the basis for their conclusion that Hyde married Robert's widow. > Caleb's land document naming Hyde as his 'Father' can be used to prove one additional relationship, but only if the other is documented elsewhere - it proves Caleb was son of Robert if you can separately show that Hyde married Robert's widow, or it can prove Hyde married Robert's widow if you can independently show Caleb was son of Robert, but it can't at the same time prove both that Caleb was son of Robert and that Robert's widow married Hyde. > > taf Vital Record of Rehoboth, 1642-1896: Marriages, Intentions ..., Volumes 3-4 P3: 1/44 Abell Joanna and William Hide of New Norwich, June 4, 1667

Is there any open source project of transcribing the entirety of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury or an established database of abstracts which can be built upon?

My comments are interspersed below. DR On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 1:27:27 AM UTC-6, Peter Howarth wrote: < I am not convinced that the harness pendant with the arms 'quarterly plain and < fretty, over all on a bend sable, three mullets', as described, "probably < shows the arms of Alan Elsfield". > < Firstly, we have no exact date for the pendant beyond an estimated period of < seventy years (1250-1320) when such things were in high fashion. Alan de < Elsfield is unknown except for mention in three rolls of arms dated by Gerald < Brault to approximately 1285-1296.[1] This is not a correct statement. See further below. > I would also stress the point made by Mrs Szymanski that Alan de Elsfield's use of a variation of the Despenser arms does not, of itself, indicate any kinship with that family. Alan de Elsfield was in fact related to Hugh le Despenser, presumably the elder: Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds 4 (1902): 48 (Sir Alan de Elsefeld [Elsfield] styled “kinsman” by Hugh le Despenser in undated grant). See the following weblink: https://books.google.com/books?id=H1I4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48 Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

On 16/05/2017 12:17 AM, Stewart Baldwin wrote: > On 5/15/2017 12:26 AM, Hans Vogels wrote: > >> H. Dobbertin's self-admitted starting point was the plaque and 999 as >> Gisela's birthyear. Published research, as well as contributions here >> on the newsgroup, has proven him wrong on this account, therefore >> some topics continue to buzz. > > The other piece of evidence which keeps Dobbertin's theory from being > stopped dead in its tracks is Annalista Saxo, which incorrectly places > Gisela's marriage to Ernst before her marriage to Bruno, consistent > with what it necessary for Dobbertin's theory to work. The plaque and > Annalista Saxo are both reasonable pieces of evidence that one should > be reluctant to set aside without good reason, but there are so many > pieces of evidence pointing in the other direction that their combined > weight is sufficient to overturn the plaque and Annalista. However, > when considered individually, none of these other pieces of evidence > qualifies as a "smoking gun" by itself. Thus, someone who has already > made up their mind based on the plaque and Annalista Saxo might very > well believe that they could argue away the other pieces of evidence > individually without considering their combined weight. So, it seems > likely that some version of Dobbertin's theory will be making an > appearance from time to time. I'm sure you are right that Dobbertin's theory won't go away - as with the Chippewa warrior analogy for Ida's alleged behaviour, some historians will try to find any angle that allows them to accept any source as true. There are compelling reasons to conclude that the plaque text is actually much weaker evidence than its provenance suggests. It is also reasonable to suppose that Annalista Saxo in the mid-12th century most probably assumed in error that Ernst's sons were older than Bruno's son Liudolf, since the latter did not inherit their mother's rights to the duchy of Swabia. However, when Gisela's brother died, Ernst was her husband while Liudolf was only a boy not more than 10 years old. There are other examples of inheritance bypassing a half-blood claimant in similar circumstances. Peter Stewart

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:44:47 AM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Robert Abell, p.2: Abell, Robert > (-June 1663) & Joanna__(-1682+), m/2 William Hyde of Norwich, Ct 1667; by > 1639 Weymouth/Rehoboth. > > New England Great Migration Begins, p.3 for Robert Abell:Joanna married > second at Rehoboth 4 June 1667 William Hyde of "New Norwich" [ReVR 3, citing > original 1:44]; she removed to Norwich with her new husband, and outlived > him as well. > > American Marriages before 1699: Joanna Abell and William Hide 4 June 1667 > Rehoboth, Massachusetts. > > The Abell Family in America by Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell (The > Tuttle Publishing Co., Inc) p.46: Joanna, after the death of Robert Abell; > m2nd in Rehoboth June 4, 1667, William Hyde, who probably came to America in > 1633 with the Reverend Thomas Hooker...William Hyde was one of the original > proprietors of Norwich, Connecticut in 1660. He d. at Norwich, January 6, > 1681. > > Hope these are good sources. Thank you for looking at my post. Yes, I hope they are too, but hope is not a very sound basis. It is important to undertand why they say this. Of the two marriage books, I am familiar with one of them, but don't recall which - it is generally good, but it does contain some speculative material, and most importantly, its format does not permit the reported marriages to be supported by documentation or explanation. The Great Migration project works are top of the line, so the question is, what exactly do the Rehoboth VR say about Hyde and his wife - are they explicit that she was Robert's widow? Is there any further support, such as probate or land records that make it clear (although if it names her as Joanna Abell, and there are no other documented Abells in Rehoboth, and the one we know of, Robert, had a known wife Joanna and died a few years before this marriage, then it is solid enough, but it would be good to know). The Abell book (p. 52) simply makes a bold statement that Robert's widow married William Hyde. One thing you want to be careful of is making a circular argument. The Abell book quotes the document in which Caleb called William Hyde his father, so that may be the basis for their conclusion that Hyde married Robert's widow. Caleb's land document naming Hyde as his 'Father' can be used to prove one additional relationship, but only if the other is documented elsewhere - it proves Caleb was son of Robert if you can separately show that Hyde married Robert's widow, or it can prove Hyde married Robert's widow if you can independently show Caleb was son of Robert, but it can't at the same time prove both that Caleb was son of Robert and that Robert's widow married Hyde. taf

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 8:51:38 PM UTC-4, taf wrote: > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 1:36:51 PM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > > Research on my son-in-law has led me to Caleb Abell, possible child of > > Robert Abell, gateway immigrant. I've read the posts in 99 and 09 in this > > group, but I don't see any recent posts. Joanna, wife of Robert Abell, has > > mention of her 2nd marriage (4 June 1667, Rehoboth, Massachusetts) to > > William Hyde/Hide (About 1605-1681) in Anderson's GMB p.5, American > > Marriages Before 1699, and US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 p.2, all > > under immigrant Robert Abell. In The Abell Family in America, Horace A. > > Abell and Lewis P. Abell have a note on p. 46: In the Book of Grants of > > Norwich, is a deed recorded to Caleb Abell, son of Joanna, which reads as > > follows: "ffour acres of meadow More or less . . . which was Given to Caleb > > Abell by his ffather William Hide deceased and ordered to be recorded to him > > by John Post (William Hyde's son-in-law and father to Caleb's wife, Margaret > > Post). The deed was recorded Feb.2, 1701-2. Wouldn't this be a source for > > Caleb being both the son of Joanna Abell and her first husband, Robert > > Abell, and step-son to William Hyde? > > Assuming it is solid that Joanna, wife of Hide was indeed the widow of Robert (I am not doubting it - I just don't know what the basis is for this conclusion), then yes, this would be definitive. > > taf US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Robert Abell, p.2: Abell, Robert (-June 1663) & Joanna__(-1682+), m/2 William Hyde of Norwich, Ct 1667; by 1639 Weymouth/Rehoboth. New England Great Migration Begins, p.3 for Robert Abell:Joanna married second at Rehoboth 4 June 1667 William Hyde of "New Norwich" [ReVR 3, citing original 1:44]; she removed to Norwich with her new husband, and outlived him as well. American Marriages before 1699: Joanna Abell and William Hide 4 June 1667 Rehoboth, Massachusetts. The Abell Family in America by Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell (The Tuttle Publishing Co., Inc) p.46: Joanna, after the death of Robert Abell; m2nd in Rehoboth June 4, 1667, William Hyde, who probably came to America in 1633 with the Reverend Thomas Hooker...William Hyde was one of the original proprietors of Norwich, Connecticut in 1660. He d. at Norwich, January 6, 1681. Hope these are good sources. Thank you for looking at my post. Valerie =

Thank you Peter for that very interesting lesson and the sources. Would your line of thnking be altered reflect the fact that one the Hugh Desepnser's did name Alan de Elsfield as his "kin". Would he have called all his knights or vassals kin or just those for which he had a close affinity towards. I find it interesting to see that a " Hugh,son of William", provided land to St. Frideswide from Elsfield land early on. In addition we know that Hugh Despenser I who died in 1238 had a son William, of which we know very little. In addition this same Hugh I had a brother William who married Juliana, but must have died with out issue as his nephew Hugh Despenser II, was his heir. In Elsfield there is family of (Hugh's I,II and III) with dealings with this area. The Plessis family. The "Hugh son of William" can not be Hugh de Plessis I, based on the pedigrees I have seen for that family unless they are in error. Does anyone else have any thoughts on the matter. Thanks to everyone who contributed. Robert Spencer

On Monday, 15 May 2017 00:38:32 UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: > Alan of Elsfield has been mentioned here before, the informetion on him and especially this new info on his brother Richard of Elsfeld is hoped to be further explored. > Any help from the team here would be most apprecaited. The summary of some of the info seems to imply the kinship was based on his brother Gilbert of Elsfeld being one of Hugh Despenser's knight's, and therefore his arms were similar to Despenser arms. That does not quite fit in my mind and I would like the imput of the great minds here to try to settle this issue. > > Richard of Elsfeld, brother of Alan of Elsfeild served as the Constable of Boreaux, Gascony from 1318-1320. I suspeect his appointemnt was arranged by Hugh Despenser to expand his influence. Richard's time in Gascony went very badly. > > Source: Richard of Elsfield as Constable of Bordeaux, 1318-20 > Esme Pole Stuart and Hilda Johnstone > The English Historical Review > Vol. 52, No. 205 (Jan., 1937), pp. 23-38 > > In 1327, Gilbert de Elsfield, who died in 1397, applied for a royal licence to ‘impark’ his wood at Elsfield which would give him the right to protect young trees from grazing animals and also to preserve his own deer. There is no written record to show that he actually did this but Cole concludes that the purlieu was made between Woodeaton and Elsfield running from the Islip road to the Cherwell, i.e. along the northern boundary of the parish. Gilbert also obtained a grant of free warren which gave him the right to hunt small game such as roe deer, rabbits, pheasant and duc > > Gilbert de Elsfield, who sought to empark his wood, was the last man of his line, but his daughter Anne left a daughter Joan, who in 1407 married John Hore of Childerley in Cambridgeshire. Several generations later a daughter, called either Edith or Eliza, married as her second husband Rowland Pudsey, whose descendants were lords of the Manor until 1692. > > > Gilbert de Elsefeld (Elsfield) > Name(s): de Elsefeld (Elsfield), Gilbert > Addressees: King and council > Nature of request: [Petition badly damaged.]Gilbert de Elsefeld states that John de Seynte Eleyne, who married Juliana de Elsefeld, grandmother of the said Gilbert, had leased to Adam de Stretton £10 of land in Blunsdon for term of life and £5 of rent in the vill of Cricklade in the county of Wiltshire, of the dower of the said Juliana and of the inheritance of the same Gilbert. These tenements were seized into the hand of our lord the King, together with other lands and tenements of the said Adam, because of his forfeiture. [Gilbert and] John his father, son and heir of the said Juliana, have often sued by petition in parliament . . . our lord the King that that land and rent might be given to him as his . . . lord the king and his council that justice and reason be done to him . . . cannot have other estate in the said land and rent than the said Adam had. > Nature of endorsement: [Not visible, due to damage to ms, and it is impossible to tell whether there was ever an endorsement. This is the endorsement edited in Docs. Illus. English History p.32: 'The Treasurer, Barons and Chamberlains of the Exchequer are to be ordered by a writ of the great seal, containing the entire effect of the petition, to examine the memoranda and muniments in the Treasury which belonged to Adam de Stretton, and to inform themselves on what they can find concerning this business: and if that is not sufficient to determine the business etc., then they are further to inquire in the Exchequer, and they are to inform the King in Chancery of what they have found in the Exchequer or by that inquiry: so that he might further ordain a suitable remedy for the complainant etc.'] > Places mentioned: Blunsdon, Wiltshire; Cricklade, Wiltshire > People mentioned: Juliana de Elsefeld; [John de Seynte Eleyne]; Adam [de Stretton]; John [de Elsefeld], son and heir of Juliana de Elsefeld. > Note: The Latin summary of the petition is enrolled on the roll of the October parliament of 12 Edward II (1318) (Docs. Illus. English History p.32). > Date: [? 1318] > Related material: > > For another petition by the same petitioner on the same matter, see SC 8/178/8880 > > For the former reference number of a portion of this petition which has subsequently been reunited with this fragment, see SC 8/155/7702 > > For a much later but related petition, see SC 8/84/4158 > > For another petition by the same petitioner on the same matter, see SC 8/1/35 > > Source: > http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C9062426 > > HARNESS PENDANT (found at Bushwood, Warwickshire) > Unique ID: WMID-6F4932 > Object type certainty: Certain > Workflow status: Published > An incomplete cast copper alloy heraldic horse harness pendant with remains of enamelling, dating > to the 13th/ 14th century AD (length: 32.1mm; width: 20mm; thickness: 2.4mm; thickness at loop: > 6mm; weight: 5.75g). This shield-shaped pendant has a suspension loop at the top that is due to > wear and corrosion and with decoration on the front only in the form of a black strip of enamel > running diagonally from the top left corner down to the right. There are three incised six-pointed > stars appearing at irregular intervals on along the black enamel, with the remains of red enamel to > the top and bottom fields of the decoration. There is no decoration on the back of the artefact. The > pendant is in a worn but fair condition with a dark green patina. > The heraldic pendant and its coat of arms have been studied by Irene Szymanski with the help of Jim > Halliday, who clarifies the following information: > ‘The design is unique amongst recorded arms. The piece probably shows the arms of Alan Elsfield - > when new, the background would have been divided into four with two of the segments red (still > visible); the other two would have been silver. The red segments would have had a lattice pattern in > gold. The diagonal band (known heraldically as a "bend"), would have been black, and the stars > (mullets of 6) would have been gold (the whole thing is illustrated in the enclosed picture passed on > by Mrs Szymanski (arms1.jpg). The leftmost of Alan Elsfield's arms has "a fret" instead of "fretty" – > both arms are recorded, but I'm not sure which was on this pendant - I can see a diagonal line there, but that's about it. Elsfield was probably a knight of Oxfordshire; Elsfield is a few miles NE of Oxford itself. I say probably re Alan, because nothing is known of him other than his name, which occurs alongside a note of his arms in three places (Segar's Roll, circa 1282; The Lord Marshall's Roll, circa 1310; Collins' Roll, circa 1295). He wasn't necessarily alive at all of those dates, but it does place him broadly as a contemporary of Edward I, and presumably involved with that monarch's wars against the Welsh and the Scots. There are two men who share the name Elsfield, Gilbert and John, who are thought to have been related to Alan. Their arms are not identical, but similar; note how > they use the same palette of colours. Gilbert is known to have been a knight of Hugh Despencer's,and Alan's arms suggest that he was also. Again, if you look at the picture, you'll see that Alan's arms bear a notable resemblance to Despencer's arms; you expect this sort of similarity if there is an > overlord/knight relationship’. > Blazons of relevant arms: > • Alan Elsfield: quarterly argent, and gules fretty or, over all a bend sable charged with three mullets of six > • Gilbert Elsfield: barry undy argent and sable, a label gules > • Hugh Despencer: quarterly argent, and gules fretty or, over all a bend sable > I would like to say a big thank you to Irene Szymanski and Jim Halliday with their help in writing this record. > finds.org.uk > Sub class: heraldic > Subsequent actions > Subsequent action after recording: Returned to finder > Chronology > Broad period: MEDIEVAL > Period from: MEDIEVAL > Period to: MEDIEVAL > Date from: Post AD 1250 > Date to: Ante AD 1320 > Dimensions and weight > Quantity: 1 > Length: 32.1 mm > Width: 20 mm > Thickness: 2.4 mm > Weight: 5.75 g > Discovery dates > Date(s) of discovery: Monday 11th July 2005 > Personal details > Found by: This information is restricted for your login. > Recorded by: Ms Caroline Johnson > Identified by: Ms Caroline Johnson > Secondary identifier: Mrs Irene Szymanski > Materials and construction > Primary material: Copper alloy > Secondary material: Enamel > Manufacture method: Cast > Completeness: Incomplete > Spatial metadata > Region: West Midlands (European Region) > County or Unitary authority: Warwickshire (County) > District: Warwick (District) > To be known as: Bushwood > Spatial coordinates > Grid reference source: From finder > Unmasked grid reference accurate to a 100 metre square. > finds.org.uk > Discovery metadata > Method of discovery: Metal detector > General landuse: Cultivated land > > Thank you.. > Robert Spencer I am not convinced that the harness pendant with the arms 'quarterly plain and fretty, over all on a bend sable, three mullets', as described, "probably shows the arms of Alan Elsfield". Firstly, we have no exact date for the pendant beyond an estimated period of seventy years (1250-1320) when such things were in high fashion. Alan de Elsfield is unknown except for mention in three rolls of arms dated by Gerald Brault to approximately 1285-1296.[1] This leaves plenty of time for the pendant to have belonged to someone else. Secondly, the arms are not unique, as claimed. They may have been attributed to Alan de Elsfield in the three rolls of arms,[2] but they also appear on two different 13c seals used by a Hugh le Despenser.[3] There is no other direct evidence of arms for Hugh I le Despenser (d.1238) (who was a younger son), so it is possible that these seals were his. We know that his son, Hugh II (d.1265), bore the same arms without the mullets on the bend.[4] But alternatively, either he or his son, Hugh III 'the Elder' (d.1326), may have used the seals whilst they were still the heir apparent.[5] So it is always possible that the arms on the pendant were those of a Despenser rather than of Alan de Elsfield. Thirdly, although such pendants were popular in the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, no pendants are extant in gold or silver to match the elaborate horse trappings used by the aristocracy. So it may be that most copper alloy pendants were used for the decoration of the horses of servants or retainers.[6] That the pendant was cast suggests that it was produced in numbers, and the enamelling would have been expensive. On that basis, the arms are more likely to be those of a baronial family like the Despensers rather than those of a younger son of a gentry family. This fits with the examples of heraldic pendants exhibited in the 1987 Royal Academy of Arts exhibition 'Art in Plantagenet England 1200-1400', all of which showed the arms of royalty, earls or barons.[7] I would also stress the point made by Mrs Szymanski that Alan de Elsfield's use of a variation of the Despenser arms does not, of itself, indicate any kinship with that family. Many vassals, when adopting their new coats of arms, chose variations on the arms their lords already bore. One result was three large 'families' of similar arms based on either the Clare chevrons, the Warenne chequers or the Mandeville quarters. Nor does Alan's use of these arms preclude him from belonging to the same family as those Elsfields who bore 'barry wavy argent and sable'.[8] Peter Howarth [1] G J Brault, 'The Rolls of Arms of Edward I' (1997) i. pp 308, 324, 362. Mrs Szymanski's dates appear to be based on the pioneering work of Anthony Wagner, 'Catalogue of English Mediaeval Rolls of Arms' (1950, 1967). All such dates have to be based on an analysis of the names and their accession and death dates where we know them, bearing in mind that the compilers probably collected the entries over a period of time. [2] Segar's Roll (c.1285) G 133, Lord Marshall's Roll (c.1295) LM 211, Collins' Roll (c.1296) Q 370 [3] PRO seals, cited Dictionary of British Arms ii. p 51. The same arms also re-appear in a 15c roll for Spencer (Shirley's Roll SHY 8), a roll of c.1510 for Sir Philip Despenser (Creswick's Roll CRK 1436) and as a quarter in the arms of the Wentworths of Nettlestead, all cited Dictionary of British Arms ii. p 52. [4] seal: 1263, Douët d’Arcq, Collection de sceaux 10122; Matthew Paris Shields (c.1244) MP II. 58, Glover’s Roll (c.1253) B 114; he was descended from Geoffrey, dispensator to the E of Chester; cf. arms of the constables of Chester, e.g. Lacy: 'quarterly or and gules, a bend sable and a label argent' [5] There are several examples where the heir apparent used a difference other than a label during his father's lifetime: e.g. John, 2nd Ld Segrave (d.1325), bore a red fleur de lis on his paternal lion, and Richard de Clifford of Appleby (d.1282 v.p.) had three silver cinquefoils on his fess. [6] John Cherry in 'Age of Chivalry' ed. Alexander and Binski (1987) p 258 [7] see catalogue: 'Age of Chivalry' ed. Alexander and Binski (1987) pp 258-259 [8] For example, although the two Brewes brothers, William of Bramber (d.1291) and Richard of Stinton (d.1292), bore 'crusilly, a lion rampant' in differing tinctures, their younger brother, John of Glasbury (d.>1283), who acted as executor to Richard de Clare, 5th E of Hertford, bore the Clare chevrons with an engrailed border in blue.

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 1:36:51 PM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > Research on my son-in-law has led me to Caleb Abell, possible child of > Robert Abell, gateway immigrant. I've read the posts in 99 and 09 in this > group, but I don't see any recent posts. Joanna, wife of Robert Abell, has > mention of her 2nd marriage (4 June 1667, Rehoboth, Massachusetts) to > William Hyde/Hide (About 1605-1681) in Anderson's GMB p.5, American > Marriages Before 1699, and US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 p.2, all > under immigrant Robert Abell. In The Abell Family in America, Horace A. > Abell and Lewis P. Abell have a note on p. 46: In the Book of Grants of > Norwich, is a deed recorded to Caleb Abell, son of Joanna, which reads as > follows: "ffour acres of meadow More or less . . . which was Given to Caleb > Abell by his ffather William Hide deceased and ordered to be recorded to him > by John Post (William Hyde's son-in-law and father to Caleb's wife, Margaret > Post). The deed was recorded Feb.2, 1701-2. Wouldn't this be a source for > Caleb being both the son of Joanna Abell and her first husband, Robert > Abell, and step-son to William Hyde? Assuming it is solid that Joanna, wife of Hide was indeed the widow of Robert (I am not doubting it - I just don't know what the basis is for this conclusion), then yes, this would be definitive. taf

On 15/05/2017 3:26 PM, Hans Vogels wrote: > Op maandag 15 mei 2017 03:05:45 UTC+2 schreef Peter Stewart: >> On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 7:32:25 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote: >>> On 10/05/2017 12:22 AM, Stewart Baldwin wrote: >>>> On 5/8/2017 4:15 PM, Paulo Canedo wrote: >>>> >>>>> One thing we can be pretty surge of, Gisela was born before 999 since >>>>> placing her birthdate on 999 would lead to an unbeliavable short >>>>> chronology >>>> That hasn't stopped everybody from proposing that the 999 date be >>>> accepted. Biologically, the date could be described as "not quite >>>> impossible" and Hans Dobbertin argued in two papers that the date was >>>> correct, using "Annalista Saxo" to claim that Ernst was Gisela's first >>>> husband and Bruno the second. See Hans Dobbertin, "Das >>>> Verwandtschaftsverhältnis der 'schwäbischen' Edlen Ida von Elsdorf zum >>>> Kaiserbruder Ludolf IV. von Braunschweig (+1038) und zu Papst Leo IX. >>>> (+1054)," Braunschweigisches Jahrbuch 43 (1962): 44-76; and "Neues >>>> über Ida von Elsdorf," Braunschweigisches Jahrbuch 53 (1972): 49-67. >>>> Most scholars have rejected his arguments, but he has attracted >>>> occasional followers. > > >>> This controversy has been neatly described (I think by Herwig Wolfram) >>> as a wasps' nest, with Hans Dobbertin indefatigably buzzing around it. >> This ascription to Herwig Wolfram was wrong, it was Hermann Jakobs in *Der Adel in der Klosterreform von St. Blasien* (1968), p. 184: 'Wer die Frage nach Idas Herkunft anpackt, greift aber gleichsam in ein Wespennest der Forschung, das zwar erst vor kurzem von H. Dobbertin zur Ruhe gebracht worden ist, in dem es aber immer noch recht unruhig summt.' >> >> Peter Stewart > H. Dobbertin's self-admitted starting point was the plaque and 999 as Gisela's birthyear. Published research, as well as contributions here on the newsgroup, has proven him wrong on this account, therefore some topics continue to buzz. > Yes, I didn't recall Jakobs remark precisely. I just came across an amusing sidelight on this sidelight, showing how far some scholars have bent over backwards to take seriously Albert of Stade's story about Ida: in 1836, Anton Christian Wedekind cited "a similar case of this rare kind", an account from 1818 of a Chippewa warrior's widow ritually accepting her only son's killer in his place. Golly. Peter Stewart

Research on my son-in-law has led me to Caleb Abell, possible child of Robert Abell, gateway immigrant. I've read the posts in 99 and 09 in this group, but I don't see any recent posts. Joanna, wife of Robert Abell, has mention of her 2nd marriage (4 June 1667, Rehoboth, Massachusetts) to William Hyde/Hide (About 1605-1681) in Anderson's GMB p.5, American Marriages Before 1699, and US New England Marriages Prior to 1700 p.2, all under immigrant Robert Abell. In The Abell Family in America, Horace A. Abell and Lewis P. Abell have a note on p. 46: In the Book of Grants of Norwich, is a deed recorded to Caleb Abell, son of Joanna, which reads as follows: "ffour acres of meadow More or less in seven acre meadow with some swampie land bounded westerly on the highway with a bowing line and northerly upon meadow of Lieut. Joseph Backus and southerly upon the Commons and easterly upon the river, which was Given to Caleb Abell by his ffather William Hide deceased and ordered to be recorded to him by John Post (William Hyde's son-in-law and father to Caleb's wife, Margaret Post). The deed was recorded Feb.2, 1701-2. Wouldn't this be a source for Caleb being both the son of Joanna Abell and her first husband, Robert Abell, and step-son to William Hyde? I would appreciate any help/comments or other sources for me. Caleb's wife is William Hyde's granddaughter through daughter Hester Hyde and John Post, so that relationship could have been stated differently in the deed. Thank you. Valerie