Also, as usual, the article is sloppy and sensationalist with genealogy. The interviewee, A.J. Jacobs, is a journalist/entertainment author, not a researcher, and got all his info from the user-contributed website geni.com. (Maybe we could all get on some talk shows with our special "findings" of distant famous cousins.) As for the Trump ancestry, I don't know if it is proven, possible, or plausible; at first glance the generations seem to line up chronologically well, but someone would need to prove it from documents. Jim+

Rupert Murdoch 1931- Génération 2 3 - Elisabeth Greene 1909-2012 Génération 3 7 - Marie Grace de Lancey Forth Génération 4 14 - Robert de Lancey Forth 1835-1890 Génération 5 29 - Caroline Jemima Sherson 1810-1878 Génération 6 58 - Robert Sherson +1842 59 - Catherine Taylor /1780-1842/ Génération 7 116 - Robert Sherson ca 1736-1821 119 - Catherine Forbes Génération 8 232 - Alexander Sherson 233 - Bridget Nowell 238 - Thomas Forbes Génération 9 465 - Bridget Nowell 466 - Roger Nowell +1725 476 - Arthur Forbes Génération 10 930 - Roger Nowell +1695 932 - Alexander Nowell 1632-1695 953 - Katherine Maitland Génération 11 1 861 - Elizabeth Fleetwood 1 906 - Charles Maitland +1700 1 907 - Jane Forbes Génération 12 3 722 - Thomas Fleetwood 3 812 - Richard Maitland +1677 3 813 - Mary Gordon 3 814 - John, Baronet Forbes 3 815 - Margaret Arbuthnott Génération 13 7 445 - Joan Langton 7 625 - Katharine Burnett 7 626 - Robert Gordon 1580-1661 7 629 - Jane Burnett 7 630 - Robert Arbuthnott, Viscount of Arbuthnott +1655 Génération 14 14 891 - Elizabeth Stanley +1533 15 251 - Katherine Gordon 15 252 - John Gordon +1600 15 253 - Isabel Forbes 1548-1622 15 258 - Thomas, Baronet Burnett +1653 15 261 - Margaret Fraser Génération 15 29 782 - Edward Stanley, Baron Monteagle +1523 30 503 - Mariota Forbes 30 504 - John Gordon +1545 30 507 - Elizabeth Keith 30 522 - Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat ca 1570-1633 30 523 - Katherine Mackenzie +1593 Génération 16 59 565 - Eleanor Nevill 1436-1471 61 007 - Beatrix Abernethy 61 009 - Jane Stewart 61 015 - Janet Gray +1539 61 045 - Elizabeth Stewart 1554-1595 61 046 - Colin 'Cam' Mackenzie, Baron of Kintail +1594 61 047 - Barbara Grant Génération 17 119 130 - Richard Nevill, Earl of Salisbury 1400-1460 122 015 - Ne Stewart +1530/ 122 018 - John Stewart, Earl of Atholl ca 1440-1512 122 031 - Elizabeth Stewart 122 090 - John Stewart, Earl of Atholl +1579 122 091 - Elizabeth Gordon +1557 122 093 - Elizabeth, Lady Stewart 122 094 - John Grant, laird of Freuchie +1585 Génération 18 238 261 - Joan Beaufort ca 1379-1440 244 030 - James Stewart, Earl of Buchan 1442-1499 244 037 - Joan Beaufort, Queen of Scotland ca 1407-1445 244 180 - John Stewart, Earl of Atholl 1507-1542 244 182 - George Gordon, Earl of Huntly 1513-1562 244 183 - Elizabeth Keith +1562/ 244 186 - John Stewart, Earl of Atholl ca 1481-1513 244 189 - Elizabeth Forbes Génération 19 476 522 - John of Gaunt Plantagenêt, Duke of Lancaster 1340-1399 488 074 - John Beaufort, Earl of Somerset ca 1373-1410 488 364 - John, Lord Gordon +ca 1517 488 365 - Margaret Stewart 1497 488 367 - Elizabeth Douglas 488 379 - Catherine Stewart 1494-1554/ Génération 20 953 044 - Edward III of Windsor Plantagenêt, King of England 1312-1377 976 729 - Joanna Stewart ca 1463-1510 976 730 - James IV Stewart, King of Scotland 1473-1513 976 734 - John Douglas, Earl of Morton 1466-/1515 Génération 21 1 953 460 - James III Stewart, Duke of Rothesay 1452-1488 1 953 469 - Joanna Stewart ca 1428-/1486 Génération 22 3 906 920 - James II Stewart, King of Scotland 1430-1460

Genealogists have discovered that likely presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton share common descent from Joan of Gaunt and Katherine Swinford. http://www.infowars.com/trump-hillary-distant-cousins-say-genealogists/ In view of past discussion regard Plantagenet Richard's Y-DNA not matching that of alleged Beaufort Somerset cousins, is the legitimacy question of John of Gaunt still an issue? If the DNA discrepancy arose from the circumstances of John's illegitimate parentage, then we could assume that both Trump and Clinton are of bastardized descent. Sent from my iPhone

The Scottish royal line for Rupert via this route is (dependent upon statements in _The Thanage of Fermartyn_): 1. James IV = Margaret Drummond 2. (illegit.) Margaret Stewart = John Gordon 3. George Gordon = Elizabeth Keith 4. Elizabeth Gordon = John Stewart 5. Elizabeth Stewart = Hugh Fraser 6. Simon Fraser = Jean Stewart 7. Margaret Fraser = Sir Robert Arbuthnott 8. Robert Arbuthnott = Marjorie Carnegie 9. Margaret Arbuthnott = Sir John Forbes, Bart. of Monymusk 10. Jane/Jean Forbes = Sir Charles Maitland, 3rd Bart. 11. Mary Maitland = Thomas Forbes of Echt 12. Arthur Forbes, later Arthur Forbes Maitland = Judith Mieumecks 13. Thomas Forbes, burgess of Aberdeen = ______ 14. Catherine Forbes = Maj. _____ Taylor 15. Catherine Taylor = Robert Sherson, Jr. 16. Caroline Jemima Sherson = Frederick Henry Alexander Forth 17. Robert de Lancey Forth = Anne Thomson Ware 18. Marie Grace de Lancey Forth = Rupert Greene 19. Elisabeth Joy Greene = Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch 20. Sir (Keith) Rupert Murdoch Amazingly, due to very compressed generations, it is also 20 generations long!

Hillary's descent from royalty is at best unproven, from what I can recall. WA Reitwiesner has the Rodham ancestry only back to Hillary's gggg-grandparents, Joseph Rodham (born about 1742) and Dorothy Bell of Chester-le-Street, Durham, married 1774. Last I checked, the connection to the earlier Roddham/Roddam family is speculation. Jim+

Thanks for the info on Heber, I couldn't seem to get any two sources to agree exactly on that line, so I tried to find another substitute. I think the will of John Fleetwood mentions money to go to his daughter Elizabeth, yet unmarried, and this may be the one they believe married Nowell. If, however, her full brother was already a burgess twenty years before the will of their father, that does seem to indicate a chronological problem.

On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 1:08:05 PM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote: > It seems possible there is a royal descent for Sir Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire businessman. > > I have used Reitwiesner and Wood's tracing of his ancestry back to ancestor #116, Robert Sherson, "b. 1736/7, buried 13 Jan 1821 at Fetcham, Surrey aged 84, apothecary, doctor of medicine and botanist. Will dated 2 Feb 1819, proved with 3 codicils at London 22 Mar 1821." The next entry is for his wife, Mary ___, and mentions the location of "Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey." > > http://www.wargs.com/other/murdoch.html > > These details given for Robert Sherson and his wife Mary tie in nicely to a big pedigree chart in Whitaker's _An History of the Original Parish of Whalley_, where a footnote to the chart shows Alexander Sherson, husband of Bridget Nowell, serving as "Town Clerk of Lancaster, died Nov. 21, 1737, leaving a numerous issue. His son Robert Sherson, M.D., late of Great Ormond Street, now (1809) of Bridge House, Surrey, has also a numerous progeny." As this statement was made in the lifetime of Robert Sherson (d. 1821) of Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey, doctor of medicine, I see no real reason to doubt its accuracy (though please inform me if this connection is wrong). > > https://books.google.com/books?id=EO1EAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA264&dq=%22son+robert+sherson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0m7Cr-8_MAhUE2SYKHZHsD1gQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22son%20robert%20sherson%22&f=false > > Bridget Nowell, shown by Whitaker to be mother of Robert Sherson, M.D., was a daughter of Roger Nowell, Esq., of Whalley, by his wife, Rebecca, relict of Cuthbert Wade (possibly born Rebecca Heber, first cousin to her own 2nd husband). This seems to lead to at least one royal descent from King Edward III, and probably more (the Heber lines should be checked in particular). > > 1. Edward III, King of England = Philippa of Hainault > > 2. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster = (3) with legitimated issue, Katherine (Roet) Swynford > > 3. Joan Beaufort = Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmoreland > > 4. Richard Neville, 1st Earl of Salisbury = Alice Montagu > > 5. Eleanor Neville = Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby > > 6. Edward Stanley, Lord Monteagle = Elizabeth Harington & Anne Vaughan > > 7. (? possibly illegitimate) Elizabeth Stanley = Sir Thomas Langton > > 8. Joan Langton = John Fleetwood > > 9. Elizabeth Fleetwood = Roger Nowell > > 10. Roger Nowell = Dorothy Holt > > 11. Alexander Nowell = Eleanor Heber > > 12. Roger Nowell = Rebecca (? Heber), widow of Cuthbert Wade > > 13. Bridget Nowell = Alexander Sherson > > 14. Robert Sherson = Mary____ > > 15. Robert Sherson = Catherine Taylor > > 16. Caroline Jemima Sherson = Frederick Henry Alexander Forth > > 17. Robert de Lancey Forth = Anne Thomson Ware > > 18. Marie Grace de Lancey Forth = Rupert Greene > > 19. Elisabeth Joy Greene = Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch > > 20. Sir (Keith) Rupert Murdoch > > > The H.O.P. biography of Sir Thomas Langton of Newton confirms his marriage to a daughter, perhaps illegit., of Edward, Lord Monteagle. > > http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/langton-sir-thomas-149697-1569 > > Sir Thomas Langton had another wife who should be ruled out as the mother of Joan Langton, who married John Fleetwood. > > The _Visitation of Cumberland_ shows the marriage of Joan, daughter of Sir Thomas and Elizabeth (Stanley) Langton, to John Fleetwood. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=4nO5MJva0IYC&pg=PA32&dq=%22thomas+langton%22+newton&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_q5mqkc7MAhUFxSYKHZSKB_wQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22thomas%20langton%22%20newton&f=false > > _Documents Relating to the Priory of Penwortham_ deals with the Fleetwood and Nowell connections in detail, though again we should rule out John Fleetwood's other wife, Catherine Christmas, as ancestral. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=MmJVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR56&dq=%22married+roger+nowell+of+read%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiunvC4_c_MAhUB3yYKHWsCBHAQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=%22married%20roger%20nowell%20of%20read%22&f=false > > I imagine there are in fact several royal descents, as the wife of generation 15, Robert Sherson, Jr., appears to have been a granddaughter of Thomas Forbes, who was the son of Arthur Forbes Maitland of Pitrichie. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=uZlNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA454&dq=sherson+nowell+fetcham&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw6cmC-s_MAhUK7yYKHRDTDn0Q6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=sherson%20nowell%20fetcham&f=false Genealogics provides a wealth of information on the ancestries of Sir Charles Maitland, of Pitrichie, 3rd Baronet and Jane/Jean Forbes: http://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00235157&tree=LEO There is, at least, a James IV descent here: James IV = Margaret Drummond Margaret Stewart = John Gordon George Gordon = Elizabeth Keith (1 James I descent) Elizabeth Gordon = John Stewart (1 Edward III descent) Elizabeth Stewart = Hugh Fraser Simon Fraser = Jean Stewart (1 Edward III descent) Margaret Fraser = Sir Robert Arbuthnott (1 Edward III & 1 James I descent) Robert Arbuthnott = Marjorie Carnegie Margaret Arbuthnott = Sir John Forbes (1 Edward III descent) Jane/Jean Forbes = Sir Charles Maitland (1 Edward III descent)

On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 12:02:10 PM UTC-7, John Higgins wrote: > On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 10:08:05 AM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote: > > It seems possible there is a royal descent for Sir Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire businessman. > > > > I have used Reitwiesner and Wood's tracing of his ancestry back to ancestor #116, Robert Sherson, "b. 1736/7, buried 13 Jan 1821 at Fetcham, Surrey aged 84, apothecary, doctor of medicine and botanist. Will dated 2 Feb 1819, proved with 3 codicils at London 22 Mar 1821." The next entry is for his wife, Mary ___, and mentions the location of "Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey." > > > > http://www.wargs.com/other/murdoch.html > > > > These details given for Robert Sherson and his wife Mary tie in nicely to a big pedigree chart in Whitaker's _An History of the Original Parish of Whalley_, where a footnote to the chart shows Alexander Sherson, husband of Bridget Nowell, serving as "Town Clerk of Lancaster, died Nov. 21, 1737, leaving a numerous issue. His son Robert Sherson, M.D., late of Great Ormond Street, now (1809) of Bridge House, Surrey, has also a numerous progeny." As this statement was made in the lifetime of Robert Sherson (d. 1821) of Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey, doctor of medicine, I see no real reason to doubt its accuracy (though please inform me if this connection is wrong). > > > > https://books.google.com/books?id=EO1EAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA264&dq=%22son+robert+sherson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0m7Cr-8_MAhUE2SYKHZHsD1gQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22son%20robert%20sherson%22&f=false > > > > Bridget Nowell, shown by Whitaker to be mother of Robert Sherson, M.D., was a daughter of Roger Nowell, Esq., of Whalley, by his wife, Rebecca, relict of Cuthbert Wade (possibly born Rebecca Heber, first cousin to her own 2nd husband). This seems to lead to at least one royal descent from King Edward III, and probably more (the Heber lines should be checked in particular). > > > > 1. Edward III, King of England = Philippa of Hainault > > > > 2. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster = (3) with legitimated issue, Katherine (Roet) Swynford > > > > 3. Joan Beaufort = Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmoreland > > > > 4. Richard Neville, 1st Earl of Salisbury = Alice Montagu > > > > 5. Eleanor Neville = Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby > > > > 6. Edward Stanley, Lord Monteagle = Elizabeth Harington & Anne Vaughan > > > > 7. (? possibly illegitimate) Elizabeth Stanley = Sir Thomas Langton > > > > 8. Joan Langton = John Fleetwood > > > > 9. Elizabeth Fleetwood = Roger Nowell > > > > 10. Roger Nowell = Dorothy Holt > > > > 11. Alexander Nowell = Eleanor Heber > > > > 12. Roger Nowell = Rebecca (? Heber), widow of Cuthbert Wade > > > > 13. Bridget Nowell = Alexander Sherson > > > > 14. Robert Sherson = Mary____ > > > > 15. Robert Sherson = Catherine Taylor > > > > 16. Caroline Jemima Sherson = Frederick Henry Alexander Forth > > > > 17. Robert de Lancey Forth = Anne Thomson Ware > > > > 18. Marie Grace de Lancey Forth = Rupert Greene > > > > 19. Elisabeth Joy Greene = Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch > > > > 20. Sir (Keith) Rupert Murdoch > > > > > > The H.O.P. biography of Sir Thomas Langton of Newton confirms his marriage to a daughter, perhaps illegit., of Edward, Lord Monteagle. > > > > http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/langton-sir-thomas-149697-1569 > > > > Sir Thomas Langton had another wife who should be ruled out as the mother of Joan Langton, who married John Fleetwood. > > > > The _Visitation of Cumberland_ shows the marriage of Joan, daughter of Sir Thomas and Elizabeth (Stanley) Langton, to John Fleetwood. > > > > https://books.google.com/books?id=4nO5MJva0IYC&pg=PA32&dq=%22thomas+langton%22+newton&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_q5mqkc7MAhUFxSYKHZSKB_wQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22thomas%20langton%22%20newton&f=false > > > > _Documents Relating to the Priory of Penwortham_ deals with the Fleetwood and Nowell connections in detail, though again we should rule out John Fleetwood's other wife, Catherine Christmas, as ancestral. > > > > https://books.google.com/books?id=MmJVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR56&dq=%22married+roger+nowell+of+read%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiunvC4_c_MAhUB3yYKHWsCBHAQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=%22married%20roger%20nowell%20of%20read%22&f=false > > > > I imagine there are in fact several royal descents, as the wife of generation 15, Robert Sherson, Jr., appears to have been a granddaughter of Thomas Forbes, who was the son of Arthur Forbes Maitland of Pitrichie. > > > > https://books.google.com/books?id=uZlNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA454&dq=sherson+nowell+fetcham&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw6cmC-s_MAhUK7yYKHRDTDn0Q6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=sherson%20nowell%20fetcham&f=false > > Very interesting! You're correct that there are royal descents in the Heber family. I presently have 8 Edward III descents for Eleanor Heber (m. Alexander Nowell, and her niece Rebecca Heber (m. (2) her cousin Roger Nowell). > > The 4th edition (1876) of Whitaker's "Parish of Whalley" is available online at the Internet Archive. In volume 2 following page 40 there is a more detailed version of the pedigree of Nowell of Read. In addition to confirming that Rebecca, widow of Cuthbert Wade and 2nd wife of Roger Nowell was in fact a daughter of Thomas Heber of Marton, it says that their daughter Bridget married "her cousin" Alexander Sherson. Alexander is almost certainly the son of Thomas Sherson, mayor of Lancaster, and his wife Bridget Nowell (sister of Roger Nowell). This latter couple is shown in the Nowell pedigree in both editions of Whitaker's Whalley. Bridget is a daughter of Eleanor Heber and thus picks up her Edward III descents. > > There may be an additional generation in the Edward III descent shown above in this thread. The Nowell pedigrees in both editions of Whitaker's Whalley say that Elizabeth Fleetwood, wife of Roger Nowell (d. 1623), was the daughter, not of John Fleetwood and Joan Langton, but instead of their son Thomas Fleetwood of Colwich (or Colwick), Staffordshire. This agrees with the Fleetwood pedigree in Grazebrook's edition of the 1663/4 visitation of Staffordshire. OTOH a Fleetwood pedigree in the 3rd (Croston) edition of Baines's History of lancashire says that Elizabeth was a sister, not daughter, of Thomas. The limited chronological information in Baines/Croston, when compared to Whitaker, suggests that the Baines pedigree is actually wrong in this matter. Thomas is said to be a burgess of Preston in 1562 and 1582, while Elizabeth is said to have married in 1602 - to a man baptized in 1582. This suggests strongly that Elizabeth is a generation later than Thomas - and not his sister. I can't confirm this, but either way the Edward III descent in question is still valid. > > (The works mentioned above are all available via either the Internet Archive or Google Books, but I don't have URLs available as I'm working from downloaded copies.) The Fleetwood pedigree in Grazebrook's edition of the Staffs visitation is on pp. 129-130 of that work, while the Fleetwood pedigree in Croston's edition of Baines's Lancashire is on pp. 208-209 of volume 4 of that work.

On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 10:08:05 AM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote: > It seems possible there is a royal descent for Sir Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire businessman. > > I have used Reitwiesner and Wood's tracing of his ancestry back to ancestor #116, Robert Sherson, "b. 1736/7, buried 13 Jan 1821 at Fetcham, Surrey aged 84, apothecary, doctor of medicine and botanist. Will dated 2 Feb 1819, proved with 3 codicils at London 22 Mar 1821." The next entry is for his wife, Mary ___, and mentions the location of "Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey." > > http://www.wargs.com/other/murdoch.html > > These details given for Robert Sherson and his wife Mary tie in nicely to a big pedigree chart in Whitaker's _An History of the Original Parish of Whalley_, where a footnote to the chart shows Alexander Sherson, husband of Bridget Nowell, serving as "Town Clerk of Lancaster, died Nov. 21, 1737, leaving a numerous issue. His son Robert Sherson, M.D., late of Great Ormond Street, now (1809) of Bridge House, Surrey, has also a numerous progeny." As this statement was made in the lifetime of Robert Sherson (d. 1821) of Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey, doctor of medicine, I see no real reason to doubt its accuracy (though please inform me if this connection is wrong). > > https://books.google.com/books?id=EO1EAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA264&dq=%22son+robert+sherson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0m7Cr-8_MAhUE2SYKHZHsD1gQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22son%20robert%20sherson%22&f=false > > Bridget Nowell, shown by Whitaker to be mother of Robert Sherson, M.D., was a daughter of Roger Nowell, Esq., of Whalley, by his wife, Rebecca, relict of Cuthbert Wade (possibly born Rebecca Heber, first cousin to her own 2nd husband). This seems to lead to at least one royal descent from King Edward III, and probably more (the Heber lines should be checked in particular). > > 1. Edward III, King of England = Philippa of Hainault > > 2. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster = (3) with legitimated issue, Katherine (Roet) Swynford > > 3. Joan Beaufort = Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmoreland > > 4. Richard Neville, 1st Earl of Salisbury = Alice Montagu > > 5. Eleanor Neville = Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby > > 6. Edward Stanley, Lord Monteagle = Elizabeth Harington & Anne Vaughan > > 7. (? possibly illegitimate) Elizabeth Stanley = Sir Thomas Langton > > 8. Joan Langton = John Fleetwood > > 9. Elizabeth Fleetwood = Roger Nowell > > 10. Roger Nowell = Dorothy Holt > > 11. Alexander Nowell = Eleanor Heber > > 12. Roger Nowell = Rebecca (? Heber), widow of Cuthbert Wade > > 13. Bridget Nowell = Alexander Sherson > > 14. Robert Sherson = Mary____ > > 15. Robert Sherson = Catherine Taylor > > 16. Caroline Jemima Sherson = Frederick Henry Alexander Forth > > 17. Robert de Lancey Forth = Anne Thomson Ware > > 18. Marie Grace de Lancey Forth = Rupert Greene > > 19. Elisabeth Joy Greene = Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch > > 20. Sir (Keith) Rupert Murdoch > > > The H.O.P. biography of Sir Thomas Langton of Newton confirms his marriage to a daughter, perhaps illegit., of Edward, Lord Monteagle. > > http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/langton-sir-thomas-149697-1569 > > Sir Thomas Langton had another wife who should be ruled out as the mother of Joan Langton, who married John Fleetwood. > > The _Visitation of Cumberland_ shows the marriage of Joan, daughter of Sir Thomas and Elizabeth (Stanley) Langton, to John Fleetwood. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=4nO5MJva0IYC&pg=PA32&dq=%22thomas+langton%22+newton&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_q5mqkc7MAhUFxSYKHZSKB_wQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22thomas%20langton%22%20newton&f=false > > _Documents Relating to the Priory of Penwortham_ deals with the Fleetwood and Nowell connections in detail, though again we should rule out John Fleetwood's other wife, Catherine Christmas, as ancestral. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=MmJVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR56&dq=%22married+roger+nowell+of+read%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiunvC4_c_MAhUB3yYKHWsCBHAQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=%22married%20roger%20nowell%20of%20read%22&f=false > > I imagine there are in fact several royal descents, as the wife of generation 15, Robert Sherson, Jr., appears to have been a granddaughter of Thomas Forbes, who was the son of Arthur Forbes Maitland of Pitrichie. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=uZlNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA454&dq=sherson+nowell+fetcham&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw6cmC-s_MAhUK7yYKHRDTDn0Q6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=sherson%20nowell%20fetcham&f=false Very interesting! You're correct that there are royal descents in the Heber family. I presently have 8 Edward III descents for Eleanor Heber (m. Alexander Nowell, and her niece Rebecca Heber (m. (2) her cousin Roger Nowell). The 4th edition (1876) of Whitaker's "Parish of Whalley" is available online at the Internet Archive. In volume 2 following page 40 there is a more detailed version of the pedigree of Nowell of Read. In addition to confirming that Rebecca, widow of Cuthbert Wade and 2nd wife of Roger Nowell was in fact a daughter of Thomas Heber of Marton, it says that their daughter Bridget married "her cousin" Alexander Sherson. Alexander is almost certainly the son of Thomas Sherson, mayor of Lancaster, and his wife Bridget Nowell (sister of Roger Nowell). This latter couple is shown in the Nowell pedigree in both editions of Whitaker's Whalley. Bridget is a daughter of Eleanor Heber and thus picks up her Edward III descents. There may be an additional generation in the Edward III descent shown above in this thread. The Nowell pedigrees in both editions of Whitaker's Whalley say that Elizabeth Fleetwood, wife of Roger Nowell (d. 1623), was the daughter, not of John Fleetwood and Joan Langton, but instead of their son Thomas Fleetwood of Colwich (or Colwick), Staffordshire. This agrees with the Fleetwood pedigree in Grazebrook's edition of the 1663/4 visitation of Staffordshire. OTOH a Fleetwood pedigree in the 3rd (Croston) edition of Baines's History of lancashire says that Elizabeth was a sister, not daughter, of Thomas. The limited chronological information in Baines/Croston, when compared to Whitaker, suggests that the Baines pedigree is actually wrong in this matter. Thomas is said to be a burgess of Preston in 1562 and 1582, while Elizabeth is said to have married in 1602 - to a man baptized in 1582. This suggests strongly that Elizabeth is a generation later than Thomas - and not his sister. I can't confirm this, but either way the Edward III descent in question is still valid. (The works mentioned above are all available via either the Internet Archive or Google Books, but I don't have URLs available as I'm working from downloaded copies.)

It seems possible there is a royal descent for Sir Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire businessman. I have used Reitwiesner and Wood's tracing of his ancestry back to ancestor #116, Robert Sherson, "b. 1736/7, buried 13 Jan 1821 at Fetcham, Surrey aged 84, apothecary, doctor of medicine and botanist. Will dated 2 Feb 1819, proved with 3 codicils at London 22 Mar 1821." The next entry is for his wife, Mary ___, and mentions the location of "Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey." http://www.wargs.com/other/murdoch.html These details given for Robert Sherson and his wife Mary tie in nicely to a big pedigree chart in Whitaker's _An History of the Original Parish of Whalley_, where a footnote to the chart shows Alexander Sherson, husband of Bridget Nowell, serving as "Town Clerk of Lancaster, died Nov. 21, 1737, leaving a numerous issue. His son Robert Sherson, M.D., late of Great Ormond Street, now (1809) of Bridge House, Surrey, has also a numerous progeny." As this statement was made in the lifetime of Robert Sherson (d. 1821) of Bridge House, Fetcham, Surrey, doctor of medicine, I see no real reason to doubt its accuracy (though please inform me if this connection is wrong). https://books.google.com/books?id=EO1EAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA264&dq=%22son+robert+sherson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0m7Cr-8_MAhUE2SYKHZHsD1gQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22son%20robert%20sherson%22&f=false Bridget Nowell, shown by Whitaker to be mother of Robert Sherson, M.D., was a daughter of Roger Nowell, Esq., of Whalley, by his wife, Rebecca, relict of Cuthbert Wade (possibly born Rebecca Heber, first cousin to her own 2nd husband). This seems to lead to at least one royal descent from King Edward III, and probably more (the Heber lines should be checked in particular). 1. Edward III, King of England = Philippa of Hainault 2. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster = (3) with legitimated issue, Katherine (Roet) Swynford 3. Joan Beaufort = Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmoreland 4. Richard Neville, 1st Earl of Salisbury = Alice Montagu 5. Eleanor Neville = Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby 6. Edward Stanley, Lord Monteagle = Elizabeth Harington & Anne Vaughan 7. (? possibly illegitimate) Elizabeth Stanley = Sir Thomas Langton 8. Joan Langton = John Fleetwood 9. Elizabeth Fleetwood = Roger Nowell 10. Roger Nowell = Dorothy Holt 11. Alexander Nowell = Eleanor Heber 12. Roger Nowell = Rebecca (? Heber), widow of Cuthbert Wade 13. Bridget Nowell = Alexander Sherson 14. Robert Sherson = Mary____ 15. Robert Sherson = Catherine Taylor 16. Caroline Jemima Sherson = Frederick Henry Alexander Forth 17. Robert de Lancey Forth = Anne Thomson Ware 18. Marie Grace de Lancey Forth = Rupert Greene 19. Elisabeth Joy Greene = Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch 20. Sir (Keith) Rupert Murdoch The H.O.P. biography of Sir Thomas Langton of Newton confirms his marriage to a daughter, perhaps illegit., of Edward, Lord Monteagle. http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/langton-sir-thomas-149697-1569 Sir Thomas Langton had another wife who should be ruled out as the mother of Joan Langton, who married John Fleetwood. The _Visitation of Cumberland_ shows the marriage of Joan, daughter of Sir Thomas and Elizabeth (Stanley) Langton, to John Fleetwood. https://books.google.com/books?id=4nO5MJva0IYC&pg=PA32&dq=%22thomas+langton%22+newton&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_q5mqkc7MAhUFxSYKHZSKB_wQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22thomas%20langton%22%20newton&f=false _Documents Relating to the Priory of Penwortham_ deals with the Fleetwood and Nowell connections in detail, though again we should rule out John Fleetwood's other wife, Catherine Christmas, as ancestral. https://books.google.com/books?id=MmJVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR56&dq=%22married+roger+nowell+of+read%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiunvC4_c_MAhUB3yYKHWsCBHAQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=%22married%20roger%20nowell%20of%20read%22&f=false I imagine there are in fact several royal descents, as the wife of generation 15, Robert Sherson, Jr., appears to have been a granddaughter of Thomas Forbes, who was the son of Arthur Forbes Maitland of Pitrichie. https://books.google.com/books?id=uZlNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA454&dq=sherson+nowell+fetcham&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiw6cmC-s_MAhUK7yYKHRDTDn0Q6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=sherson%20nowell%20fetcham&f=false

On 10/05/2016 9:53 AM, Peter Stewart via wrote: > > Chibnall went on to reference the 1105 charter as supporting Orderic's > identification of Eudes au Capel as the dapifer/uncle of Robert This is sloppy on my part - Orderic made Eudes au Capel a dapifer but did not mention Robert of La Haye, whose connection comes in the 1105 charter cited by Chibnall to support the statement of Orderic. Peter Stewart

On 10/05/2016 8:29 AM, Peter G. M. Dale via wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Many thanks for your extensive insight and analysis. I am unfamiliar, to a large extent, with the individuals referenced in your last few posts. When convenient, I would appreciate it if you would please advise me of the following: > > 1. Does the publication 'Les seigneurs de Ryes en Bessin: études historiques', by Romain-Auguste-Laurent Pezet, establish or propose the wife (wives), parentage and/or further ancestry of Hubert de Rie? I am embarrassed to admit my unilingualism renders me unable to meaningfully review the article for which you kindly provided the link; According to Pezet the first recorded possessor of Ryes was named Geoffrey, succeeded by his son Eudes who gave a moiety to Fécamp abbey in 1026 - the latter's heir was most probably Hubert, perhaps his son. On a quick look I didn't spot any information about Hubert's marriage/s. He and his three eldest sons saved the life of the young duke William at the time of the revolt by Guy of Brionne and others a few months before the battle of Val-ès-Dunes in 1047 (Pezet thought that Eudo was the eldest of these three, but unless he lived to around 90 he could not have been one of them since he died in February 1120). > > 2. Is it the abovementioned Pezet article that references Eudo du Capel being conflated with Eudo Dapifer? I assume it is in Note 2 on p. 130; Yes, and on p. 138 in note 4 Pezet identified Eudo of Ryes as the dapifer/uncle of Robert de la Haye. > > 3. What relationships can be established (unlikely) or reasonably conjectured based on the Eudes au Capel v. Eudo de Rie discussion?; and As I said before, the relationship is mysterious - Eudo of Ryes was one of the (many) witnesses to a royal confirmation in 1080 of gifts made by Eudes au Capel and his father Turstin Haldup to the abbey they had founded at Lessay in 1056, and by 1105 Robert of La Haye (son of Radulf, the count of Mortain's seneschal) had inherited the founders' rights there. Eudes au Capel had a son Radulf who was in southern Italy by 1045 and does not appear again; by his (evidently second) wife Muriel (of Conteville) Eudes reportedly had no children, or at least none that Wace heard of in the 12th century. The simplest conjecture seems to me that Eudes au Capel had a sister who married Hubert of Ryes and was mother of their (perhaps eldest) son Radulf, castellan of Nottingham, probably father of Robert of La Haye, but there can be no certainty on the available evidence. > > 4. For further discussion regarding Orderic Vitalis' identification of Eudo au Capel v. Eudo de Rie, please see p. 124, Note 2 (which continues on p. 125) of 'The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, Volume II: Books III and IV', edited by Marjorie Chibnall - > > https://books.google.ca/books?id=s6Vlc8FJEksC&pg=PA124&dq=%22THURSTAN+HALDUP%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibh5Lf_83MAhUozIMKHaC4CasQ6AEIJzAC#v=onepage&q=%22THURSTAN%20HALDUP%22&f=false. > > Again, I am not familiar enough with this material to provide any useful comment thereon. > > Chibnall went on to reference the 1105 charter as supporting Orderic's identification of Eudes au Capel as the dapifer/uncle of Robert, and thought that since Orderic knew well the monk Benedict, a nephew of Eudes, he 'is likely to be right'. However, this is messy reasoning. Eudes au Capel was one of the most prominent magnates in the Cotentin, a brother-in-law of William the Conqueror, and lived until 1089 when he must have been around 90, yet he does not occur as dapifer in any of William's charters. Orderic referred numerous times to Eudo the dapifer, meaning Eudo of Ryes who does occur in this capacity independently. Orderic was not always careful and reliable about people who fell outside his immediate interest, including those with whom he was within a few degrees of separation, and a passing mention by him along with the contentious interpretation of one charter are not sufficient evidence for Chibnall's conclusion. Peter Stewart

On Tuesday, 10 May 2016 16:19:22 UTC+1, Vance Mead wrote: > I'm wondering about the occupation of William Symond, of London, "steweholder", the defendant in the first entry here. Is he a fishmonger or a brothel keeper? This is from 1453. > > > http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no768/aCP40no768fronts/IMG_0803.htm Or perhaps a genuine bath-house keeper? But brothel keeper seems the most likely - the OED has many early examples of 'stewe' meaning brothel. Matt Tompkins

I'm wondering about the occupation of William Symond, of London, "steweholder", the defendant in the first entry here. Is he a fishmonger or a brothel keeper? This is from 1453. http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no768/aCP40no768fronts/IMG_0803.htm

On Monday, 9 May 2016 19:13:55 UTC+1, John Watson wrote: > On Monday, 9 May 2016 17:13:42 UTC+1, al...@mindspring.com wrote: > > Also shown in a number of places online: > > > > > > > > The Survey of the County of York, Taken by John de Kirkby, Commonly Called ... John Kirkby, p 281. > > > > "William de Ergham... and Thomas de Outhenby, or de Aunby, and William de Ergham as representatives, the one of Christian, the other of Joan, sisters of Osbert de Arches, while Edmund Mansel claimed a third part, as son and heir of Alice another sister." > > > > Jury determined Alice a bastard. > > > > Which helps determine some about the relationship between some of these families. Not clear it is the same William de Ergham. > > > > Doug Smith > > The Erghum pedigree is briefly as follows: > > 1. Malger de Erghum married Joan, sister of Osbert de Arches > > 2. Walter de Erghum > > 3. William de Erghum (d. aft. 1322) m. Eustache > > 4. William de Erghum (d. bef. 2 Apr 1347) m. Sibyl dau. of Henry fitz Aucher > > 5. William de Erghum (d. aft 1405) m. Katherine dau. of Hugh de Cressy > > 6a. Juliana de Erghum (d.s.p) m. John Aske of Ousthorpe (d. 2 Jun 1429) (first wife) > 6b. Sibyl de Erghum (d. abt 1408) m. Robert Cumberworth (d. 1405) > > Regards, > John Corrections to the pedigree: 1. Malger de Erghum married Joan, sister of Osbert de Arches 2. Walter de Erghum 3. William de Erghum (d. aft. 1322) m. Eustache [possibly a daughter of William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe] 4. William de Erghum (d. bef. 2 Apr 1347) m. Sibyl dau. of Aucher fitz Henry [not Henry fitz Aucher] 5. William de Erghum (d. aft 1405) m. Katherine dau. of Hugh de Cressy 6a. Juliana de Erghum (d.s.p) m. John Aske of Ousthorpe (d. 2 Jun 1429) (first wife) 6b. Sibyl de Erghum (d. abt 1408) m. Robert Cumberworth (d. 1405) My suggestion that Eustache was a daughter of William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe and his wife Eustache fitz Ralph is purely speculation, based on her name and that the arms of Ros are shown on the seal of Isabel her daughter, wife of Peter de Percy and Philip de Neville. Sibyl, was a daughter of Aucher fitz Henry, as shown in the summary of the Common Pleas case below, and not his son Henry fitz Aucher as suggested in Complete Peerage, vol. 5, 415. 1364, Trinity Term. Miles de Stapelton, chivaler, and Sibel de Erghum claim against Master John de Snayth 30 acres of land and 6 acres of meadow in Carleton near Snayth, as their right and inheritance, in which John has no entry except through a demise which John de Bella Aqua, sometime husband of Laderana Brewes, great-grandmother of Miles and grandmother of Sibel (whose heirs they are), made in the lifetime of Laderana, when she could not contradict him. From Laderana the right descended to Sibel and Joan, as daughters and heirs; Sibel's purparty descended to Nicholas, as son and heir, and from him to Miles, the plaintiff, as son and heir; Joan's purparty descended to Sibel, the plaintiff, as daughter and heir. Judgment was given for the defendant. W. Paley Baildon, Baildon and the Baildons, vol. 1 (1912), 337. Regards, John

On Tuesday, 11 December 2012 04:45:35 UTC, pd...@peterdale.com wrote: > Greetings, > > I have recently commenced researching the Hemenhale family of Norfolk > and Suffolk. My connection to them is that an Elizabeth Hemenhale > married my ancestor Sir William Jermy (d. 1385). Sir William's son > Sir John Jermy and his son John Jermy, Esq. are referenced in the IPM > below. > > The book, 'Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and Other Analogous > Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office', (1898), Henry VII., > vol. I., published by Eyre and Spottiswoode, London, p. 140, sets > forth the Inquest Post Mortem of John Jermyn dated November 4, 1487. > This IPM references a "Ralph Hempnale", among others, as a feofee of > Sir John Jermy. Sir John Jermy's parents are, according to numerous > unsourced pedigrees, said to be Sir William Jermy and his wife > Elizabeth Hemenhale/Hemenhall or Hunhall who was the daughter of John > de Hemenhale, Esquire (or, occasionally Thomas). One reference (again > unsourced) states that her family came from Rishangles, Suffolk but > originated in Burnham, Norfolk. > > I found the following entry in the Feet of Fines and also the will of > Sir William Jermy. Please see below: > > The book, 'A Calendar of the Feet of Fines for Suffolk', (1900), by > Walter Rye, printed by W. E. Harrison for the Suffolk Institute of > Archaeology and Natural History, p. 283, states the following with > respect to the Mounteney and Jermy families: > > "1 Henry V. [1413-1414] ... 2 John Lancastre, William Mounteneye, > Ralph Hemnale, and John Sprot v. John Germyn of Metefold and Margaret > his wife of the manor of Gosbak called Germynes manor" (source: > http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924029784992/cu31924029784992_djvu.txt) > > (Latin translation): Will of William Germy Knight [NCC 46 Harsyk - > this will found to be incorrectly indexed as William Berny Kt - NROCAT > and printed NCC indexes now corrected] > > [heading] The testament of Sir William Germy Knight deceased > > In the name of God Amen I William Germy, being of sound mine & good > memory make this my testament in this wise: > Firstly, I commend my soul to Almighty God, the blessed Mary & all the > saints, and my body to be buried in the church of St John, Medefeld in > the county of Suffolk. > Item I bequeath to Elizabeth my wife, half my chattels, [tam viva quam > mortua - in life so in death?]. > Item I bequeath for the making of a bell-tower at Medefeld 100 silver > shillings. > Item I bequeath for the repair of the church of Gosebak 20 s. > Item I bequeath for repair of the church of Mendham 20 s. > Item to the Anchoress of Framelyngham 6s 8d. > Item I bequeath to Margar' de Hemenhal 20s. > Item I bequeath to brother Henry, Prior of Filchestowe 2 silver marks. > Item I bequeath to John Derby 20s. > Item I bequeath to Thomas Draper 6s 8d. > Item I bequeath to Robert de Rysyngges 13s 4d. > Item I bequeath to each serving boy remaining with me in the hospital/ > hospice 3s 4d. > Item I bequeath to William Barbour 3s 4d. > The residue of all my goods not bequeathed, wheresoever they be, I > bequeath to my executors, to be disposed of, taken & paid for my soul > & the souls of my ancestors and friends, as seems most pleasing to be > done. > I ordain, make & appoint as my executors of this testament Elizabeth > my wife, John Breuse knight, Katherine Hemenhal, John Bercelot clerk & > Roger Breuse. > In witness whereof to this present testament I have placed my seal. > Given at Walton in the county of Suffolk on Saturday next after the > feast of the Beheading of St John the Baptist AD 1385. > > This testament was proved at Norwich before the official of the Bishop > of Norwich on the 7th day of September in the year AD above written. > Administration of goods granted to John Bercelot clerk one of the > executors named, with power reserved to the co-executors, when they > should come &c > > I have tried to further corroborate the relationship between Sir > William and Sir John Jermy and have come across the following > references to each of them, respectively, in IPMs: > > The book, 'Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other > Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office', (1970), > Vol. 15, 1-7 Richard II (1377-84), HMSO, London, p. 249, states the > following with respect to William Germyn, knight: > > "William de Ufford, earl of Suffolk > ... > > 619. Suffolk. Inq. taken at Framelyngham, 12 March, 5 Richard II. > [1382] The earl held the under-mentioned knights' fees and advowsons > for life by the courtesy of England etc., as above (Hertford > inquisition). ... > > Gosbek and Eston. 2 knights' fees, held by William Germyn, knight." > > The book, 'Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other > Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office', Vol. 23, > 11-15 Henry VI (1432-37), Academic Director and General Editor - > Christine Carpenter, p. 92, states the following with respect to the > wife of John Germyn: > > "John, Duke of Norfolk > ... > > 115. Writ [not extant]. 9 November 1432. > Addressed to the escheator of Norfolk and Suffolk [CFR 1430-37, p. > 103]. > Suffolk. Inquisition. Beccles. 16 January 1433. [Roys]. ... > > The following knights' fee, parts of fees and advowsons are part of > the castle and manor, each whole fee worth 100s. when it falls and > annual values of the advowsons as shown. ... > > Gosbeck and Easton, 2 fees which Richard de Gosbek formerly held and > now Margaret who was the wife of John Germyn holds." > > I have seen the following references to a Katherine de Hemenhale and > Margaret Hemenhale (as per Sir William Jermy's will above) but have no > idea if they are the same individuals. There is a lot of repetition > of "Ralph", "Margaret", etc. in this family. > > (Dame) Katherine de Hemenhale - > http://books.google.ca/books?id=GgYVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA32&dq=%22catherine+de+hemenhale%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5aDGUOL9BsmD2gXBtoCYBA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22catherine%20de%20hemenhale%22&f=false > > http://books.google.ca/books?id=efsUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA74&dq=%22catherine+de+hemenhale%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5aDGUOL9BsmD2gXBtoCYBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22catherine%20de%20hemenhale%22&f=false > > http://archive.org/stream/cu31924092579576#page/n193/mode/2up > > Margaret Hemenhale - http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=37889#n26 > > I would appreciate any assistance in establishing the parentage and > ancestry of Elizabeth (de Hemenhale) wife of Sir William Jermy and > proposed mother of Sir John Jermy. Many thanks! > > Cheers, > > Pete Dear Pete and Matt, My interest is a little more general than yours, but you might like to know about my new biography, The Wife of Cobham, whose subject, Joan Lady Cobham (c. 1370-1434) was married to Sir Robert Hemenhale (d. 1391). It's published next month, and of course includes quite a lot about the Hemenhale family. More info is available on www.lassepress.com, or you can contact me direct on curranpub@gmail.com All best, Susan Curran

In alt.talk.royalty D. Spencer Hines <d_spencerhines@america.com> wrote: > Perhaps Her Majesty, knowing her reign must surely be approaching its final > years, is currently saving those three Garter appointments for her successor > to make. > > DSH I doubt very much that she wishes the Order to depopulate for the remainder of her reign.Given the number of members in their 80s and 90s there would be little left of it at her death. > "Louis Epstein" wrote in message news:ng9kod$i1n$1@reader1.panix.com... > > In alt.talk.royalty D. Spencer Hines <d_spencerhines@america.com> wrote: >> Again, just bald assertions -- no proof. > > The FACT that appointments were NOT made is more > than a "bald assertion" and demands for "proof" > are ridiculous. > >> The more important issue -- if, as a hypothetical, what you say were to be >> scrupulously accurate -- is WHY the Queen is supposedly leaving the Garter >> positions vacant. > > That's something to discuss. > > It was alleged elsewhere that appointments will be made later, > according to one of the Pursuivants Extraordinary...perhaps the > 90th birthday year will be an excuse for the appointments to > be made in the Birthday Honours,though that would cut very close > to the traditional investiture of the year's new Companions. > >> Get Real... >> >> ...And learn how to make a newsworthy post. >> >> Who, What, When, Where, Why & How. >> >> Elementary, My Dear Epstein... >> >> DSH >> >> Exitus Acta Probat >> >> "Louis Epstein" wrote in message news:ng5gps$kgm$1@reader1.panix.com... >> >> In alt.talk.royalty D. Spencer Hines <d_spencerhines@america.com> wrote: >> >>> Let's see some scholarly proof for your sack of unsubstantiated >>> assertions - or substitute a more earthy word of your choice. >>> >>> Facts, quotations, sources and citations -- and hypothetical rationales. >>> >>> ...Otherwise you are just bloviating. >>> >>> DSH >> >> You're being ridiculous. >> It is clearly documented that the announcements of new Companions >> of the Garter have as a rule been made on April 23rd since the 1960s, >> and no such announcement was made this year or last. >> There are three vacancies in the Order,the most recent by the >> death of the late Duke of Wellington at the end of 2014. >> >>> "Louis Epstein" wrote in message news:nfm3l5$1dv$2@reader1.panix.com... >>> >>> In alt.talk.royalty D. Spencer Hines <d_spencerhines@america.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Interesting... >>>> >>>> ...If indeed true. >>> >>> And how would it not be true? >>> No announcement of new Knights was made on the 23rd. >>> >>>> DSH >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>> From: Louis Epstein >>>> >>>> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 5:51 AM >>>> Newsgroups: alt.talk.royalty >>>> >>>> Subject: Days Without Knights! >>>> >>>> Since the 1960s the vacancies among the Companions of the Most Noble >>>> Order >>>> of the Garter have been filled by announcements made on St. George's >>>> Day, >>>> April 23rd. >>>> >>>> Since 2014 there have been three vacancies. >>>> >>>> In 2015 and now again in 2016...no announcements! >>>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>>-=-=- >>>>The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, >>>>at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed. >> >> > >

I've learned that letters testimonial for the ordination of an ancestor, about 1561 in Worcestershire, exist. I understand the purpose of such testimony (to assure conformity), but I wonder if anyone here has experience with them. I'm sure they must be in Latin, but I am wondering about content, length, etc. I've only found two examples online, both very short. Paul Gifford

On 9/05/2016 11:07 AM, Peter Stewart via wrote: > On 6/05/2016 9:05 PM, Peter Stewart via wrote: >> On Friday, May 6, 2016 at 5:10:12 PM UTC+10, Peter G. M. Dale wrote: >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I am curious if there is an authoritative pedigree of the "de Rie" >>> family? I have seen multiple references and narratives regarding Eudo >>> Dapifer, his brothers and his father Hubert I "de Rie". However, I >>> have not seen any authoritative evidence of a pedigree beyond Hubert. >>> I would be appreciative of any insight into whether this has been >>> documented, or otherwise sensibly conjectured. Many thanks. >> The most thorough study I know of is 'Les seigneurs de Ryes en Bessin: études historiques' by Romain-Auguste-Laurent Pezet, originally published in *Mémoires de la Société d'agriculture, sciences, arts et belles-lettres de Bayeux* 8 (1879) 81-196 (http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k433567m/f106), and reprinted in the series Monographies des villes et villages de France (Paris, 2012). >> >> I should have remembered to check this when I was looking for a collateral relationship as suggested by Round - it turns out that Eudo's brother Radulf did have male heirs of his own, so what I had thought a limited possibility is in fact a dead end. >> > This has been challenged off-list, on the grounds that Pezet identified > Eudo de Ryes (who died in 1120) as the dapifer whose nephew Robert of La > Haye, son of Radulf, confirmed in 1105 the donations of Turstin Haldup > and his son Eudes au Capel in 1056/64 founding Lessay abbey. > > The origins of the seigneurial family of La Haye are obscure, but in my > opinion Pezet was most probably correct - the alternative identification > of Robert's uncle Eudo, the dapifer referred to in 1105 when Eudo de > Ryes certainly held the office, with Eudes au Capel who had died in 1089 > makes much less sense. Apart from the peculiarity this would read into > the charter text in question, there is a chronological difficulty: Eudes > au Capel was the father of Radulf who became count of Aversa in 1045. In > other words, Eudes must have been a very old man when he died in 1089 > and it is somewhat unlikely that his son Radulf returned to Normandy and > became sensechal to the count of Mortain as was Radulf the father of > Robert of La Haye. It seems more plausible to me that Robert's father > Radulf was the brother of Eudo de Ryes, that he was sensechal of Mortain > as well as castellan of Nottingham and very probably lord of Crick. > > How they were related to Turstin Haldup and his son Eudes au Capel is a > mystery - the simplest explanation is that Hubert of Ryes, father of > Eudo and Radulf, married a sister of Eudes au Capel. > This is a bit cryptic - the problem is that charters describe Robert of La Haye as 'nepos', which could mean either grandson or nephew, of Eudo. Eudes au Capel's father Turstin Haldup was also known as Richard, and Robert of La Haye had a son named Richard. In a charter dated 1126 the relationships are muddled by a scribal error - the document reads "Robertus de Haia Ricardus et Eudonis nepos dederunt ..." . This probably should mean "Robertus de Haia Eudonis nepos et Ricardus dederunt ..." (Robert of La Haye, nephew of Eudo, and Richard gave ...), referring to Robert and his son Richard. However, Horace Round gave an unconvincing emendation and mistranslated this as "Robert de Haia, grandson of Richard and nephew of Eudo (Ricardi et Eudonis nepos) gave ...", making 'nepos' do a contorted double duty while misrepresenting the plural verb 'dederunt', so that Richard refers to Turstin Haldup. Apart from the charter dated 1105 as interpreted by some, the only source calling Eudes au Capel by the title dapifer is Orderic, who said that Turstin's daughter Emma took refuge with her brother Eudo, dapifer of the duke of Normandy ("ad Eudonem fratrem suum Normannici ducis dapiferum ... secessit"). This may have been confusion on Orderic's part between Eudes au Capel and Eudo de Ryes, whom elsewhere he called dapifer. The 1105 charter is not useful evidence that Orderic was correct, and the lack of any other document making the very long-lived Eudes au Capel into a ducal dapifer is glaring. There was a second dapifer of this name, but he died aged 26 (and his father's name was Stigand). Eudes au Capel married William the Conqueror's half-sister Muriel (apparently as his second wife, since Wace says that they had no children whereas Eudes had a son active in 1045), and if Orderic had known much about him he would most probably have mentioned that relationship. Peter Stewart

On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 4:13:11 PM UTC-3, Bronwen Edwards wrote: > Apologies for getting the link wrong! I go there so often I just have it on my desktop. Bronwen At this point, who doesn't? :-))