But not only do you have to ignore the ages in the IPMs of his nieces Elizabeth and Eleanor in 1376: "aged 24 years and more" and "aged 30 years and more" His age is given as "aged 50 and more" in the IPM of Gerard Braybroke in 1403. I don't see how you can argue that he is the Nicholas Wodhull, executor of his brother John in 1348, who had to of been born by 1327. On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 1:45:52 PM UTC-7, [email protected] wrote: > Specifically, Hansen cites a single pedigree, created some 100 years after the fact, used in a few legal battles amongst the same group of individuals, legal battles which have been included in the Tropenell Cartulary. > > For the time period you'd actually expect to find Thomas, the cartulary entries have no sign of him. Those entries have the same individuals found in the IPMs. > > If you follow all the primary records (ignoring IPM birth estimates), you seem to end up with a Nicholas that looks like this ... > > Born (bef 1328) > Age 21+: Executor to his brother's will (1349, assuming adult by this time) > Age 38+: Marries Margaret Foxcrote (1366, and they receive her inheritance) > Age 48+: Inherits from his nieces (1376) > Age 52+: Sheriff of Wiltshire (1380) > Age 55+: No longer sheriff of Wiltshire (1383) > Age 82+: Dies (1410) > > ... an individual who seems to live quite long, but a possible timeline, if we ignore the IPM birth estimates. He would be almost 20 years older than the closest IPM estimate of 1346, or before. If he were somehow an executor as a minor, he'd still need to be born by 1336, when the father dies, making the closest estimate still a decade off. The first question, I guess, would be ... how accurate we should expect IPM birth estimates for heirs, to be? If there's no surprise if they aren't accurate, then there's no real problem.

Every single one says "and more". I'm considering that to be the only accurate part. The numbers can't all be right, as they're all different.