The date of 1540 for the will seems to be reasonable, given that the son appears to have been the rector in 1835. Thank you for the information re the usual citing of wills. I have contacted TNA and will update when I get a reply. Helenor Jones

On 06/02/2015 14:28, hownhelcymru wrote: > The date of 1540 for the will seems to be reasonable, given that the son appears to have been the rector in 1835. > Thank you for the information re the usual citing of wills. Pardon? There's close on 300 years difference. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail>

> On 06/02/2015 14:28, hownhelcymru wrote: > > The date of 1540 for the will seems to be reasonable, given that the son appears to have been the rector in 1835. > > Thank you for the information re the usual citing of wills. > > > Pardon? There's close on 300 years difference. Even given that some clergy were long lived, this is going it. Doesn't even seem likely that the son of a man dying in 1540 would be alive in 1635 even, so is the missing figure 1535? EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society