Fw: Giving Anne "Harling" an ancestry
Leo
or take a year. Her first husband died in 1462. She was then 40 give or take
a year, she would have been 78 roughly when she died. Pretty "great age" I
would say in 1498.
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: "wjhonson" <wjho...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-me...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Giving Anne "Harling" an ancestry
> One quibble about the next heiress of Gonville Manor.
> It is said that this Margaret, was the sister of Anne, Lady Scropes
> father. I find that hard to believe.
>
> When Anne de Herling, Lady Scrope died without issue on 18 Sep 1498
> she was then described as "of a great age". Her first husband William
> Chamberlain, K.G. was certainly born by 1413, possibly as much as 40
> years earlier for all I know. But we do know that he was Governor of
> Craill upon Oise in France, in 1436 if not earlier. By the way, he
> has a monument at East Herling, but I don't know that it says anything
> on it.
>
> If Anne were only say 60 ish I wouldn't call that "a great age", so
> apparently she had to be at least 70. Her parents Sir Robert and his
> wife Joan Gonville were *already married* in 1420 when that year
> holding the Manor of Gonvilles and he is already that year called
> "miles".
>
> When Robert de Herling was slain in Paris in 1435 it was while trying
> to hold that city for the king.
>
> There is a site here
> http://www.themcs.org/churches/East%20Harling%20St%20Peter%20and%20St%20Paul.html
> which apparently is given details from M.I.s I would suppose, although
> they don't make that very clear.
>
> They state, fwiw that John de Herling, Knt father of this Robert was
> born 1379 and died Jun 1403. That gives very narrow range for when
> Robert himself could be born.
>
> But for my purpose it casts doubt upon the statement that Margaret in
> 1498 then wife of Robert de Tudenham, Knt was this Robert's "sister".
> She would have been quite ancient at the time, certainly well into her
> 90s. That simply isn't credible without a direct quote from the
> primary source material.
>
> Will Johnson
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
wjhonson
> If Anne's parents "were" married by 1420, Anne was say born about 1420, give
> or take a year. Her first husband died in 1462. She was then 40 give or take
> a year, she would have been 78 roughly when she died. Pretty "great age" I
> would say in 1498.
> Leo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
> To: <gen-medie...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 1:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Giving Anne "Harling" an ancestry
>
> > One quibble about the next heiress of Gonville Manor.
> > It is said that this Margaret, was the sister of Anne, Lady Scropes
> > father. I find that hard to believe.
>
> > When Anne de Herling, Lady Scrope died without issue on 18 Sep 1498
> > she was then described as "of a great age". Her first husband William
> > Chamberlain, K.G. was certainly born by 1413, possibly as much as 40
> > years earlier for all I know. But we do know that he was Governor of
> > Craill upon Oise in France, in 1436 if not earlier. By the way, he
> > has a monument at East Herling, but I don't know that it says anything
> > on it.
>
> > If Anne were only say 60 ish I wouldn't call that "a great age", so
> > apparently she had to be at least 70. Her parents Sir Robert and his
> > wife Joan Gonville were *already married* in 1420 when that year
> > holding the Manor of Gonvilles and he is already that year called
> > "miles".
>
> > When Robert de Herling was slain in Paris in 1435 it was while trying
> > to hold that city for the king.
>
> > There is a site here
> > which apparently is given details from M.I.s I would suppose, although
> > they don't make that very clear.
>
> > They state, fwiw that John de Herling, Knt father of this Robert was
> > born 1379 and died Jun 1403. That gives very narrow range for when
> > Robert himself could be born.
>
> > But for my purpose it casts doubt upon the statement that Margaret in
> > 1498 then wife of Robert de Tudenham, Knt was this Robert's "sister".
> > She would have been quite ancient at the time, certainly well into her
> > 90s. That simply isn't credible without a direct quote from the
> > primary source material.
>
> > Will Johnson
>
>
>
Leo you're addressing something that I did not dispute.
I didn't dispute that Anne might be "of a great age" in 1498.
What I said was that she died s.p. and her heir was Margaret
Tuddenham. I'm not certain of the exact wording used to describe this
heir in the primary documentation, but someone has decided that she
was the "sister of her father". In other words, Anne's aunt or
possibly half-aunt I suppose.
Either way, if Anne herself were "a great age" than my thesis was,
that it's likely, unless this documentation clearly states that
Margaret is her aunt, that someone has misplaced this Margaret who,
would have to be in her 90s I suppose at this time.
That, is what I find unlikely. Not Anne's age.
Will