Winslow Families
mhol...@mac.com
1400-1700 is out and available for purchase. I have a copy at hand
and it appears to be well researched and informative.
jay0...@gmail.com
I wonder if you can tell us whether the book uncovers any new
information about the purported royal/noble connections of the
Winslows?
Thanks,
Jay
mhol...@mac.com
>
> I wonder if you can tell us whether the book uncovers any new
> information about the purported royal/noble connections of the
> Winslows?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jay
Yes. And No. Buy the book.
David Teague
Would you consent to share information on the book's cost & publisher?
Thanks in advance,
David Teague
> -------------------------------
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
Rediscover Hotmail®: Now available on your iPhone or BlackBerry
http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_Mobile2_042009
jonme...@gmail.com
> On Apr 17, 11:02 am, jay03...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I wonder if you can tell us whether the book uncovers any new
> > information about the purported royal/noble connections of the
> > Winslows?
>
Yes and no indeed.
I just took a walk over to the NEHGS library, where the book is
prominently displayed in the first floor bookstore.
Briefly, on leafing through it:
- the proposed Greville descent is out
- but the author proposes another Neville-Beaufort-Edward III
descent.
And, yes, we'll all have to read the book. It's at least 200 pages of
documentation.
Tony Hoskins
http://www.newenglandancestors.org/publications/45_7152.asp
T.
Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
Sonoma County Archivist
Sonoma County History and Genealogy Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404
Tony Hoskins
I look forward to reading the whys and wherefores for the dismissal of this - whether merely for lack of clinching proof or outright proof to the contrary.
mhol...@mac.com
> "the proposed Greville descent is out"
>
> I look forward to reading the whys and wherefores for the dismissal of this - whether merely for lack of clinching proof or outright proof to the contrary.
I've been reading and reviewing Brandon Fradd's new book on the
Winslow Families of medieval England 1400-1700. The first thing that
comes to my mind is how unbelievable it is that it's 2009 already.
This book was written in large part to continue the research of the
late Marshall Kirk whose 2000 NEHGR article Loving Cosens was also
about the Winslows of Massachusetts and their potential royal and
gentry ancestry.
I helped Marshall with the the Loving Cosens article. I worked at
Widener Library from 1996 to 1999 and retrieved many items for him. I
am also a Winslow descendant and I proofread several drafts of the
article. I believe I'm mentioned in two footnotes [the entire article
is reproduced in the book as Appendix A]. Marshall died in 2005.
In any case, Brandon (as I did) thought Marshall had an excellent
theory and set out to prove it. The volume is his research effort to
that end. In short, Fradd feels that Kirk's theory is no longer
credible. I have to say that Fradd's discovery of the will of Lady
Elizabeth (Willoughby) Greville is very important and does shut the
door on the thought that an unnamed older daughter of hers was the
wife of Kenelm Winslow, the grandfather of the Winslow brothers.
Fradd details the relationships between the Buck and Winslow families
and conjectures a Buck descent. However, Fradd is very cautious and,
in short, does not even firmly state that the father of EdwardA
Winslow was KenelmB Winslow [he does give five main points why that
relationship was true]. The Buck descent would still explain why both
Dorothy Hesilrige and Elizabeth Pelham mentioned Gov. Edward Winslow
of Plymouth as cousin in letters both to him and John Winthrop. The
Buck descent is not new, but one of the many explanations that was
promoted forty years ago.
The book is unusual insofar as it is a research notebook of all
pertinent documents found, none of which shed any light on the
Winslows' ancestry. Several other Winslow families, some branches of
other families, are given where they were pieced together. I wish
there had been a Buck genealogical section, since that family plays
such an important role.
So, I'm left a bit perplexed. I have to believe that Winslow,
Hesilrige, and Pelham were cognizant of their fifth cousinship via the
Neville family [a younger brother of the 2nd Lord Latimer]. Or I have
to believe that both Fulke and Elizabeth failed to mention a daughter
who was ostensibly living close by. I find neither situation
appealing or believable. I have a feeling something else may be
happening, but what?
See also: "Clues to the Ancestry of Winslow of Droitwich" TAG 41
(1965 ):168-175
"Governor Edward Winslow's Mother's Family: The Olivers" TAG 42 (1966):
52-55
"Mayflower Winslows: Yeomen or Gentlemen" by John G. Hunt NEHGR 121
(1967):25-9 and NEHGR 122 (1968):175-8 and 124 (1970):182-3.
mhol...@mac.com
> > So, I'm left a bit perplexed. I have to believe that Winslow,
> > Hesilrige, and Pelham were cognizant of their fifth cousinship via the
> > Neville family [a younger brother of the 2nd Lord Latimer]. Or I have
> > to believe that both Fulke and Elizabeth failed to mention a daughter
> > who was ostensibly living close by. I find neither situation
> > appealing or believable. I have a feeling something else may be
> > happening, but what?
>
That would be my initial reaction. His second wife was Susanna (???)
White. Was she a Fuller or not, well, there's a host of articles for
and against that. Wouldn't it be something to find out she was the
second cousin of the Hesilriges and Pelhams. I noted that the letters
are directed to greet "my cousin" Edward Winslow, when three of his
brothers were also living in New England. Why not say greet all my
Winslow cousins, etc.
In advance of Marshall's theory, I always wanted to examine the extant
correspondence of the two Lord Conways who were also Greville
descendants and were on the privy council. I wanted to see if they in
any letters mention Winslow as a cousin. I have not yet had the time
(or money) to go to Kew and make a search for that purpose.
Tony Hoskins
I ordered this book for my library a couple of months ago, but it has yet to appear. As another Winslow descendant myself (John and Mary (Chilton) Winslow), I am eager to see it. You wrote:
" I have to say that Fradd's discovery of the will of Lady Elizabeth (Willoughby) Greville is very important and does shut the door on the thought that an unnamed older daughter of hers was the wife of Kenelm Winslow, the grandfather of the Winslow brothers."
This fascinates me - and, at the risk of earning a repeat of the admonition, "read the book", I have to ask why this might be? Does the will explicitly name all children? If not, as you know, innumerable wills of that period name a child, or some children, while not making the vaguest reference to others, demonstrably alive at the time.
As I did when discussing this years ago with Marshall (how he is missed) I cannot think a more distant connection than the one he posits (by process of elimination, so far to my observation and knowledge, the only/best one) could account for the frequent references to "cozens".
But, I await the book impatiently!
Best wishes,
Tony
WJho...@aol.com
I barely know my third cousins and I'm a genealogist! (Or I pretend to be.)
I think it's more likely there is some error in the charts and these people
are closer related than has been stated so far.
Will Johnson
**************
Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web.
Try the new Email Toolbar now!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/mail/download.html?ncid=txtlnkusdown00000027)
mhol...@mac.com
Kenelm is not as rare as we might think it today. This is important
in the Kenelm Bucke as ancestor of Kenelm-B Winslow. However, if
there's one thing that is disappointing is that no decent chronology
can be pieced together beyond the marriage date of Edward-A and
Magdalen Oliver in 1596. Fradd takes the position that Edward was
born ca. 1570 and adjust the previous generations to that. Edward's
birth in 1560 is apocryphal, but Kirk accepted it. Those 10 years
certainly makes a difference is figuring out Edward's parents. If
Madgaden is the same as the one baptized in 1566, I favor 1560 rather
than 1570. And here's the real fun: There is an Edward Winslow,
baptized, son of John in 1568. Do we all want to go down that rabbit
hole?
David Teague
I know a number of my more distant cousins -- in fact, my housemate/landlady is, at closest relationship, a 4th cousin once removed, I think. However, I suspect that if large portions of my father's family hadn't been in more or less the same area for most of the last 250 years or so, I probably wouldn't be able to make that claim. Also, my knowing the precise relationships involved with these people is the result of work and study on my own part, more than it is anything else. The population stability of piedmont N.C. until very recent times allowed me to know that fairly large numbers of people (on both sides of my family) were "kin," but after about 4 -5 generations away from the common ancestors, not much more than that fairly basic recognition. I suspect that many people in past centuries also had that sort of experience.
David Teague
> -------------------------------
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Life without walls.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1b_explore_042009
jonme...@gmail.com
> > The relationship came through one of Edward Winslow's wives?
>
> That would be my initial reaction. His second wife was Susanna (???)
> White. Was she a Fuller or not, well, there's a host of articles for
> and against that. Wouldn't it be something to find out she was the
> second cousin of the Hesilriges and Pelhams. I noted that the letters
> are directed to greet "my cousin" Edward Winslow, when three of his
> brothers were also living in New England. Why not say greet all my
> Winslow cousins, etc.
At the time, would someone have been called a "cousin" if the
relationship was only through marriage?
ABB
royala...@msn.com
> > At the time, would someone have been called a "cousin" if the
> > relationship was only through marriage?
Yes, in this time period.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
royala...@msn.com
Dear Martin ~
It sounds to me more like no and no to me.
I never accepted the proposed Greville-Willoughby descent for the
Winslow family advanced by Marshall Kirk. In fact, I saw an advance
copy of the Kirk article and advised the editor of the Register not to
publish it. The editor chose to publish it anyway, even though I
thought it was seriously flawed. If Mr. Fradd has new evidence to
disprove this connection, well and good.
As for the older proposed Winslow descent from the Buck and Neville
families, that certainly remains a possibility and is more viable in
my opinion. However, I haven't yet seen any evidence which comes
close to proving it. If Mr. Fradd has found new evidence to support
this connection, I'd like to know about it.
Matthew Hovious
> The book is unusual insofar as it is a research notebook of all
> pertinent documents found, none of which shed any light on the
> Winslows' ancestry. Several other Winslow families, some branches of
> other families, are given where they were pieced together.
I have no known Winslow descent and don't plan to read the book, but
did want to say a word in support of the inclusion of (apparently)
extraneous documents even when they ultimately shed no light on the
family of interest. One obvious advantage to preparing such a study as
a book rather than an article is that it gives space to include wills,
chancery suits etc that have been examined because something about
them piqued the researcher's interest; but which, when read, proved
disappointing. My experience has been that in articles where material
deemed irrelevant is not mentioned to save space, eventually readers
pose questions along the lines of 'Yes, but what about the will
of....?' At least by putting the whole accumulation in everyone's
hands at once, one can preemptively say 'Tried that' and save everyone
interested some time.
Nathaniel Taylor
<e43e4db1-9995-45a4...@g19g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
Matthew Hovious <dominus_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
This is true, but the publication of such material in the form of a
printed book is a disappearing luxury (as Mr. Fradd is certainly aware).
One equivalent step would be for the leading genealogical journals to
set up a system where documents and secondary materials that contribute
indirectly to the preparation of a (concise) published article might be
made more fully available, in durable format, on a sponsored web server
as a companion to the printed study. This has happened in other
disciplines but not yet in genealogy.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
peter...@yahoo.ca
Peter D. A. Warwick
padre...@hotmail.com
> How can Edward Winslow senior possibly be the son of Kenelm Winslow if Edward was born in 1560 and Kenelm was born in 1551? I'm VERY surprised no one has raised this issue before. In order for Edward to be the son of this Kenelm either Edward was born later, say about 1570, or Kenelm was born earlier, say about 1541.
>
> Peter D. A. Warwick