McCain

14 views
Skip to first unread message

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 22, 2008, 11:22:58 PM3/22/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

about the question of RD validation:

I do not have any of the RD books - nor do I think I
would really need them; there are so many in this
group who can check those books...


Reitwiesner's work, the ancestral table of senator
McCain, places to positions 84 and 85
a Fenner - Coddington couple:

84 Richard Fenner, b. ... , d. New Bern, N. C., ...
[by 1768]
m. ... 1745
85 Ann Coddington, b. ... 1731, d. New Bern, N. C., 12
July 1777

of these, Ann Coddington probably was born in Ireland,
and presumably in vicinity of Dublin. She anyway ended
up to North Carolina. She thus would be that queried
gateway immigrant.

According to Reitwiesner's collection, that Ann
Coddington was daughter of a mr Dixie Coddington, of
Athlumney, b. Holmpatrick, co. Dublin, ... 1693, d.
Queen Street, Dublin, ... Sept. 1776, and his wife
Hannah Waller, b. ... 1705, d. ... 15 Jan. 1769

Reitwiesner mentions the said Hannah Waller (whose
patriline seemingly dwelled in Ireland for at least
three generations, in 1600s and early 1700s) as
granddaughter of John Waller, of Kilmainham castle.
Who in turn would be son of that Robert Thomas Waller,
b 1609, possibly not mentioned in a will, whom
Reitwiesner believes as a son of that Ann Hampden.

Much of this lineage depends on the maternity of said
Robert Thomas Waller, if he existed.

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 22, 2008, 11:17:06 PM3/22/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

AdrianBnjmBurke

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 12:09:39 AM3/23/08
to
>       ___________________________________________________________________________­_________

> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

i have many of those books but i am not familiar with this supposed RD
ancestor - not too mention the fact that tracing such people in
ireland is pretty tricky...at least in my experience...

WJho...@aol.com

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 1:34:21 AM3/23/08
to qs...@yahoo.com, GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

In a message dated 3/22/2008 8:24:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
qs...@yahoo.com writes:

Robert Thomas Waller,
b 1609, possibly not mentioned in a will, whom
Reitwiesner believes as a son of that Ann Hampden.

Much of this lineage depends on the maternity of said
Robert Thomas Waller, if he existed.>>

--------------------------------------------------------------
Right. That was the basis of my previous posting on this topic.
Whether Burke's Landed Irish Gentry which was quoted earlier, can actually
be substantiated.
So that's the weak link, imho. Connecting the Wallers of Ireland back to
Anne Hampden.
We have a source. The source isn't really very good, esp in light of
possibly no confirmatory contemporary documentation, and the slightly negative
evidence of not being mentioned in the will of his father, nor in the codicil
*drawn specifically* to include a newborn son. And the additional negative
evidence, that earlier versions of the same pedigree, probably from the same
underlying source (the Waller family), did not include this link.

Will Johnson

**************Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL
Home.
(http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15?ncid=aolhom00030000000001)

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 2:20:27 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

I have somehow lost that date, so:
what actually was the dating of the said will, and
dating of the said codicil.

Robert Thomas, whenever born (was it 1609 in some
text), may have been born after the sealing of the
will itself, and added possibly by another codicil,
which is not in the reviewed documents. Or something
like that.

His purported birth year signals that if he was son of
that family, his mother most likely was that Anne.

an younger son was somewhat likely to pass to other
parts of the empire, such as to Dublin... plausible,
that.

Better-class people even in Ireland, would presumably
get to documented fairly much in 1600s, particularly
if they owned estates, or were state officers...
Do I recall correctly that one or two of them even had
a castle or something like?
I have been having an impression that it is Irish
peasants whose roots are hard to trace.
These Wallers, were they Anglicans? state church
parishes kept records already in those days in Dublin
and environs, right?

Everything of course depends on whether the requisite
lineage is attested by near-contemporary documents,
there in Ireland.

--- WJho...@aol.com wrote:


____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

WJho...@aol.com

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 2:31:19 AM3/23/08
to qs...@yahoo.com, GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

In a message dated 3/22/2008 11:21:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
qs...@yahoo.com writes:

Robert Thomas, whenever born (was it 1609 in some
text), may have been born after the sealing of the
will itself, and added possibly by another codicil,
which is not in the reviewed documents. Or something
like that.


-------------------------
The will was dated 1615.
I provided a link to the extract earlier.

WJho...@aol.com

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 2:33:18 AM3/23/08
to qs...@yahoo.com, GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

In a message dated 3/22/2008 11:21:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
qs...@yahoo.com writes:

Everything of course depends on whether the requisite
lineage is attested by near-contemporary documents,
there in Ireland.>>


---------------------------
Not only in Ireland.
If we could find any documentation of any such son "baptised in 1609" that
would help as well.
And that would be in English records.

Then we'd need someone to show that he went to Ireland and started a family
there for some reason.

Will Johnson

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:32:40 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...


____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:43:53 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...


____________________________________________________________________________________

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:47:02 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...


____________________________________________________________________________________

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:22:40 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...


____________________________________________________________________________________

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:48:28 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...


____________________________________________________________________________________

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:52:14 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...

The Dalyell ascent, through mother, also leads to
Robert the Bruce - there's Katherine, countess of
Craufurd, daughter of king Robert II by his second
wife Euphemia of Ross

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 5:23:58 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 5:02:19 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...

The Dalyell ascent, through mother, also leads to
Robert the Bruce - there's Katherine, countess of
Craufurd, daughter of king Robert II by his second
wife Euphemia of Ross

____________________________________________________________________________________

M.Sjostrom

unread,
Mar 23, 2008, 4:15:30 AM3/23/08
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

observe that the inestimable Thomas Monteith (and his
Dalyell and Menteith parents) have already one other
presidential line in Leo's database:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00435038&tree=LEO

It is to be hoped that those Menteiths were validly
linked to the Bruces of Airth...

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages