Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-15 23:13:06
Thanks, Brunhild. I knew the forum would come up trumps!
So, not only did Clarence's granddaughter marry Buckingham's grandson but Clarence's great-granddaughter married Hastings' great-grandson, whose mother was a daughter of the 2nd Duke of Buckingham (is that Henry x.1483 or Edward x. 1521).
The descendents of three of the most controversial figures of the time just kept marrying each other. Francis and Catherine are, of course, the ancestors of our Aussie Earl.
Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American, very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your midst?
----- Original Message -----
From: brunhild613
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: Are they related?
--- In , "brunhild613"
<brunhild@n...> wrote:
> --- In , "stephenmlark"
> <smlark@t...> wrote:
> > In 1483, Richard executed William, Lord Hastings.
> > Henry Lord Montagu, had a daughter as his heir, Catherine Pole.
> > She married Francis, 2nd Earl of Huntingdon, who was also Lord
> > Hastings.
> > Does anyone know about a family relationship? After all, we
> managed
> > to connect Richard with Buckingham, via Thomas Stafford, and
> Robert
> > Earl of Essex, via Countess Isabel.
>
> Huntingdon is the son of George Hastings and Anne Stafford. George
> was 1st earl (ignoring the Herbert earls), amd Anne was one of the
> 2nd duke of Buckingham's daughters. George was also 3rd Baron
> Hastings. If I remember correctly George was William Lord
Hastings'
> nephew. George was born in 1488 and Francis in 1517. There was an
> Edward Hastings, Lord Hungerford, 1481-1507; unfortunately I can't
> remember where I read a bit of history of the Hastings family so
> that's the best I can do today.
> B
No, a little more -there is another who Edward Hastings was
William's son, 1466-1537 and he seems to have had a grandson Francis
and daughter Mary. The family tree for this omits George in the
middle but identifes Francis as earl of Huntingdon. However I did
think I had come across references to a brother or nephew of
William's continuing the family name.The tree actually had Thomas
Howard in George's place which makes no sense. Either way I can find
nothing about Edward Lord Hungerford, and even his birthdate is
unsure.
B
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
So, not only did Clarence's granddaughter marry Buckingham's grandson but Clarence's great-granddaughter married Hastings' great-grandson, whose mother was a daughter of the 2nd Duke of Buckingham (is that Henry x.1483 or Edward x. 1521).
The descendents of three of the most controversial figures of the time just kept marrying each other. Francis and Catherine are, of course, the ancestors of our Aussie Earl.
Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American, very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your midst?
----- Original Message -----
From: brunhild613
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: Are they related?
--- In , "brunhild613"
<brunhild@n...> wrote:
> --- In , "stephenmlark"
> <smlark@t...> wrote:
> > In 1483, Richard executed William, Lord Hastings.
> > Henry Lord Montagu, had a daughter as his heir, Catherine Pole.
> > She married Francis, 2nd Earl of Huntingdon, who was also Lord
> > Hastings.
> > Does anyone know about a family relationship? After all, we
> managed
> > to connect Richard with Buckingham, via Thomas Stafford, and
> Robert
> > Earl of Essex, via Countess Isabel.
>
> Huntingdon is the son of George Hastings and Anne Stafford. George
> was 1st earl (ignoring the Herbert earls), amd Anne was one of the
> 2nd duke of Buckingham's daughters. George was also 3rd Baron
> Hastings. If I remember correctly George was William Lord
Hastings'
> nephew. George was born in 1488 and Francis in 1517. There was an
> Edward Hastings, Lord Hungerford, 1481-1507; unfortunately I can't
> remember where I read a bit of history of the Hastings family so
> that's the best I can do today.
> B
No, a little more -there is another who Edward Hastings was
William's son, 1466-1537 and he seems to have had a grandson Francis
and daughter Mary. The family tree for this omits George in the
middle but identifes Francis as earl of Huntingdon. However I did
think I had come across references to a brother or nephew of
William's continuing the family name.The tree actually had Thomas
Howard in George's place which makes no sense. Either way I can find
nothing about Edward Lord Hungerford, and even his birthdate is
unsure.
B
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-16 03:35:15
--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
> Thanks, Brunhild. I knew the forum would come up trumps!
> So, not only did Clarence's granddaughter marry Buckingham's
grandson but Clarence's great-granddaughter married Hastings'
great-grandson, whose mother was a daughter of the 2nd Duke of
Buckingham (is that Henry x.1483 or Edward x. 1521).
> The descendents of three of the most controversial figures of the
time just kept marrying each other. Francis and Catherine are, of
course, the ancestors of our Aussie Earl.
>
> Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American,
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Hi Stephen
I am an Aussie and I'm fairly sure there are a few others out there. I
mostly lurk as I don't know as much as most on this foum and find it
very interesting as well as learning so much.
I don't think we have a rightful king mainly because Henry VII won the
crown (unfortunately) by right of conquest. That was his claim wasn't
it? The Aussie Earl was not that big a story down here, certainly not
as big as it was over there, and the media got 95% of the information
and history wrong.
regards
Beth
<smlark@t...> wrote:
> Thanks, Brunhild. I knew the forum would come up trumps!
> So, not only did Clarence's granddaughter marry Buckingham's
grandson but Clarence's great-granddaughter married Hastings'
great-grandson, whose mother was a daughter of the 2nd Duke of
Buckingham (is that Henry x.1483 or Edward x. 1521).
> The descendents of three of the most controversial figures of the
time just kept marrying each other. Francis and Catherine are, of
course, the ancestors of our Aussie Earl.
>
> Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American,
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Hi Stephen
I am an Aussie and I'm fairly sure there are a few others out there. I
mostly lurk as I don't know as much as most on this foum and find it
very interesting as well as learning so much.
I don't think we have a rightful king mainly because Henry VII won the
crown (unfortunately) by right of conquest. That was his claim wasn't
it? The Aussie Earl was not that big a story down here, certainly not
as big as it was over there, and the media got 95% of the information
and history wrong.
regards
Beth
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-16 05:46:38
> Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American,
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
Helen
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
Helen
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-16 10:47:52
----- Original Message -----
From: Helen Rowe
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
> Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American,
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
Helen
In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son, Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation (Edmund's daughter was a nun).
In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later your "departure" from the male line, the better.
This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
From: Helen Rowe
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
> Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or American,
very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians out
there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in your
midst?
Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
Helen
In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son, Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation (Edmund's daughter was a nun).
In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later your "departure" from the male line, the better.
This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-16 13:58:08
--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Helen Rowe
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or
American,
> very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians
out
> there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in
your
> midst?
>
>
>
>
> Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when
reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
>
> By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
>
> Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets
through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through
a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets
through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
>
> Helen
>
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over
the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had
died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation
(Edmund's daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth
of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later
your "departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large
country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
As with the French royal line, only when the absolute nearest in
blood to the last male, first through nearest other males then
nearest females do they start working backwards on the same scheme
to the nearest claimant of previous generations. So if we were to
have, asy, six Edwards in a row, all kings, and each one produced
males and females, but finally come to an end with the last Edward,
the first step would be his brother or sister or nephews and nieces.
If that produces no-one they go back to siblings of the fifth Edward
and look at sixth Edward's cousins. If still nothing they go back to
the generation of the fourth Edward and follow that down to current
descendant, and if they draw more blanks they go back to the third
Edward and so on. But the direct male heir always has precendence
over one by a female, even if that heir is herself female. In France
the problems were caused by the Salic law forbidding female
inheritance, hence the Hundred Years War when Edward III claimed the
French throne in right of his mother Isabella, whose brothers had
all died leaving no children or daughters only. They rejcted his
claim preferring to go backa generation to the uncle and his
descendants of the male line.
B
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
>
<smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Helen Rowe
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or
American,
> very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians
out
> there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in
your
> midst?
>
>
>
>
> Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when
reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
>
> By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
>
> Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets
through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through
a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets
through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
>
> Helen
>
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over
the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had
died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation
(Edmund's daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth
of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later
your "departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large
country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
As with the French royal line, only when the absolute nearest in
blood to the last male, first through nearest other males then
nearest females do they start working backwards on the same scheme
to the nearest claimant of previous generations. So if we were to
have, asy, six Edwards in a row, all kings, and each one produced
males and females, but finally come to an end with the last Edward,
the first step would be his brother or sister or nephews and nieces.
If that produces no-one they go back to siblings of the fifth Edward
and look at sixth Edward's cousins. If still nothing they go back to
the generation of the fourth Edward and follow that down to current
descendant, and if they draw more blanks they go back to the third
Edward and so on. But the direct male heir always has precendence
over one by a female, even if that heir is herself female. In France
the problems were caused by the Salic law forbidding female
inheritance, hence the Hundred Years War when Edward III claimed the
French throne in right of his mother Isabella, whose brothers had
all died leaving no children or daughters only. They rejcted his
claim preferring to go backa generation to the uncle and his
descendants of the male line.
B
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-16 16:10:18
----- Original Message -----
From: brunhild613
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Are they related?
--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Helen Rowe
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or
American,
> very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians
out
> there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in
your
> midst?
>
>
>
>
> Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when
reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
>
> By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
>
> Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets
through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through
a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets
through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
>
> Helen
>
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over
the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had
died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation
(Edmund's daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth
of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later
your "departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large
country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
As with the French royal line, only when the absolute nearest in
blood to the last male, first through nearest other males then
nearest females do they start working backwards on the same scheme
to the nearest claimant of previous generations. So if we were to
have, asy, six Edwards in a row, all kings, and each one produced
males and females, but finally come to an end with the last Edward,
the first step would be his brother or sister or nephews and nieces.
If that produces no-one they go back to siblings of the fifth Edward
and look at sixth Edward's cousins. If still nothing they go back to
the generation of the fourth Edward and follow that down to current
descendant, and if they draw more blanks they go back to the third
Edward and so on. But the direct male heir always has precendence
over one by a female, even if that heir is herself female. In France
the problems were caused by the Salic law forbidding female
inheritance, hence the Hundred Years War when Edward III claimed the
French throne in right of his mother Isabella, whose brothers had
all died leaving no children or daughters only. They rejcted his
claim preferring to go backa generation to the uncle and his
descendants of the male line.
B
I am pleased that we have "taken" some of the figures of Richard's reign - Buckingham and Hastings - and shown them to have families, not to be free-standing.
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
From: brunhild613
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Are they related?
--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Helen Rowe
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: Are they related?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Incidentally, most of the posters on here are British or
American,
> very occasionally Canadian. Are there any Australian Ricardians
out
> there? If so, what do you think of having the rightful King in
your
> midst?
>
>
>
>
> Another Australian here. It was regarded as abit of a joke when
reported on a couple of current affairs shows here.
>
> By the way Michael Hastings is a Republican!
>
> Query. Michael Hastings is descended from the Plantagenets
through a female, Margaret of Salisbury. If one is claiming through
a female there would be other descendents from earlier Plantagenets
through daughters so wouldn't they have a better claim?
>
> Helen
>
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over
the Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had
died). Of course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation
(Edmund's daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth
of Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later
your "departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large
country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
As with the French royal line, only when the absolute nearest in
blood to the last male, first through nearest other males then
nearest females do they start working backwards on the same scheme
to the nearest claimant of previous generations. So if we were to
have, asy, six Edwards in a row, all kings, and each one produced
males and females, but finally come to an end with the last Edward,
the first step would be his brother or sister or nephews and nieces.
If that produces no-one they go back to siblings of the fifth Edward
and look at sixth Edward's cousins. If still nothing they go back to
the generation of the fourth Edward and follow that down to current
descendant, and if they draw more blanks they go back to the third
Edward and so on. But the direct male heir always has precendence
over one by a female, even if that heir is herself female. In France
the problems were caused by the Salic law forbidding female
inheritance, hence the Hundred Years War when Edward III claimed the
French throne in right of his mother Isabella, whose brothers had
all died leaving no children or daughters only. They rejcted his
claim preferring to go backa generation to the uncle and his
descendants of the male line.
B
I am pleased that we have "taken" some of the figures of Richard's reign - Buckingham and Hastings - and shown them to have families, not to be free-standing.
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-17 04:35:15
This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large country, of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
No. I live in Melbourne, Victoria.
Helen
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
No. I live in Melbourne, Victoria.
Helen
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Are they related?
2004-05-17 05:05:29
Hi
I used to live quite close only 1 1/2 hours from there, in a very
small town on the border of NSW and VIC but recently I have moved to
Wollongong which is 1 hour south of Sydney on the coast. I do go down
to Narrandera often which is very
close to Jerilderie. Jerilderie is a lovely town and the area around
is what I consider to be paradise, I can understand why the Aussie
Earl doesn't want to leave it.
regards
beth
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over the
Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had died). Of
course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation (Edmund's
daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth of
Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later your
"departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large country,
of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
I used to live quite close only 1 1/2 hours from there, in a very
small town on the border of NSW and VIC but recently I have moved to
Wollongong which is 1 hour south of Sydney on the coast. I do go down
to Narrandera often which is very
close to Jerilderie. Jerilderie is a lovely town and the area around
is what I consider to be paradise, I can understand why the Aussie
Earl doesn't want to leave it.
regards
beth
> In fact, no. If a man has one son and one daughter, his son has
one daughter only and the original man's daughter has children, the
son's daughter precedes the daughter's sons.
>
> i.e. Richard, Duke of York is the original. Clarence is his son,
Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, is his daughter.
> Lady Margaret is Clarence's daughter and took precedence over the
Suffolk line (when Clarence was un-attainted and Warwick had died). Of
course, the Suffolk line died out in the third generation (Edmund's
daughter was a nun).
>
> In other words, females from the male lane trump males from the
female line. Other claimants would have been through an even earlier
female line than Lady Margaret, Catherine Pole, Countess Elizabeth of
Moira and Countess Barbara (Michael's mother). The later your
"departure" from the male line, the better.
>
> This next question is also for Beth: Australia is a large country,
of course, but do either of you live near Jerilderie, NSW?
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.