Roscruge tangle... Aug 4, 2007 2:05:39 GMT -5
Post by Zenobia on Aug 4, 2007 2:05:39 GMT -5
trencrom said:Zenobia, a few more thoughts on this matter:
The addressee being Thomas Cromwel as chancellor has me wondering about the dates 1515-8 for these suits. Wasn't Thomas Cromwell only chancellor of England in the latter 1530s?
Now I am really wondering... The document also called him Archbishop of York, but according to Wikipedia, Thomas Cromwell is not listed in the list of Archbishops of York. I am also having a hard time determining when (if ever) he was chancellor... but you are right - if he was, it was much later.
It was the PRO that dated this petition at that time period, and I swear the first info I found online showed Cromwell being Chancellor then - I must have been hallucinating...
Although not certain, given that this part of the pedigree is pre-Reformation I would assume that the medieval laws pertaining to consanguinity were still applicable.
You are almost certainly correct, so that leaves only the step-sister/step-brother marriage scenario. Of course, then we get into affinity... But dispensions were always available.
Re my earlier post: I was assuming that Udon was still alive at the time of Richard (I)'s claim. However Richard (II)'s claim that Jane died in 1504, and that Udon predeceased her, would appear to contradict this. I am now wondering whether Richard (I) would have had any entitlements to the rentals once his wife had died.
Well, Udon would have to be alive at the first petiton, since she is included as one of the petitioners. That is why I think now that it was much earlier, and was re-written and included with Richard (II)'s petition to lend weight to his claim.
This, of course, could blow my Tregonwell theory, as it could give her plenty of time to remarry if Richard (I) died shortly thereafter.
Had she been dead, incidentally, her husband would have had claim on her lands until his death by the 'courtesy of England' law.