Post by johntanner on Jan 27, 2008 13:56:23 GMT -5
I am now satisfied that Trencrom’s analysis, with one Udon but two Richards, is essentially right. I apologise to all for having rushed into the discussion without having properly absorbed all that had been said before.
There are just two matters that I am not totally happy about.
Firstly, the statement in the second case that seems to say that Udon died and then Jane in 1504/5. I now suggest that this is a clerical error by the original scribe. If you move the phrase “that is to say in the feast of St Michael the Archangel in the 20th year of the reign of our late sovereign Lord King Henry 7th (1504/5)” to a point several lines earlier to follow “after his decease”, then it makes sense and is consistent with what is said in the first case. Perhaps the scribe wrote the version that we have from his rough notes, and knew that the date had to go somewhere, but he chose the wrong place to put it.
The second difficulty that I see is that the time scale seems rather short for this line:
John Tregitheowe died 1504/5 Udon Jane Richard born about 1480.
Even allowing only 20 years per generation, John would have to have lived to about 85. Not impossible, but a bit worrying.
Ian, I do not see the two daughters of Udon having the same name as being a problem in this instance, even if we cannot say precisely why it happened. The Visitation says, rightly or wrongly, that both had the same two parents. Nor do I see that having two daughters Jane helps to explain the two difficulties that I raised above.
I do not wish at the moment to enter the discussions about the family of the 1643 Thomas Curnow, but in that case my guess is that two different mothers were involved.
Post by Cornish Terrier on Feb 10, 2008 11:32:03 GMT -5
Hi John - and nice to be 'talking' with you again.
Both your points are well taken and I have stated in previous postings regarding this problem that I am more of an 'observer' rather than a 'participant' in the conversation - except for when I see something that I can contribute that may be of assistance.
I see your point about the two Janes but, without having read diligently all the postings on the subject, I still offer the possibility that one of these two died before the second 'suit' occurred.
As for latter day families with two children of the same name - yes it did seem to happen.
In the 1643 CURNOW case - I reckon that, many years ago, I raised the same point of there having been two marriages involved.
The Will clearly states that there were two sons named John but, as you indicated, this discussion should be left for a later time and, probably, a different forum.
Let me see what I have to answer on other sections of the Board.