WRG-Robot: Automated changes by RenameBot

2010-03-31T12:49:10Z

Automated changes by RenameBot

Tdoyle at 14:08, 24 November 2009

2009-11-24T14:08:30Z

Show changes

Tdoyle: New page: Back | Forward | Up

2009-11-24T14:01:58Z

New page: Back | Forward | Up

New page

@@ Line 154: / Line 154: @@
 . You wrote, " ... this would mean that his eldest son Robert was still living in 1645, but we have him listed as having died before 1638. Do you know why we have him listed thus?"  Yes.  It comes from the matriculation records of his younger brothers.  If Constantine was second son in 1638, then Thomas, the eventual heir, must have been the first son, so all older sons must have died before that date, including Robert.  There seems to have been a clerical error, either in the index, or, more likely, in the original document, and it should have said '''''Thomas''''' Whitney, esq., son and heir.
-. You wrote, "If the Eustace Whitney who married Elizabeth Freville in 1301 was actually [[Family:Whitney, Eustace de (c1287-c1352)|Eustace de Whitney (c1287-c1352)]], then he had to have been born before our estimated date of 1287. Either we have this Eustace's birthyear too late, or this marriage was a second marriage for his father [[Family:Whitney, Eustace de (b1256-a1301)|Eustace]]."  The birth dates we have for the early generations are rough estimates and extrapolations from the ages of later generations.  That means that they are likely to be off by a certain amount.  My guess is that Eustace was born somewhat earlier, perhaps 1275-1280, and his father accordingly earlier.  That also means that his son Robert probably was born before 1318, perhaps 1302-1307, and later generations might be accordingly somewhat older (possibly enough older to include an extra generation we don't show).
+. You wrote, "If the Eustace Whitney who married Elizabeth Freville in 1301 was actually [[Family:Whitney, Eustace de (b1283-c1352)|Eustace de Whitney (c1287-c1352)]], then he had to have been born before our estimated date of 1287. Either we have this Eustace's birthyear too late, or this marriage was a second marriage for his father [[Family:Whitney, Eustace de (b1256-a1301)|Eustace]]."  The birth dates we have for the early generations are rough estimates and extrapolations from the ages of later generations.  That means that they are likely to be off by a certain amount.  My guess is that Eustace was born somewhat earlier, perhaps 1275-1280, and his father accordingly earlier.  That also means that his son Robert probably was born before 1318, perhaps 1302-1307, and later generations might be accordingly somewhat older (possibly enough older to include an extra generation we don't show).
 - [[User:Rlward|Robert]] - [[User talk:Rlward|Talk to me]] 17:17, 19 November 2006 (CST)

User:Tdoyle/2006 4Q - Revision history

WRG-Robot: Automated changes by RenameBot

Tdoyle at 14:08, 24 November 2009

Tdoyle: New page: Back | Forward | Up