Difference between revisions of "Archive:Reunion 2004, Ward, Slide 15"
From WRG
Jump to navigationJump to searchm |
(Automated changes by RenameBot) |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| − | [[ | + | [[Reunion 2004, Ward, Slide 14|Back]] |
---- | ---- | ||
Copyright © 2004, 2006, [[User:Rlward|Robert L. Ward]] and the [[Whitney Research Group]] | Copyright © 2004, 2006, [[User:Rlward|Robert L. Ward]] and the [[Whitney Research Group]] | ||
Latest revision as of 04:08, 13 May 2010
Miscellaneous > Whitney Family Reunion, 2004 > Reunion 2004, Ward, Slide 15
Thoughts on Thomas Whitney of Westminster
by Robert L. Ward
26 June 2004
Connection to the Main Line
I propose that Robert, younger son of James and Blanche (Milbourne) Whitney, born say 1500, was the same as Robert Whitney of Castleton whose will was dated 1555, and father of Thomas Whitney of Westminster. That would make John1 Whitney a second cousin of Sir James Whitney of the 1587 will and entail. Neither he nor his nephew were the heir male of the family, since George Whitney of Icomb, Gloucestershire, uncle of Sir James, had male issue.
The theorized descent then would be:
- JAMES WHITNEY of Whitney, b. say 1465, m. Blanche Milbourne
- ROBERT WHITNEY, younger son, b. say 1500, d. 1555, of Castleton, m. Elizabeth ferch
Morgan ap William
- THOMAS WHITNEY, third son, b. say 1550, d. 1637, of Castleton and Westminster, m.
1583, Mary Bray
- JOHN1 WHITNEY, bapt. 1592, St. Margaret's, Westminster
Nice theory! Now it needs proof.
Copyright © 2004, 2006, Robert L. Ward and the Whitney Research Group
