Discussion:
Echyngham Wakehurst connection.
(too old to reply)
Roger Bradshaw
2021-07-24 17:16:19 UTC
Permalink
Is there a consensus on the ancestry of the Elizabeth Echyngham who married Richard Wakehurst in the 15thC. Church's 2011 paper on the Echynghams, if I have it correctly, has Elizabeth the daughter of Robert Echyngham and Joan Thorpe, Robert being the son of William Echyngham and Elizabeth Criol.
This seems to conflict with the abstract of the account of the ownership of Dixter manor by Salzman where Elizabeth is purported to be the daughter of a Robert Echyngham who is descended from Richard Echyngham, the Brother of William Echyngham and his wife Joan at Gate.
It that the state of play at the moment or have I missed something?
Will Johnson
2021-07-27 14:30:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Bradshaw
Is there a consensus on the ancestry of the Elizabeth Echyngham who married Richard Wakehurst in the 15thC. Church's 2011 paper on the Echynghams, if I have it correctly, has Elizabeth the daughter of Robert Echyngham and Joan Thorpe, Robert being the son of William Echyngham and Elizabeth Criol.
This seems to conflict with the abstract of the account of the ownership of Dixter manor by Salzman where Elizabeth is purported to be the daughter of a Robert Echyngham who is descended from Richard Echyngham, the Brother of William Echyngham and his wife Joan at Gate.
It that the state of play at the moment or have I missed something?
You might review this

http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/families/Echyngham.pdf

and point out any errors or omissions
Roger Bradshaw
2021-07-30 11:34:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Johnson
Post by Roger Bradshaw
Is there a consensus on the ancestry of the Elizabeth Echyngham who married Richard Wakehurst in the 15thC. Church's 2011 paper on the Echynghams, if I have it correctly, has Elizabeth the daughter of Robert Echyngham and Joan Thorpe, Robert being the son of William Echyngham and Elizabeth Criol.
This seems to conflict with the abstract of the account of the ownership of Dixter manor by Salzman where Elizabeth is purported to be the daughter of a Robert Echyngham who is descended from Richard Echyngham, the Brother of William Echyngham and his wife Joan at Gate.
It that the state of play at the moment or have I missed something?
You might review this
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/families/Echyngham.pdf
and point out any errors or omissions
Thank you for your response.

I have concocted a tree from Charlotte Smith’s well researched paper on the Echynghams (for some reason I called her Church in my first posting!) and have the following query.

On page 23 we have Robert11 Echyngham a son of (14) William10 Echyngham and Elizabeth Criol who married Joan Thorpe, with no recognised descendants.

I am descended from his younger brother (20) Richard11 Echyngham and an unknown wife who had the (26) Robert12 Echyngham marrying Joan Aps. (Joan seems to be an extraordinarily popular christian name at that time!)

Page 20 has a (16) Richard10 Echyngham as a brother to the aforementioned William10 who on page 23 is said to have had a son through an un-named wife, a second Robert11 Echyngham.

Are we certain (as far as can be ascertained after 700 years) which Richard was the father of the Robert who married Joan Aps.

I am also slightly confused by the various quotes of Saltzman’s history of the Manor of Dixter, the best I have found says:-

Salzmann (p. 153): “Hamo’s daughter Joan married Robert Echingham, and after their death, without issue, Dixter passed to the descendants of Robert’s younger brother, Richard; accordingly in 1411 we find a later Robert Echingham possessed of “Dyksterve” and Gatecourt, each valued at 20.li. This Robert’s daughter Elizabeth married Richard Wakehurst…”

Have you seen the original, the reference to “a later Robert’ could mean either of the two Roberts available, both sons of Richards..

Roger
Will Johnson
2021-07-30 21:16:25 UTC
Permalink
On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 4:34:58 AM U
Post by Roger Bradshaw
Post by Will Johnson
You might review this
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/families/Echyngham.pdf
and point out any errors or omissions
Thank you for your response.
I have concocted a tree from Charlotte Smith’s well researched paper on the Echynghams (for some reason I called her Church in my first posting!) and have the following query.
Actually her paper is quite sloppy.
She states birthyears with no sources at all
She quotes parts of IPMs but not the relevant parts
She assumes marriage years from "first mentions" and on and on.

So you're going to have to re-source each claim she is there making, IMHO

Here is just one example where it appears she has no idea what she is talking about.
She claims that this William married twice.
She states his "first wife" was Elizabeth Crioll, and then she states that he married Marie Shoyswell.
However she then in addition claims that Elizabeth "died after" 1391.
.... but wait, he was already dead, how could he have a later wife?

And then in her notes for this man, she throws her hands up in the air that she really doesn't know Elizabeth's maiden name *at all*.

The whole section is incredibly sloppy
Will Johnson
2021-07-30 21:18:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Johnson
On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 4:34:58 AM U
Post by Roger Bradshaw
Post by Will Johnson
You might review this
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/families/Echyngham.pdf
and point out any errors or omissions
Thank you for your response.
I have concocted a tree from Charlotte Smith’s well researched paper on the Echynghams (for some reason I called her Church in my first posting!) and have the following query.
Actually her paper is quite sloppy.
She states birthyears with no sources at all
She quotes parts of IPMs but not the relevant parts
She assumes marriage years from "first mentions" and on and on.
So you're going to have to re-source each claim she is there making, IMHO
Here is just one example where it appears she has no idea what she is talking about.
She claims that this William married twice.
She states his "first wife" was Elizabeth Crioll, and then she states that he married Marie Shoyswell.
However she then in addition claims that Elizabeth "died after" 1391.
.... but wait, he was already dead, how could he have a later wife?
And then in her notes for this man, she throws her hands up in the air that she really doesn't know Elizabeth's maiden name *at all*.
The whole section is incredibly sloppy
And oh by the way this "first wife" Elizabeth supposed to be Crioll from... nothing?
Was born in 1333 in Kent.
We know no such thing
We don't know she was a Crioll
We don't know she was born in Kent
We don't know she was born in 1333

Loading...