Post by j***@gmail.comGood catch. Definitely egg on their face. A lazy shortcut.
Joe, I got a very prompt and polite response from the College. It's very old "egg on their face" - the mis-assignation of Sir Michael Stanhope's paternal Jerningham grandmother as a daughter of Sir Edward Jerningham (d. 1515) & Mary Scrope, dates much further back than the early 19th-century, and seems to have originated in the late 16th-century. This of course is well before the records were available that today allow us to apply vital dates to the individuals, and so verify the pedigrees via chronology.
The College has reviewed the issues with the Mary Scrope/Sir Michael Stanhope chronology, and agree that she could not have been his ancestor, and they are adjusting their records.
Post by j***@gmail.comt's not too much of a mountain but certainly not a molehill.
I have already had enquiries from New Zealand Rollestons, cousins of Frank Gardner, about the ancestral sequence. I had intended posting a query on this forum about that very subject, you have got in first with the answers. I and other Rollestons are grateful for your details. In fact I would be pleased to hear of any other lineages, that you have hinted at. I don't normally follow the royal descents, although interest is building from reading yours and other postings.
For the record, Rev John Rolleston was about 5th son of Christopher Rolleston of Watnall and wife Hannah Holden from Aston on Trent. John was 41 years Rector at Aston on Trent and received substantial properties in the will proved 1751 of his eldest brother Lancelot Rolleston of Watnall.
Thank you very much, Ken, for the parentage of Rev. John Rolleston - I did not have it. I won't be able to look into it myself for several weeks at least. But John Higgins has alerted me that there is at least one Edward III line in Rev. Rolleston's ancestry. Hopefully John will have time to post it here to SocGenMed.
If there's a particular line that you or other Rolleston would like further information on, just let me know, and I'll be happy to send or post the details that I have.
Post by j***@gmail.comFrom John & Dorothy descended all of the later Rolleston of Watnall, as well as Prof George Rolleston at Oxford (featured in the programme)and his youngest brother William who emigrated and initiated a considerable branch in NZ. George's eldest brother, not mentioned on the programme, was Sir Humphry Davy Rolleston, Regius Professor of Medicine at Cambridge Uni, Physician in Ordinary to King George V, and I believe attended at the King's death. Sir Humphry of course was Frank's mother Grace's uncle.
This is all great - the WDYTYA programme never hinted that the Rolleston descendants had become so widespread. If you have the availability to re-watch the episode, and can pause while doing so, toward the beginning of the programme, when Frank Gardner is talking with his cousin, and she shows him their grandfather's obituary, pause on the text of it. I thought I had seen that their grandmother Grace was the *daughter* of Sir Humphrey Davy. This of course would be a much stronger reason for John and Grace Rolleston to have named their son Humphrey Davy Rolleston, than if Grace was Davy's niece.
Post by j***@gmail.comYou are spot on in terms of your chronological analysis. However, I do have a major and a minor quibble.
The major quibble is that in two instances you draw conclusions based on an assumption of completeness in a visitation. You indicate that Mary Jerningham either died as a child or was yet unmarried in 1561, based on the failure of the visitation to name a husband. Likewise, you imply a significance to a Margaret or Mary being missing from the previous generation. I just want to point out that I can cite examples both of visitation pedigrees that give incomplete lists of children, and when a spouse was not shown for a married woman. I would be very careful in arguing based on what is absent from a visitation pedigree.
Completely agree with you here, Todd, in general, in regards to Visitation pedigrees. With this specific 1561 Jerningham pedigree, however, Sir Edward's daughters from his first marriage to Margaret Bedingfield, are all named with husbands, as are the two daughters of his son Sir John Jerningham. Going one generation back from Sir Edward (d. 1515), to his parents Sir John Jerningham (d. 1503) & Isabel Clifton, their three daughters are not named, but the surnames (though not first names) of their spouses are given. This strikes me as a fairly accurate account of the extent of the family knowledge of whoever the Jerningham family representative was who worked with the herald in 1561.
By 1561, the Stanhopes had become a prominent family on a national level, and I would think that had a daughter of Sir John Jerningham (d. 1503) married into the Stanhope family, the Jerningham family rep in 1561 would have known to add that marriage in along with the spouses of the other three daughters which were given. Stanhope was certainly more prominent in 1561 than those other three families - "Palmer", "Scott of Kymberley", and "Haslake of Norfolk".
Post by j***@gmail.comThe minor quibble. which is non-genealogical: you indicate that Lord Stanhope was "wrongfully executed" in 1552. Unless you mean a far-sighted executioner misread the name on the edict and put the wrong bloke on the block, I am not sure the term 'wrongfully' can be applied. Amidst a pattern of arbitrary and capricious executions that spanned most of the century and beyond, what constitutes being 'rightfully executed'? (OK, John Felton I will give you.)
Point conceded. I was following the WDYTYA episode, which spent quite a bit of time on the Sir Michael Stanhope segment, with the historian concluding that John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, was on a power-grab, and the charge of treason for which Sir Michael Stanhope was found guilty was completely trumped up. Sir Michael went to the block maintaining his loyalty to King Edward VI. It's wrong in today's sense of justice (hopefully), but, yes, 'justice' in the 16th-century was an entirely different concept.
Cheers, -----Brad