GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-04 > 0986616844


From: (Reedpcgen)
Subject: Re: Tomlinson, Elizabeth PART I
Date: 07 Apr 2001 04:14:04 GMT
References: <nltayl0-0604012142410001@atl-tgn-yfu-vty25.as.wcom.net>


>To nail it down, I'd like to see another case of a 17th-c yeoman retainer
using his lord's surname as a given name for one of his sons / grandsons.
>
>Nat Taylor

I'll have to think over the next few days, as I know I've seen it before. One
hopes that such a usage is indicative of a blood tie, but I know I've been
disappointed before.

In this instance, I'd point out that John Bagley was for all intents Edward
Sutton alias Dudley's brother-in-law, and I would not be at all surprised if he
was a godfather as well.

Thanks,

Paul

PS And thank you for your commentary. The instances rendered grandchild were
indeed neptis [ex filia, etc.] and those rendered nephew were nepoti.

This thread: