GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-10 > 1003347355


From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: New Evidence for Parentage of Alice (Camoys) Hastings
Date: 17 Oct 2001 12:35:55 -0700
References: <5cf47a19.0110142118.21528704@posting.google.com>, <146801c155f1$40f59480$04794fcb@cbevan>


(Rosie Bevan) wrote in message news:<146801c155f1$40f59480$>...
> Dear Douglas
>
> Looking at the context of the document you found, whereby William Lord
> Hastings is referred to as kinsman of George, Duke of Clarence, it is not
> clear whether the quotes are direct or indirect (i.e.are the quotes from a
> contemporary document recording verbatim the Duke of Clarence, or in a
> passive tense ?). If indirect, I believe it was referring to the Duke of
> Clarence' immediate kinship ties by marriage.
>
> I do not share your experience in your statement "if kinship is claimed
> between two parties, it is inevitably done so on the basis of blood, not
> marriage. In fact, I only know of one instance in the medieval period where
> a man referred to a second man as his nephew, when actually the 2nd man was
> the first man's nephew by marriage." I have come across quite a few 15th
> century wills and letters where testators refer to their executors as
> 'brother' or 'son' when in fact they refer to a brother in law or son in
> law - a relationship contracted by marriage not bloodline. Also where a
> mother in law is referred to as a mother.
>
> Claims of kinship were used to emphasise bonds of mutual trust, political
> unity, and legal/ financial security especially during the turbulent years
> of the Wars of the Roses - you need look no further than the Paston letters
> to see examples of this.
>
> "a very truste and loue to his cosyn John Paston" Sir John Falstaff to John
> Paston - related through marriage 1459
> "Myn cosyn Berney" William Paston 1460 - related through marriage
> "My hertely welebelovyd cosyn" Sir Thomas Brewes to Sir John Paston the
> elder 1477 - related by marriage
> " myn cosyn Southwell " William Paston to Richard Roos 1479. Southwell was
> very distantly related by marriage via the Bernys of Reedham to William
> Paston
>
> Cheers
>

Hi Rosie ~

You've cited some good examples. However, since people often had
double ties by both blood and marriage, one shouldn't assume that the
claim to kinship stated above was solely on the basis of intermarriage
between the families. To be certain, one would have to have a
pedigree of all parties worked back in all directions for five
generations. The period of this period kept track of even remote
relations.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail:

This thread: