GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2005-07 > 1121409176


From: Tim Powys-Lybbe <>
Subject: Re: Sir John Stanley K.G.
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:32:56 +0100
References: <df.17765a4e.30085419@aol.com>


In message of 15 Jul, wrote:

> _RootsWeb: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Re: Sir John Stanley K.G._
> (http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2005-07/1121384097)
>
> I noticed the membership number was different than the one you
> provided but I copied it as it was printed in the source I was
> using.

So which numbering system should we be using? I have done some spot
checks on Grace Holmes' numbering (published in 1984) and it is
identical to that in Complete Peerage (Vol II, Appx B) which was
published in 1912 and to which she refers on page 12 of her book. The
CP author, A B Beaven, explains that one of the principal differences
with Beltz' numbering is whether Edward III is given the number 1 or
not. Modern practice is to exclude Edward III.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

This thread: