GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-04 > 1177616388


From: "Brad Verity" <>
Subject: Re: Descents From Edward III For Judge Richard Aske, Regicide Counsel
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:39:48 -0700
In-Reply-To: <004701c7881f$c75ec8f0$59838d47@labs.agilent.com>


Thanks, John. Comments interspersed.

>From: "John Higgins" <>

>A particularly interesting aspect of this useful summary of the Askes of
>Aughton is the identification (for the first time?) of Julian Aske the
>first
>wife of Thomas Portington as the sister, not the daughter, of Sir John Aske
>who married Eleanor Ryther.

>This Julian Aske was apparently confused,
>probably by Foster in his edition of Glover's visitations of Yorkshire,
>with
>her niece Julian the 3rd wife of John Vavasour of Spaldington. Foster
>includes Thomas Portington as the husband of the second Julian in italics
>(without mentioning a Vavasour marriage), indicating an addition not in the
>original visitation manuscripts.

That's a great explanation of how it started. I think I've been reading
Foster's Visitation work incorrectly. I thought the italics in a 1585 &
1612 combined pedigree indicated it was information found in the 1612
pedigree, not information Foster put in himself.

>This error appears to have been carried
>forward to subsequent pedigree compilations, including for example
>Maddison's Lincolnshire Pedigrees (HSP v. 52),

Yes, Maddison calls Julian 'heiress' of John Aske of Ryther, 4th son, or
something like that, which made me think for awhile she was a daughter of
John Aske, younger son of Sir John Aske & Elizabeth Bigod.

>Gerald Paget's work on the
>ancestry of Prince Charles, and most recently Douglas Richardson's
>Plantagenet Ancestry and Magna Carta Ancestry.

PA3 also overlooks the will of Robert Aske (d. 1542), the son and heir of
John Aske and Eleanor Ryther.

>The will of Sir John Aske as cited by Brad clearly indicates that he had a
>daughter Julian not yet married and that the wife of Thomas Portington was
>his sister, not his daughter.

Yes. Clearly Julian's son Henry Portington was important to his uncle John
Aske, who made him executor of his will and guardian of his two youngest
sons until they came of age. At least one of those sons was not as thrilled
with cousin Henry, as the following Chancery suits show:

C1/1326/46-47 John ASKE v. Henry PORTINGTON of Sawcliffe in Risby
(Savelyff), co. Lincoln, late his guardian.: Legacy of John Aske of
Houghton, father of complainant, of whom both parties were executors, and
account of his possessions, being tithes of corn and hay andlands in
Londesborough, some of which produced lead ore.: YORK. 1553-1555

C1/1400/43 John, younger son of John ASKE, deceased, v. [Henry PORTYNGTON,
overseer of the will of the said John the father].: Detention of goods of
the said John the father and of a lease of the tithes of Houghton and of
land there and in Londesborough.: YORK. 1556-1558

>The chronology certainly works better with
>Julian Aske Portington as a sister of Sir John Aske, since she was married
>by 1510/1 to Thomas Portington and thus could not possibly have been a
>daughter to Sir John, who was himself only 10 to 15 years old at that time
>(based on the wills of his father and grandfather).

Yes. The one wrinkle in all of this is Julian being left off of the 1530
Aske Visitation pedigree. John Aske was the informant, and from his will we
know he was close to his sister's son. Portington, one of the Yorkshire
properties of the Portingtons, was in the same parish (Eastrington) as
Owsthorpe, the original Aske East Riding property, so the families were
close neighbors. He provides the names of his other four sisters, all of
whom were also married by 1530, but leaves off Julian. Three possible
explanations:

1) Error by herald Thomas Tonge. We've seen other errors by Tonge
(confusing the two Mauleverer wives of Richard Aldeburgh, for instance),
even in the generations of the informant himself. So John Aske could have
given his sister Julian's name, but Tonge left her off by mistake when he
officially entered the pedigree back in London.
2) Julian had died shortly after her son Henry's birth, well before 1530,
and John Aske only gave the names to Tonge of his siblings who were living.
3) Julian was an illegitimate daughter of Sir Robert Aske, and so would not
be appropriate to include in a list of his children with Elizabeth Clifford.

I'm leaning toward explanation 2). What are your thoughts?

>Both Julian Askes have a considerable number of notable descendants,
>including (for example) Princes William and Harry. I'd guess that a number
>of pedigrees and databases will need to be corrected based on this
>information....

Hopefully moving her back a generation in a database won't prove too
difficult.

Cheers, --------Brad

_________________________________________________________________
Download Messenger. Join the im Initiative. Help make a difference today.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_APR07

This thread: