GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-08 > 1186202310


From: "Leo van de Pas" <>
Subject: Fw: Death of Edward II
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 14:38:30 +1000


----- Original Message -----
From: "D. Spencer Hines" <>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Death of Edward II


> Mortimers do not need to be descendants of Roger Mortimer [1287-1330], 1st
> Earl of March to be RELATED to him... OR just have the Mortimer surname
> and
> not be ABLE to prove or disprove a given connection.
>
> ...But perhaps still have an ax to grind.
>
> 'Nuff Said.
>
> DSH

I don't think people need to have the surname Mortimer to have an axe to
grind. It seems some keep on grinding and grinding, saying very little and
achieve even less.




>
>> "Leo van de Pas" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>
>>> You were talking about _related_ Mortimer lines-----and I presume you
>>> meant Mortimers related to Roger Mortimer in any way----except male line
>>> connections. I did not say it had to be Ian Mortimer's family. I too
>>> implied Roger had many descendants and I even mentioned a few.
>>> With best wishes
>>> Leo van de Pas
>>> Canberra, Australia
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>

This thread: