GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2010-07 > 1279832887


From:
Subject: Re: Nicholas Harrington and Nicholas Harington and IsabelLoringand/or Engl...
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:08:07 EDT


In a message dated 7/21/2010 11:17:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
writes:


> Thomas' son died in 1358, lets start saying the son was 20 years old
> when
> he died, then he was born about 1338 when Thomas was about 31. Now change
> this and say Thomas became a father aged 20, then John the son could be
> born
> about 1327, gives us a period from 1327 to 1338 for John to be born and
> grow
> up enough to be married and have a child. What do you think? >>



I think you're grasping :)
To me it seems more likely that the reconstruction is flawed.
Of course outliers are *possible* but they require excellent evidence.


This thread: