Author Topic: Who Appeared in Visitations? *COMPLETED*  (Read 13917 times)

Offline supermoussi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,251
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #27 on: Saturday 16 November 13 10:19 GMT (UK) »
Certainly no great effort would be made to find distant relatives of the deceased.

I guess this might be even more the case during Henry VII and VIII's reigns as they went to great lengths to seize as much land as possible to fund their wars, assisted by the scheming Peter & John Dudley.

Offline supermoussi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,251
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #28 on: Saturday 16 November 13 10:50 GMT (UK) »
No because land was devised by primogenture not gavelkind. Once the land was devised or inherited by Robert, Richard and Henry were out of the picture unless Robert had no issue (children).

Wiki's definition of Primogeniture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture ) states:-

In the absence of children, inheritance passed to collateral relatives, usually males, in order of seniority of their lines of descent.  The eligible descendants of deceased elder siblings take precedence over living younger siblings, such that inheritance is settled in the manner of a depth-first search.


If you look at the diagram in its article on Depth-first search ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth-first_search ) and super-impose the Marmaduke example, then Robert, Richard & Henry would be 2, 7 and 8, the Montagues 4 & 5. The way I read it it implies that in the absence of 4 and 5 having any issue then inheritance would pass back up to 6, then 7 then 8 then 9, etc, i.e. Richard and Henry's lines.



Offline Guy Etchells

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,632
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #29 on: Saturday 16 November 13 12:51 GMT (UK) »
No because land was devised by primogenture not gavelkind. Once the land was devised or inherited by Robert, Richard and Henry were out of the picture unless Robert had no issue (children).

Wiki's definition of Primogeniture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture ) states:-

In the absence of children, inheritance passed to collateral relatives, usually males, in order of seniority of their lines of descent.  The eligible descendants of deceased elder siblings take precedence over living younger siblings, such that inheritance is settled in the manner of a depth-first search.


If you look at the diagram in its article on Depth-first search ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth-first_search ) and super-impose the Marmaduke example, then Robert, Richard & Henry would be 2, 7 and 8, the Montagues 4 & 5. The way I read it it implies that in the absence of 4 and 5 having any issue then inheritance would pass back up to 6, then 7 then 8 then 9, etc, i.e. Richard and Henry's lines.




Very good except there was no abscence of children.
The first heir was Robert he in turn left a heir Isabel.
Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline supermoussi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,251
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #30 on: Sunday 17 November 13 07:51 GMT (UK) »
Very good except there was no abscence of children.
The first heir was Robert he in turn left a heir Isabel.

But her line died out. Collateral relatives includes cousins so land could transfer back up the tree and down.


Offline Guy Etchells

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,632
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #31 on: Sunday 17 November 13 10:22 GMT (UK) »
What are you actually asking?

You keep changing the details!
You gave an example showing a lineage down to Isabel we cannot answer questions from a stated imaginary lineage if you then require information about lines not detailed in the example.

The precise details of the situation change the answers that may be given, the rules that apply if there is issue, are different from the rules that apply when there is no issue.
The rules that apply when there is male issue, are different from the rules that apply when there is female issue.

The devil is in the detail.
Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline KGarrad

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,063
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations?
« Reply #32 on: Sunday 17 November 13 21:40 GMT (UK) »
As I said back in reply #15:
???

What is the question you are really trying to ask?

What is the name of the family/person?

What is it you are trying to prove?
Garrad (Suffolk, Essex, Somerset), Crocker (Somerset), Vanstone (Devon, Jersey), Sims (Wiltshire), Bridger (Kent)

Offline supermoussi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,251
    • View Profile
Re: Who Appeared in Visitations? *COMPLETED*
« Reply #33 on: Monday 18 November 13 08:43 GMT (UK) »
You keep changing the details!

The orginal example was just down to the descendants of the Montagues but remember the conversation went:-

Once the land was devised or inherited by Robert, Richard and Henry were out of the picture unless Robert had no issue (children).

and

Ok, but surely where landholdings were concerned the pedigree would have had to be documented by some representative of the King as how would they know who inherits the land in the event of the eldest line (in the above case the Montagues) dying out? Wouldn't the Sheriffs/Heralds have to go and find living descendants of Sir Walter Marmaduke's two youngest sons, Richard & Henry?

Feudal grants of lands (and arms) were typically (but not always) made to a person and the heirs of their body. Lands had to be kept as a whole and passed on down to the next generation of the family. If a senior line eventually died out then the next in line would be cousins of some sort hence the need to document junior lines.