Notes

Matches 1,551 to 1,600 of 3,765

#	Notes	Linked to
1551	GADLING: 1. Originally, a companion or fellow, in good sense; esp. a companion in arms. Beowulf 2617 His gÃ¦delinges guewÃ¦du. c1000 Daniel 422 Hwa a yfe sealde ingum gÃ¦delingum. c1205 LAY. 12335 Alle a gadelinges Alse heo weoren sunen kinges. a1250 Prov. Ã†lfred 312 in O.E. Misc. 120 So is mony gedelyng godlyche on horse. 13.. K. Alis. 1192 Fiftene thousand of fot laddes..And alle stalworthe gadelynges. 2. In bad sense, as a term of reproach: A base, low-born person, a â€˜fellowâ€™. 1297 R. GLOUC. (1724) 310 e beste body & noblest..yslawe was oru a gadelyng, so vyllyche, alas! c1400 Gamelyn 107, I am no worse gadelyng..But born of a lady, and geten of a knight. c1475 Rauf Coiear 612 Quhair gangis thow, Gedling, thir gaitis sa gane? ?a1500 Chester Pl. (E.E.T.S.) x. 237 That false gedlinge [v.r. gelding]. 15.. Robd. Cysille in Hazl. E.P.P. I. 273 Fals thefe, and fowle gadlyng, Thou lyest falsely. 3. A wanderer, wayfarer, vagabond. a1542 WYATT in Tottel's Misc. (Arb.) 41 The wandring gadling, in the sommer tyde, That findes the Adder with his rechlesse foote. 1565 Maister Randolphes Phantasey 539 The amased lewsarde..from the wandringe gadlinge hasteth amayne. 4. Hence attrib. (in sense of â€˜wanderingâ€™, as if formed from a verb gaddle); also as vbl. n. 1594 CAREW Tasso (1881) 98 Nor on the promisde ten alone relyes, But trusts he stealth should more a gaddling lead. c1624 LUSHINGTON Resur. Serm. (1659) 15 Three way-going women, gadling gossips that came from Galilee. 1676 COLES, Gadling, stradling. 1706 PHILLIPS (ed. Kersey), Gadling (old word), straggling.	GADD, James (I2)
1552	GADMAN: The man or boy who directed or guided a team by means of a gad or goad, esp. in ploughing; a goadsman. c1450 HENRYSON Mor. Fab. 73 His Gadman and hee, His stots hee straught with Benedicite. 1515 Ld. Treas. Acc. Scotl. in Pitcairn Crim. Trials I. 260*, xij cartaris ane hundrethe and xx pynouris and ix gadmen, being careand the Artalzery fra Edinburghe to Streueling. 1786 BURNS Inventory, A gaudsman ane, a thrasher t'other. 1827 HONE Every-Day Bk. II. 1656 Pig drivers and gadsmen. 1863 J. L. W. By-gone Days 10 With every plough two persons were engaged, one the ploughman..the other the gadman, from the long gad or goad with which he impelled the horses or oxen. [OED]	GADD, James (I2)
1553	Gave age as 40 in 1841, yet was not baptised at TM like younger supposed siblings.	Source (S124)
1554	General Labourer. Informant: Peter WEBB, in attendance, resident at Clifton Union Workhouse, Stapleton.	HAYNES, William (I65)
1555	Generation-13 Thomas Mallory, esq. can be shown to have never been knighted unless it occured immediately before his death and were not generally known to either the government or his own children. However, he was extraordinarily well-connected, much more so than the reputed author of ?Le Morte Darthur?, Sir Thomas Mallory of Newbold Revel. Through his mother and father together he was related closely enough to, according to the way people thought in medieval England, be considered extended family by perhaps as many as 10 members of the House of Lords. He also had extensive family connections in the House of Commons. His mother's presumed father had been a long-serving member and had his stepfather and his two half-brothers had been members, too. In addition, his mother's presumed brother had been and was to be Speaker of the House of Commons. His father's foster father, Sir William de Papworth had been a member of parliament and one of Sir William de Papworth's closest associates was yet another Speaker of the House of Commons. Not only that, but his brother-in-law, Thomas Palmer also was yet another long-serving member, as was his wife?s mother?s brother. From 1449 to 1451, Thomas Mallory himself became a known member of two parliaments. Between 1445 and 1451, there is, however, a story to be told. Being still 19, his wardship and marriage rights were bought by Lionel Louth, a man not much older than Thomas, himself, who possessed the Manor of Sawtry Beaumes in Huntingdonshire. The Louths were a new family to Huntingdonshire, but married well and were well established. There is reason to believe Thomas had been educated for some years at the nearby Sawtry Abbey from the time his mother passed away. There is even a possibility he and Lionel were friends. They, by virtue of the Papworths, the Beaumes family, and the le Moignes, had many connections with each other in a historic sense. For whatever reason, Lionel soon surrendered his property wardship and marriage rights to the treasury, not only over Thomas but, according to the terms of the original grant, over Thomas's successors should Thomas die early, thus possibly indicating Thomas may have had younger full brothers or sisters at the time. This surrender by Lionel most likely represents the purchase of these rights to Thomas Mallory's former brother-in-law Thomas Palmer. One senses here, too, the influence of the now soon to pass away Lady Grey of Codnor, Thomas Mallory's aunt, as in her will she leaves Thomas Palmer, her former nephew by marriage a small pension as a token of her gratitude for past services. I have so far been unable to find the personal name of Thomas Mallory's wife, though her family name, approximate age, etc., is all abundantly clear. She was the child, probably oldest child, of Thomas Palmer's dead younger half-brother, John Palmer and his wife, Elizabeth Kinnesman whose brother (or, less possibly, her father) had been a member of the House of Commons. Thomas Mallory's Palmer wife would have been born around 1435, as her own father had been born around 1410 and she was married and a mother of her own first surviving child, John, in 1452. There were problems, though, in 1445, Thomas's future wife had to first reach puberty, something which in the middle ages was normally a couple of years later than in modern times due to differences in diet. Thomas's future wife would not have really been ready to be his wife in anything else than name until around 1449 or 1450 when she would have been 14 to 15 years old. There was no reason to hurry, so no one hurried. Thomas did what he wanted to, people who had his best interests in mind managed his property for him, and he, apparently, was satisfied enough not to cause trouble. In 1449, it was time to get married, but troubles arose. He couldn't take possession of his property because the records that the treasury was supposed to have received after his father's death apparently had never been sent and no longer existed. In response, Thomas two times in succession became a member of parliament, not as a county representative but as a borough representative which was easily achieved with the help of young friends of his in the treasury and with at least the tacit approval, first of the Duke of Buckingham and then of then of the Duke of York, the father of the future Edward IV. The Duke of York, in particular was connected with both William Buley, Thomas's presumed uncle, and with Thomas Palmer his former brother-in-law. Both men were men the Duke of York wanted to tie more strongly to his own party. Thomas made a name for himself of sorts and proved helpful to a number of people including Baron Dudley, who was closely allied with the Duke of Buckingham, and with the Baron Cromwell who was equally closely connected to the Duke of York. He also helped his young friends in the Treasury. In the meantime he obtained the marriage and wardship rights of an heiress of the Swinnerton family of Staffordshire. He soon disposed of both these rights in a way that could have brought him no permanent financial benefit and this demands an explanation. He, himself, being young and single, could have arranged for himself the marriage of this young and rich landed feudal heiress had he wished and this was something of a tradition with Mallorys, something Thomas Palmer was sure to have picked up on immediately. I would suspect that Thomas Mallory thought his former brother-in-law and/or future mother-in-law were delaying his marriage to Thomas Palmer's niece on purpose and that Thomas Mallory, with his hormones in control of his emotions, wanted to hurry things as much as possible. Having the wardship of a rich heiress forced everyone's hand. He then went to Shropshire to get the equivalent of a birth certificate (actually a group of written statements made by people certifying as to how they knew he was born when he was born). He got treasury permission to get control of his lands, he got the wife he wanted (even though she was not an heiress!) which was Thomas Palmer?s niece, and he promptly married the rich heiress of the Swinnerton family off to the next male-line representative of the same family of an appropriate age to marry her. No one lost face by the way Thomas handled things which meant he continued his business dealings with his very capable former brother-in-law and uncle by marriage, Thomas Palmer, and he had made permanent friends in Staffordshire. In the 1450s and 1460s most of the records listing the members of the House of Commons have been lost. My hunch is that Thomas served in parliament during this troubled period, too, because he was too well connected not to. There is no proof, though. From 1461 immediately after Edward IV came to power to sometime after 1464 and before 1470, Robert Mallory was the Lieutenant of the Constable of the Tower of London and was appointed before the Constable, himself, (the Earl of Worcester who had been studying abroad in Italy) was able to reach England to take up his position. Different people have different theories as to whom this Robert Mallory might have been. Mine is that he was Thomas Mallory's younger brother and the son of Sir William Mallory and Margaret Burley, not because any hard documentary evidence is available that could prove anything one way or another but because it would economically explain so many other things that happen later. The man who was somewhat later to take up the position of Constable of the Tower of London, the Earl of Worcester, was a man closely related to the king through his mother. The Earl of Worcester's father, however, had originally been a commoner whose main properties were in Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire who had been connected with Sir William de Papworth. In fact, the Earl of Worcester's main property in Cambridgeshire bordered on Thomas's. If Robert were William and Margaret's younger son, he would have known the Earl all his life, as would Thomas. In 1462 there was a campaign Edward IV leads against a Lancastrian invasion in the north from Scotland. A list of the king's companions survives. Under the heading of knights it has a very mixed list of prominent men, some of who were knights, others of whom demonstrably were not. The list distinguishes between the two by using the honorific "Sir" before the name of a man who was a knight, but adds no honorific before other men's names in that section. A "Thomas Malery" with no honorific appears. I assume that the writer of the list knew far better than we do who was and was not a knight and that the Thomas Mallory being referred to was the Thomas Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes. P.J.C. Fields essentially assumes that the writer didn't have that much knowledge and that everyone was a knight; and in his analysis of the list has changed people's names when necessary to give everyone a knighthood. Other writers have interpreted the list opportunistically in other ways. Until I have seen a proper analysis of the list done by someone with no ideological bias to influence the outcome, I prefer to take the list's author at his word and assume the Thomas Mallory referred to was not a knight and that the only Thomas Mallory of a prominence equal to the other individuals lumped together as knights was Thomas Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes. In 1464 the King married Elizabeth Woodvile and in 1465 had a coronation ceremony for her at which Thomas's half-brother Roger Corbet was made a knight, meaning that not only his half-brother, but that his half-brother's wife, the beautiful and extremely rich Elizabeth Hopton, came with him. My assumption is that Robert Mallory, Roger's presumed half-brother was still Lieutenant of the Tower of London which was where he would have found them accommodation since, besides being a prison, it also functioned throughout the middle ages as a royal palace. It was here that the Earl of Worcester would have been most likely to have met Thomas's sister-in-law and, it is clear she made an indelible impression on his mind. It should be noted that Thomas was also given the opportunity of being a knight, but that he did not see this as an opportunity. He took out a distraint of knighthood in this same year of 1465, which, in modern English, means he paid a fine (something like a rather hefty traffic fine) not to be made a knight. And I think he was quite right in his judgment. There was already a distant relative of his, a Sir Thomas Mallory, knight, of Newbold Revel who had spent a large part of his life in trouble with the law and in and out of jail. Especially if the man was a brilliant writer, I'm sure Thomas of Papworth had no intention of further enhancing people's confusion about who was who, something which must have already been an irritation to him during his own lifetime. In 1465 the former Lancastrian king, Henry VI, was imprisoned and, if Robert Mallory was still lieutenant of the Tower of London, Robert would have been the ex-king's jailer. From 1464 to 1470 there is no record of who the Lieutenant of the Tower was, but I am inclined to believe that Robert was still in that position until probably as late as 1467 and was responsible for the humane treatment the king received in his first year or so of imprisonment. In 1466 Robert took out a general pardon. On this point, like P.J.C. Field, I believe Robert, realizing what a dangerous thing it was to try to keep two kings? favor, took the easy way out and resigned his position. He would have taken advantage of the fact that the Constable of the Tower was being given a new position as the king's Lord Lieutenant of Ireland which, for all practical purposes, made him the king's vice-roi, even though the king's brother had the equivalent of that position in name, though not much caring to exercise authority so far from England. In 1467 Sir Roger Corbet passed away. This happened as the Earl of Worcester was preparing to leave England for Ireland. He suddenly made a detour, went to Shropshire, wooed the new widow who like himself was around 40 years of age, married her then and there, and, presenting the king with an accomplished fact, begging his forgiveness for doing so without his permission, permission being something he was supposed to have had to acquire the hand of a widowed feudal female landowner of Elizabeth Hopton's position. According to the religious teaching of the times, in-laws were not distinguished from blood relatives. The Earl had married Thomas's sister when he married Elizabeth Hopton. The reality, however, was that people often made emotional distinctions just as they would now. However, the relationship with the new Countess remained a good one for Thomas Mallory, the evidence being that she was responsible for raising his son Anthony and perhaps his other younger children after Thomas and his wife both passed away in 1469. The Earl of Worcester and his countess perhaps unexpectedly had a son, Edward, in 1469, something the Earl had most likely long given up hope of. Their happiness, though, was broken up that same year in a most brutal fashion. The Earl of Warwick, being dissatisfied, made a coup d'etat, capturing the king, and trying to rule through him. Various men on his hit list were killed immediately, including the queen's father and one of her brothers. Others escaped, including the Earl of Worcester and another near neighbor of both the Earl of Worcester and Thomas Mallory, Lord Scales, the Queen's oldest brother. Thomas Mallory was worried about dying when he wrote his will, but the will does not complain about bodily pain or sickness. He may very well have been on a hit list and knew it. Whether he died naturally or was killed, his fears were justified because he did pass away within a month after his will was written at the age of 44, leaving behind 10 motherless children, including a baby who was still nursing. He left marriage portions to his daughters. His second son Robert he put under the guardianship of the Abbot of Sawtry, Sawtry having been closely connected with his Papworth ancestors since its foundation and carefully nurtured by the 12th century Earls of Huntingdon (also Kings of Scotland), individuals who were also ancestors of his (assuming either the la Zouche or the Burley connection is correct), though he himself may have been unaware of it. He wanted his third son William to become a businessman in the City of London and wanted Anthony and his other children to get a proper education so that they could become clergymen if they wanted to. Edward IV was soon able to stage a counter coup and regained power for about a year. However, Warwick gathered a force in France, invaded England, and succeeded in overthrowing Edward IV and bringing Henry VI back into power. This time the Earl of Worcester was captured and soon executed, though the King was safely able to escape. The Queen, heavily pregnant with the future Edward V, sought asylum in Westminster Abbey which was granted by the Abbot and respected by the new government. Suddenly Robert Mallory was showered with small favors by the new government during the short period it was in power. This can most economically be explained if he were Henry VI's jailer, the one who had treated him humanely during his first year in prison, whereas his successor hadn't been equally as kind. Just as suddenly as the new government came to power, it lost power yet again when Edward IV returned to overthrow it. Robert Mallory was careful to take advantage of a general pardon and, though he was accused by the Queen's mother of being one of those responsible for her husband's death and the death of one of her sons in 1469 and even though it would have been easy to do so, he was never brought to court. Obviously, a preliminary investigation of sorts must have confirmed that he had nothing to do with the lurid acts he was accused of. However, he also was never again given an official government position, possibly because his former patron, the cultured and extremely well educated Earl of Worcester was no longer alive and also more probably because he, himself, was fed up with it all. My theory is that it was probably this Robert who was the ancestor of the Mallorys who had property in Saddington at the end of the 15th century (but, apparently, never the actual lordship of the manor) and who possess other properties in the 16th century. At first, I was inclined to affiliate them with either the Mallorys of Newbold Revel or even of Welton or Litchborough. However, for the same reasons given by S. V. Mallory Smith, I would assign them an origin closer to the main line. Having this Robert, the presumed younger son of Sir William Mallory and Margaret Burley, as their ancestor would be an economical way of presenting things. Further research, though, might reveal that some other affiliation would be more attractive. Also, there is a possibility that this Robert might be the grandfather (or great grandfather) of Sir Richard Mallory, the Lord Mayor of London of 1564-1565, in stead of Thomas Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes. A lot would depend on the nature of Noble Collection mentioned by S. V. Mallory Smith in her history of the Mallorys, a work which I have not yet been able to identify. Also, much would depend on how a certain Mallory (Richard?) and his wife were in 1532 in possession of a soon-to-expire 60-year lease of the Manor of Harlowebury in Essex, a manor being leased to them by the Abbot of St. Edmundsbury. I am trying to find answers, but progress is always frustratingly slow. Generation-14 Thomas Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes's heir was John Mallory born in 1452. As he was a minor and his wardship and marriage rights were in the king's hands, the king sold them to two London businessmen, one of whom later became Lord Mayor of London. John died within a year of his father and his brother Robert, the one his father had put under the guardianship of the Abbot of Sawtry, became the heir of Papworth St. Agnes and thus the new ward of the London businessmen. He had to have gotten married to a woman chosen for him to have possession of his estates for which there is record he did gain possession, so it is likely that Robert married either a daughter or neice of one of the men his wardship and marriage rights had been sold to. He did not have any children who survived, because his brother Anthony, the fourth son of Thomas, inherited the family estates in 1492. The third brother (in this I agree with S. V. Mallory Smith rather than P.J.C. Field) was William. As Mallory Smith suggests, he might have been the William Mallory, esq. who was the third husband of Elizabeth Bruyn, the mother of Charles Brandon, husband of King Henry VIII's sister Mary and Duke of Suffolk. Another possibility might be that this particular William Mallory was the son of Robert Mallory the Lieutenant of the Constable of the Tower of London and the man I have presumed to be the younger son of Sir William Mallory and Margaret Burley. In any case, assuming this William Mallory to have been a member of the Papworth St. Agnes family would help to more economically explain part of why Sir Richard Mallory of London was later to have the astonishing access to the centers of power which he did toward the end of the reign of Edward VI. Anthony Mallory, Sir William's father, was born in 1466. As a fourth son and a small child when his father died in 1469, he was taken by his father's Thomas Mallory's sister-in-law to Shropshire to be raised on one her estates. Anthony's aunt, as she would have been considered according to the thought processes of people living in medieval England, married firstly Thomas Mallory?s half-brother Sir Roger Corbet and secondly John Tiptoft, the first Earl of Worcester and patron of Robert Mallory. For her third husband, the very wealthy Elizabeth was given in marriage by the king, but with her consent, to Sir William Stanley and, thereby, became the sister-in-law of Margaret Beaufort, the mother of the future King Henry VII. At the Battle of Bosworth where Richard III was overthrown and where Henry VII became king, it was Sir William Stanley, whose actions literally saved the day for Henry VII and made him king. In gratitude, Sir William was made Lord Chancellor of England by the new king. Sir William, too, according to the thought processes of people of the time and their modes of speech, was Anthony's uncle, though, of course, Sir William Stanley would not have felt particularly close to the boy or his brothers. Nevertheless, Anthony grew up extremely well-connected and with access to the royal family, itself, through the King's mother Margaret Beaufort who knew him and trusted his managerial abilities, using him to manage property she held in Cambridgeshire to fund an educational project of hers. After Anthony became lord of the manor of Papworth St. Agnes, he was often used by the governments of Henry VII and Henry VIII to manage local government affairs in Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire. He must have been married sometime in the 1490s after the death of his older brother Robert, but to whom is still a mystery. When he married his second wife sometime after her first husband passed away around 1510, a widow by the name of Alice Lane (her maiden name probably being Farrington), however, he fell completely under her spell and, in the end, left all his property to her with an extaordinary set of remainders in place that will be explained a bit further on. There is no record of his first marriage, but this can be inferred by the fact that his son William's will much later in the century makes mention of a sister that was not mentioned in either Anthony's will or that of his widow, Alice. Likewise, that Anthony was married twice can be inferred from a special patent he received from Henry VIII in 1526, allowing him to devise his properties to whomever he might wish as long as his son Henry would eventually inherit them and Henry's sons after him, providing he had any sons to inherit. Two years late he acts on the authority given to him by the king's patent and gives everything to his wife for her life, putting Henry first in line according to the terms of Henry VIII's patent, but then unconditionally putting William second in line, then unconditionally putting his daughter Audrey next in line after William. Only then does he provide for the eventual possibility that his right heirs might succeed to his properties which could be interpreted to mean either daughters of Henry or other children Anthony may have had by a former wife. If there had been no other children who had a better or equal rights, it would have been unnecessary to go to all this trouble, as English common law would have made things work almost exactly as Anthony provided for. Even if there had been any number of former wives or children by former wives, Alice would have automatically received one third of Anthony's properties for life just by right of dower as she continued to hold one third of her first husband's properties. That would have been more than enough to take care of her financial needs in style. Henry would then have automatically inherited two third's of his father's estates and, if he had no children, it would have automatically gone to William, then failing William to Audry anyway. The simple answer is that Henry was likely not to have been Alice's son, but that common law preference for an oldest son's rights meant that he could not be disinherited property that was to his by right of feudal tenure without his own consent. In this point, Alice had no choice but to accede to a provision for his eventual inheritance. Nevertheless, she could and did get a limitation that if he did not have any son, his daughter would not receive anything. She could also provide for herself for life denying Henry possession of the family properties until her death and she could provide for her own children to the exclusion of any others of Anthony who were not hers, all of which she did. Anthony passed away in 1539 mentioning in his will as children his sons Henry and William and his daughter Audrey only. If my memory serves me, Alice passed away in 1545 mentioning in her will as children by Anthony her son William and her daughter Audrey. She also mentions her children by her first husband, members of the Farrington family, and her daughter Audrey's children. William is her successor to the manor Papworth St. Agnes and related properties. Generation-15 Based on the unusual provisions of the royal patent and Anthony's implementation of it, we can assume that Henry had married in 1528 and, therefore, the need to exercise the rights in the patent to keep the unexpected from perhaps making them inapplicable later. From this, we can assume Henry was born around 1506 or 1507. If he had any children who survived, they were daughters and no trace of them remain in the record. He was still alive in 1539, but dead before his father's wife Alice passes away in 1545. William, according to his mother's inquisition post mortem, was her heir and born around 1519. From 1534 he was an apprentice of Richard Mallory, mercer and citizen of London, the Lord Mayor of London from 1564 to 1565. Richard may have been William's older half-brother who, being younger than Henry, but not Alice's child, was effectively disinherited. He may have also been a cousin. Without a chance to evaluate the Noble Collection mentioned by S. V. Mallory Smith or finding out more about the manor of Harlowbury in Essex it would be difficult to pin things down further. Printed sources do record Richard as being the son of Anthony and it would fit chronologically, but the earliest of the printed sources is from a 19th century expanded second edition of a book which, when originally published two hundred years before, did not mention anything about Richard's parentage. Better proof, obviously, is necessary. However, as S. V. Mallory Smith, has demonstrated, Sir Richard Mallory had to be closely related to Anthony's son Sir William and that, if they were not brothers, they would have been first cousins. I would expand on that by saying if not brothers, then first cousins, or first cousins once removed. As Anthony Mallory produced his known children so late in life, it is entirely possible Richard Mallory, if a cousin of William, could have been one generation further along and still have been old enough for William to have been his apprentice. The possibilities of descent for Richard, though, are few. Either he was Anthony's son or the son or grandson of one of Anthony's three younger brothers Edward, Christopher, or John (assuming any of them survived) or as a grandson or great grandson of Robert Mallory the presumed brother of Anthony Mallory's father Thomas. Having digressed with regard to Sir Richard Mallory's origins, I would like to return to Sir William Mallory who was either his cousin or his half-brother. William who, as was mentioned above, was made an apprentice to Richard Mallory in 1535. He had an active career, both in London as a mercer from 1542 and in Cambridgeshire as the lord of the manor of Papworth St. Agnes. He was not as successful in his business dealings as Sir Richard, but was never a failure and was elected to represent London in parliament. He was also entrusted with various positions in the government of Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire. He was also careful to maintain his contacts and a letter of his to William Cecil, Lord Burleigh, who was Queen Elizabeth's most important minister of state, survives. No matter what the family relationship was between Sir William and Sir Richard, they treated each other as if they were brothers in the traditional Mallory sense of the word which meant looking out after each other and trying to be helpful whenever possible. Not only that, but good relations continued into the next generation as well. Richard Mallory was already a mercer in 1534 and had been involved in a land transfer in 1531 with the man he was apprenticed to. Because of the nature of the land deal, he would have had to have been of age in 1531, meaning he was born by 1510 at the latest, meaning it was chronologically close to impossible for him to have been a son of Anthony?s second wife Alice as her first husband didn?t die until 1509 and, had he been her son, he would have been her first son, which would make what happened later even stranger. Richard was knighted by Elizabeth I when he became Lord Mayor of London. He is universally said to have been married first to Anne Smith by whom he had 17 children. London parish records make it clear there were three still births. The names of the remaining 14 children can be found either in his will or in the parish records of the London churches he and his wife used. I have so far found no contemporary source, though, identifying his wife's name, though I have no doubt it is correct. Circumstantial evidence points at her being a sister of Sir Clement Smythe who, due to the fact he married Dorothy the sister of Jane Seymour the mother of King Edward VI, was to play an important role in the treasury during the reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI. The year he passes away Richard Mallory and his wife name their son born that year Clement and they name their next daughter Dorothy. Toward the end of Edward VI's reign, the treasury ran out of money three months before the end of the fiscal year. Richard Mallory went to the rescue, helping to arrange a loan among his fellow merchants in the City of London that provided the government with enough money to tide it over for the rest of the financial year. Just before Edward VI dies, after much thought, the boy king decided to overturn his father's will which, if Edward were to die childless, settled the English throne on first his oldest daughter Mary and her heirs, failing on which his second daughter Elizabeth and her heirs, failing which on the heirs of his second sister Charles Brandon's wife. Richard Mallory, in spite of the fact that his only titles were simply those of mercer and citizen of London, was called in his capacity as the King?s councilor, along with the high and the mighty of the court, by the King to witness the above-mentioned deed and provide for the succession to the throne of Charles Brandon's granddaughter the Lady Jane Grey. If the William Mallory who was the third husband of Charles Brandon's mother was a Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes, either by being Thomas's child or the child of his presumed brother Robert and Richard closely connected to this man, even as a nephew, it might explain why he was summoned. Just as through Sir Clement Smythe he may have had an indirect connection with the King, he may have had a similar, if not closer, connection with the intended future Queen, the Lady Jane Grey. It might also explain part of the reason for his extraordinary economic success, having died possessed of Tottenham Manor which is not very far of a walk from where I live and is now a very impressive bit of real estate with no evidence of the manor itself surviving whatsoever, though old maps show its existence to be real. He also possessed property in other counties, though I have not made a full and accurate inventory so I prefer to be vague on this point for the time being. He was not only a mercer (cloth dealer) but a mercer who was a member of the company of "merchant adventurers", which meant that he was actively involved with foreign trade that is said to have included dealings with both the middle east and far east. Soon after his wife died in childbirth with her 17th child, Sir Richard married Elizabeth Pakington, the step-daughter of Sir Michael Dormer, a former Lord Mayor of London and a great granddaughter of an illegitimate sister of King Edward IV's wife, thus a third cousin of Queen Elizabeth I who treated Elizabeth Pakington's family, especially its male members, whom she found stimulating to be around, as extended family. Richard and Elizabeth had a son who died as a small child and a daughter who was well provided for financially but was still not married close to 40 years after her father's death in 1566. His will gives the impression that, having lived life magnificently, he had no regrets and, considering himself old, was ready to die, even though he could not have been any older than I, myself, am at present. With this, I shall stop my consideration of the main line, though both Sir William and Sir Richard had numerous descendants and, with proper research, both could surely be taken up to the prsent. That, however, is someone else's work. The center of my research continues to be Thomas Mallory (1425 - 1469) of Papworth St. Agnes and I do not feel it advisable to carry the serious part of my research further than his grandchildren. To do so would divert attention from what my university is paying me to do which is to produce quality research in published form about a topic that would be recognized as academic by the academic world. I will continue writing up the chronology of the medieval branch lines and uploading them to this site and to the Mallory forum of genforum.com, as this research forms a part of my original research plan. Before concluding this section completely, I need one more time to express my gratitude to S.V. Mallory Smith for her pioneering work on Mallory history. Without it, it is inconceivable that any scholar over the last twenty years could have made significant progress in untangling the intricacies of medieval Mallory history. Although some of the details of her work have become superseded, there is still much left that is timeless. Moreover, her methodology is impeccable, as is her sure sense of where the problems lie. I, too, am, in my own way, walking in her footsteps. Like always, I will go ahead and upload this now, certain that I have made numerous mistakes only a Japanese with attention deficit syndrome could make, as that is what, in spite of having been born and raised in the United States, I have, over the years, become and what I now am. Nevertheless, there is much in what I have written that is worth reading, so I would hope people will bear with my mistakes of omission and commission with regard to the English language. Hikaru	MALORY, Sir Thomas (I22149)
1556	Gentleman of the Horse to Charles I. MP for Carlisle 1626 & 1628-29. Wounded at battle of Edgehill, 23 October 1642.	GRAHAM, Richard of Esk, Bart. (I8182)
1557	Gentleman, bachelor. Effects valued at under Â£1500. Administration granted on 18 Jan 1876 to brother William HEMUS, farmer, one of next of kin.	HEMUS, John (I18643)
1558	Gentleman. Effects under Â£4000. Probate granted on 4 Mar 1861 to nephew William GADD of North Petherton, gentleman and Abraham TURNER of Staplegrove, gentleman, executors.	GADD, Richard (I11294)
1559	George Albert Farmer, bachelor, born London, law student, aged 24, resident Bayswater Road, Darlinghurst, Sydney, son of Alfred Farmer & Phoebe Sheppard, father's occupation London City missionary AND Olivia Jay Winspear, spinster, born ---, aged 19, resident Corra Lynn, P[...] Street, Darlinghurst, daughter of James Woodward Winspear & Jane [name crossed out], father's occupation Wesleyan Minister; witnessed by Samuel Edward Lee[.]s & Ethel Willan Winspear; married at William Street Wesleyan Church, Sydney according to the rites of the Wesleyan Church by James W Winspear, Officiating Minister; The consent of Rev. J.W. Winspear Father of the Bride was given to the Marriage, J. W. Winspear, Minister [marriage certificate]	Family: George Albert FARMER / Olivia Jay WINSPEAR (F8061)
1560	George Augustus Frederick [Hanover]	HANOVER, George IV King of UK (I6195)
1561	George Augustus [Hanover]	HANOVER, George II King of UK (I6217)
1562	George BANKES Q4 1838 Melksham Reg'n District VIII 228	BANKS, George (I14794)
1563	George Frederick Ernest Albert Windsor	WINDSOR, George V King of GB etc. (I6140)
1564	George GADD, widower.	Family: George GADD / Elizabeth EVANS (F7439)
1565	George Lewis [Hanover]	HANOVER, George I King of UK (I6219)
1566	George ROSE widower, Ann ROSE spinster. Both of this parish. Both make mark [x]. Witnessed John NEWNAM & John WEBSTER. On the same day were married, with the same witnesses, Sarah ROSE spinster and Mathew TURLEY.	Family: George ROSE / Ann ROSE (F6355)
1567	George William Frederick [Hanover]	HANOVER, George III King of UK (I6193)
1568	George's birth certificate & Bristol P.O. Directory	Source (S8)
1569	At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld.	CRATES, George Edward (I14770)
1570	Geraldine Hemus (known in the family as Genna) was admitted as a=20 solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand at Auckland on February= 1907. From1932, until her retirement in 1950, she practiced as a= practitioner in Auckland, mainly as a criminal lawyer. She was also= involved in the National Council of Women for many years.	HEMUS, Geraldine (I10849)
1571	Gideon met Sarah when he arrived in South Shields to take his Mariner's exam. He had left Shetland after fathering a child by Ann Jane Williamson, a fact only discovered by his other descendants in 1996 after a visit to Shetland.	CHRISTIE, Gideon (I534)
1572	Given connection to Burford identified in Will, check will of Henry GODFREY, gentleman of Burford, 1701.	GODFREY, Richard (I17973)
1573	Given in probate affidavit.	FRANCIS, Samuel (I19819)
1574	Given in probate affidavit. This is now [2009] the site of The Royal Mews on the south side of Buckingham Palace gardens, approximately.	FRANCIS, Samuel (I19819)
1575	Given quaker connections could be grandson of Justinian.	FLEXNEY, John (I15354)
1576	Given the discrepancy in age at death, it's possible that this baptism is for a different child with parents of the same name - another Zachariah SHRAPNEL married an Elizabeth GAY at Trowbridge in 1731.	SHRAPNEL, Zachariah (I21409)
1577	Glos. IPM.	Source (S103)
1578	Gloucester CRO references to check: 1682 butler john U westerleigh 1682/ 27 yeoman Inventories 1682 butler john M westerleigh 1682/ 86 yeoman Wills 1541 - 1800 1686 butler katherine F westerleigh 1686/ 52 Wills 1541 - 1800 1712 buttler william U westerleigh 1712/ 54 Inventories 1712 buttler william M westerleigh 1712/178 Wills 1541 - 1800	BUTLER of Westerleigh, Glos. (I19901)
1579	Gloucestershire IPM Records: 1383 Held the manor of Coldaston, Glos.	BUTLER, James 2nd Earl of Ormonde (I1205)
1580	Godfather of James Scott of Scalloway.	INNES, Alexander of Laxfirth (I7936)
1581	Godparents were Ralph FLEXNEY, Elizabeth FLEXNEY and Thomas BARFOOT.	FLEXNEY, Ralph (I15572)
1582	Godparents: Lawrence Rutter, Peter Appleby, Trixie Gadd	Source (S150)
1583	Godparents: Tara Gadd, Rachael Gadd & Paul Rutter	Source (S184)
1584	Good amateur tenor - would sing in clubs, accompanied by his wife on the piano. [Doreen GRAHAM 2008]	GRAHAM, Alexander Pringle (I680)
1585	Goodlad is a name first recorded in mainland Scotland in the 15th century.	GOODLAD, Shetland (I3142)
1586	At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld.	CLAPHAM, John William (I14309)
1587	Graduated Harvard 1653	SHEPARD, Thomas (I7772)
1588	Graduated Harvard 1708	QUINCY, John (I7776)
1589	Graduated Harvard 1725	SMITH, William (I7779)
1590	Granddaughter of Berenger I (Count of Rennes 887 - 890) and heiress of Rennes.	_______, _______ (I7451)
1591	Grandfather of Canute, King of England, and of Olaf, King of Sweden. {Burke's Peerage}	DANE, Harold "Bluetooth" (I7367)
1592	Grandfather of Debbie Demascio, 5 Hosea Court, Mahogany Creek, W. Australia 6072.	PUGH, John Gadd (I9636)
1593	Grandmother of Len Noble.	STEVENS, Jane (I979)
1594	Grant gives her father as Andrew, Lord Sinclair - who doesn't exist according to Scots Peerage. This Andrew does, however, and is listed as having issue, though they are not actually listed.	SINCLAIR, Isobel (I2446)
1595	Grant says: "if the arms over the door of the Old Hall in Scalloway are correct, must have belonged to the Ancrum family".	SCOTT, Alexander (I2288)
1596	Granted gift by his father of lands in Kingsley, including the Hall, the Chapel in Frodsham Church and a quarter of the Manor.	ROTER, Richard le of Kingsley, Cheshire (I3618)
1597	Granted lands to Isabel Aston and Sir Robert de Aston.	ROTER, Nicholas le of Frodsham (I12687)
1598	Granted messuage called Newalls in Feering as part of daughter's marriage settlement.	BAKER, Willliam (I13035)
1599	Granted probate for late brother William's estate.	NEALE, Thomas (I16188)
1600	Granted the same coat of arms as appears on the Memorial of Ralph (d.1578), so speculated that these two were father and son. The wording on the memorial precludes this Ralph being a son of the father's second wife. 1599:Bailiff, 1612:Mayor	FLEXNEY, Ralph (I15475)

Maintained by Stephen Gadd.