William Mauleverer and Jane Conyers

[Muddipaws]

Hi

Like many, I am researching my family tree, and got to the difficult part of Nobility, some of it is ok and well documented and some not so.  Depending on where I look gives me a different result of wife to Illiam Maulevere, 1471 Worthersome, Bardsey, West Yorkshire, England and died 11 August 1551 , 1471 Worthersome, Bardsey, West Yorkshire, England.

I get two options Jane Conyers and Anne Conyers.  Both born 1470.  Having also checked The Peerage, it states Anne, when I check Stirnet.com its a jane.  Digging deeper it seems this is a grey area.   Has anyone looked in to this and got to the bottom of it at all?

[bradburyd]

From soc.genealogy.medieval :

 The pedigree of Mauleverer of Wothersome in the 1563
Visitation of Yorkshire (H.S.P. 16, 1881, p. 202) gives the wife of Sir
William and mother of his children as "Jane daughter of Conyers of
Sokeborne". So the family knew they were descended from the Conyerses
of Sockburn, they simply confused the first name (Joan/Jane) of Sir
William's second wife with that of his first (Anne).

[HughC]

Can we be sure Sir William married twice, and it's not just a misunderstanding?
It could be that the story was handed down by word of mouth and not committed to paper until later.

My Mauleverer tree says:

Sir William; born 1463 [vellum roll bearing the seal of the Lancaster herald 1591*]; buried at Bardsey, Yorks., 13 Aug. 1547 [parish register*].  Inherited the Arncliffe estate 1492 [Archæologia Aeliana, 3rd series, vol. XIV].  Knighted 1524 [“pettiegree” collected by his descendant Willm Mauleuerer 1601-02*].  Married 1492 Jane [Burke’s Landed Gentry] or An [the aforesaid pettiegree], dau. of Sir John Conyers of Sockburn or Sockburne, Co. Durham.  “Lady Jane Mauleverer” was buried at Bardsey 27 Nov. 1546 [parish register*].

The asterisks refer to Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, vol. 2 (London, 1876).

A grey area indeed.

[Muddipaws]

From soc.genealogy.medieval :

 The pedigree of Mauleverer of Wothersome in the 1563
Visitation of Yorkshire (H.S.P. 16, 1881, p. 202) gives the wife of Sir
William and mother of his children as "Jane daughter of Conyers of
Sokeborne". So the family knew they were descended from the Conyerses
of Sockburn, they simply confused the first name (Joan/Jane) of Sir
William's second wife with that of his first (Anne).

How do you access this medieval Geneology page?

[bradburyd]

https://groups.google.com/g/soc.genealogy.medieval

[HughC]

Sir William’s GGfather, another Sir William, of Wothersome, married Jone [the aforementioned vellum roll] or Joane [Visitation of Yorkshire 1584-85] or Joan [Burke’s Landed Gentry], elder daughter & coheir of the late John Colvell [vellum roll] or Sir John Colvile [visitation] or Colville [“pettiegree” and Landed Gentry] of Arncliffe, Yorkshire, and his wife Alas or Alice née d’Arcy (daughter of Lord Darcy).  She brought the Arncliffe estate into the family.

Are the names Colville and Conyers similar enough to have given rise to confusion?
Or is it just that Joan and Jane were common names (feminine forms of John)?
As usual, we’ll have to learn to talk to the dead to find out the truth.

I sometimes wonder why we bother to trace our ancestors back so far.  Assuming all the wives down the line were faithful to their husbands, who therefore really were the fathers of the children they called their own, the younger Sir William and his wife (whatever her name may have been) were 15 generations back from me, just two of over 30 thousand ancestors in that degree – even allowing for some cousin marriages.  If I’ve understood correctly, I can have inherited genes from no more than 46 of them.  So the probability is overwhelmingly great that they were not “mine” at all.

[Muddipaws]

Well I guess I bother because I like it.  Gives me something to do, learn a little of history on my way.  Yes there will be some tricky points. At the end of the day I'm losing no sleep over it.  I don't take it too seriously.  I just thought I would ask.