Zij is getrouwd met John VI le Strange.
Zij zijn getrouwd rond 1299.
Kind(eren):
BP & CP name her Iseult, with no indication of her ancestry. I havefound several references to her in soc.genealogy.medieval as Isolda orIseult de Walton, apparently based on a citation in "Burke's Dormant &Extinct Peerages", p. 515. Given the unreliability of BxP as a source, Ibelieve that Curt is correct (below) in questioning the ancestry I hadgiven Iseult. Therefore I am removing Iseult's surname of Walton.
------------------
The following was a post-em, 7 Jul 2003, by Curt Hofemann, curt_hofemannAT yahoo.com:
Jim, consider what you’re suggesting:
John de Walton + Isabel Shirley had a son John who had a dau Iseult. John& Isabel also had a dau Maud + John V lord/baron le Strange who had a sonJohn VI lord/baron le Strange. Iseult & John IV marry. Unless there arepapal dispensation records extant, I’d think it "shirley le strange" that1st cousins wed at this level of the peerage, though there are precedents& I'm not "Knockyn" it. To my (limited) knowledge, no source providesIseult’s antecedents & Maude's antecedents, though cleared up in CPXIV:596, seems to me to still have questions unanswered. And what "leBeche" about the wife of John V named Alienore de Montibus/Montz da. & h.of Eble de Montibus/Montz, Constable of Windsor Castle, by Joan, widow ofGodfrey de Craucombe & prior wife of Stephen de Somery, perhaps dau of NNde Beche? It appears she wasn't a Craucombe, but a possibly le Beche ormore precisely - ancestry unk.
Unfortunately questions & not answers...
Curt
Iseult (isolda) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
± 1299 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John VI le Strange |
Iseult (no last name)
Iseult (no last name)
Iseult de Walton