Kind(eren):
The Magna Charta Sureties states that Isabel, wife of John Aylesbury, was"said to be daughter of Eubulo (1373-1411), a clerk, son of Roger, 5thLord Strange of Knockyn." If the 1373 is a birth date (birth dates arenot normally given in this format--reigning years of royalty usually aregiven like this--maybe MCS is indicating Eubulo's reigning years ofclerking), then it leads to an impossible situation because Isabel's sonSir Thomas Aylesbury was born "c. 1369". In other words Thomas was born4 years before his grandfather.
The other thing that is strange about the ancestry of Eubulo le Strangeis that, if he was the son of Roger the 5th Lord, then being just a clerkhe would be a younger son. Roger the 5th Lord's eldest son John was bornabout 1352. If Eubulo was born after 1352, then he could not have agrandson born about 1369.
I have found that the numbering of lordships varies all over the place,depending on which lineage/book you are following. Some number "Lord leStrange"s. Others number "Lord le Strange of Knockyn"s. Yet others goby certain creation dates and start renumbering every once in a whilebecause some monarch re-knighted someone. Therefore I have made Eubulo'sfather Roger, the 4th Lord of Knockyn by my numbering system--and with abirth date of 1335, he is a younger son.
When some better dates/proofs come along, I will be happy to change mylineage to agree.
-------------------------------------------
A little more proof has come along tending to confirm Eubulo as son ofRoger. He had an uncle Ebles, a Baron and quasi Earl of Lincoln, wholeft Roger a lot of lands after he died in 1335. Therefore I think thisEubulo/Ebles is named after him.