Sir Francis Bryan I "The Vicar of Hell", Lord Chief Justice of Ireland - Documenting any children of Sir Francis Bryan

Well said :)

Browsing around the Bryan/Bryant tree and I ran into the Ancestor's of Ann Smith Bryant who are Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville Queen Consort.
http://www.geni.com/path/Wanda+is+related+to+Edward-IV-King-of-Engl...

Margaret Watson is a Daughter of Edward and Elizabeth and while at first glance it looks like a fakery attempt it is not. Margaret is named as a namesake for the other Margaret "Margaret of York" as her Niece. The two Margaret's in Comparison:
Margaret Watson: Born 1472
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_York_(1472)
and
Margaret of York: Born 1446
Not sure why they call them both Margaret of York.
In any event, while following Margaret's Ancestor's I arrived at her Father Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville.
Quite oddly, Edward IV's profile is not merged with any other Edward IV profiles and comes to a dead end. We all know he has ancestor's so why the dead end?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_IV_of_England
Edward IV of England

Sorry, here is what I meant to paste for Edward IV dead end.
Edward IV of England

I think there must be a confusion of Margarets here.

Edward IV had a daughter Margaret of York, named after his sister Margaret of York.

Edward IV's sister Margaret married the duke of Burgundy. She was the one who help the pretender Perkin Warbeck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_York

Edward IV's daughter Margaret died at the age of 8 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_York_(1472)

Erica Howton, you are the curator for Margaret Watson. Do you know what evidence there might be for the idea she was a legitimate daughter of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville?

Thank you Justin, you are right, it does say she died as an infant. Even odder is that her body is missing from the Sarcophagus.
These Heritage profiles seem to think that Margaret lived and married a Watson. http://www.myheritage.com/names/margaret_watson%20plantagenet
and someone working on Geni must have copied one of them to that tree.

Normally I would just disconnect the relationship and move on, but because it's a curated profile I'm reluctant to do that. Let's see what Erica thinks.

Good eyes! I would not have known about this. Margaret (unknown) disconnected from parents.

Thanks!

Thank you Erica :)

That's two fakeries so far that have been fixed this week in the Bryan/Bryant tree. It appears to be a problem profile or one of those that people like to embellish upon. Out of curiosity I did a surname dna search for Woodville and was Happy to find that surname is not a match for me. Watson however is and that is exactly where that one ends with Margaret Watson. Watson is a Scottish name and I believe I saw a Henderson in the Watson tree, another Scottish clan. There's nothing worse then fakeries added to a tree because it takes away from the legitimate work and legitimate ancestor's. Thanks again for curators Erica Isabel Howton for disconnecting the fake Parents of Margaret Watson and to curator Erin Spiceland for correcting the fake Marquiess Title on Bryan.

While researching possible connections to Sarah (Brinker) Bryan, Wife of Sir Francis Bryan III born c. 1634, I accidently stumbled upon a connection between Berryman (the other alias for Sarah) as being a descendant of the Bourchier's. If Sarah is indeed a Berryman rather than a Brincker then it would make her Sir Francis Bryan's Cousin. How or why that would also make her a cousin to the Prince or Princess or Orange is unknown. The de Sille connection I was searching for which I thought might be a connection to Sarah because it comes from the Netherlands is also found to be a distant Ancestor of Bryan. Sarah seems to be cut off from her entire family for some odd reason and no information can be found that connects her to the Brunngger's. Sarah does not show up in ship or sailing logs either however she does show up in the "National Society Sons and Daughters of Pilgrims along with Husband Francis and other Bryan's. The only other Brinker's to show up are Brinks with only one of them being close to Sarah's age. No Brunngger's show up in the area for this Society. By following the earliest born Brink in America listed on the National Society Sons and Daughters of Pilgrims you find that specific solitary family to have come from the Netherlands (which Sarah is said to come from) with the following information: http://minerdescent.com/2010/08/12/lambert-herbertse-brink/
They are also said to be known as Brinkerhoff. Per my DNA surname matches I have found matches to the surname Brinckerhoff. I believe this is the right Brink connection to Sarah. Berryman's MAY match by DNA because SOME BERRYMAN'S share Bryan ancestor's of Bourchier. One John Berryman is also listed as also being a member of the Society. However his Ancestor's lead to no where.
Listed below are possible relatives of Sarah Bryan

Brink; Hendricks Cornelisse c1633 bef 12 Feb 1695/6 Married to Lambert Huybertse Brink

Brink; Lambert Huybertse c1629 wp 11 Apr 1702 Married to Hendricks Cornelisse

Berryman; John c1630 28 Jan 1680 Married to Jane Tucker

More research on the Brink family with some interesting twists and turns.
This site lists the Brink family (Sarah omitted).
http://www.hopefarm.com/brink.htm
If you skip down to the part where it lists the Burgomaster's you will find names of and years that these brink's were Burgomaster's in North Holland.
I wasn't sure what a Burgomaster was so I had to look it up. Interestingly I arrived at a page about Elenore' de Bourbon and her gift from the Burgomaster of Haarlem aka State's General. It only mentions a gift from the Burgomaster, not his name but he comes from the place where the Brinks' would be from and about the right time frame.
Question of the day.. Were any of those Brink's State's General's or Burgomaster's related to Eleonore de Bourbon or other House of Orange or House of Bourbon member's or was it just a confusion about the gift giving? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89l%C3%A9onore_de_Bourbon

The most likely Burgomaster and States General Member alive during the time of the gifts to Eleonore de Bourbon would have been

Year 1597 Alphert Brink, LL.D. (Not sure what the LL.D means)

A bit off topic but another interesting piece of trivia from all of this is about the name Haarlem. (Early Brink Settler's in New York, mostly Long Island). Harlem New York is named for Haarlem in Holland also mentioned

Henry Hudson names Staten Island after the Staten General.

This of course has no direct path to Sarah Brinker but in general terms to her family name it does for the story even if it is very loosely applied.
The Brink's come from North Holland
The Brinks had Burgomaster family members
The members of the House of Orange/Bourbon etc. are mentioned as being associated with at least one of those Burgomasters in the right time frame for it to have a possible connection.
Conclusion; more research needed.

Amy Nordahl Cote, at the start of this thread you were asking for a translation of the following passage:

Stratham, 16 septembre. — Selve a reçu il y a trois jours la dépèche que l'amiral lui a envoyée par le fils de sir Francis Bryan, lequel est arrivé sain et sauf avec et sauf avec un des gens de Selve à Londres, d'où il est reparti pour aller retrouver son père. << Ledict sieur de Bryant a depuis peu de temps espousé une vefve irlandoise nommée la comtesse de Ouar- mont et s'en va en Irlande en partye pour voir le bien de sa femme mais principalement comme je cuyde depesché pour les affaires de ce roy. » Il répète à l'amiral le refus du protecteur de donner une garantie plus catégorique à la flotte de pêche française, sous prétexte qu'un tel acte ferait accuser le roi d'Angleterre de pusillanimité, et l'avise de la saisie des 10 ou 12 navires français signalée à Douvres.
Correspondance politique de Odet de Selve: ambassadeur de France en Angleterre (1546-1549)

I begged a favor from a good friend, and got the following:

Strathem, 16 September. Selve has received three days ago the dispatch that the admiral has sent to him by the son of Sir Francis Bryan, who has arrived safe and sound and sent with one of Selve’s people to London, from which he has left again to go find his father. “The said sire of Bryant has recently married an Irish widow named the Comtesse de Ouarmont and goes to Ireland partly to see to the wellbeing of his wife but principally … to see to the affairs of the king.“ He repeats to the admiral the refusal of a protector to give a guarantee more categorically to the French fleet, under the pretext that such an act would be to accuse the king of England of faintheartedness, and the advice of the seizure of 10-12 French ships signaled to Douvres.
Political Correspondence of Odet de Selve, ambassador of France in England, 1546-49

That tells us very little, but it does confirm the ambiguity of the passage.

Justin Durand

I apologize for disappearing--had a flare-up of health issues that I don't wish to bore anyone with.

Many thanks for getting this translation...and please thank your friend!

Alas, nothing there to show this was an illegitimate son. Timing-wise, he could also be from Francis's first marriage with Phillipa Spice Fortescue. (She had a son Henry from her first marriage with John Fortescue.) I haven't found proof of the existence of their alleged son, Edmund Bryan.

The French admiral's name was Claude d'Annebault. Hoping I can dig up a name for this un-named Bryan using that name--if I succeed, I'll report here.

I have been thinking the same thing. To take the dates and times that other member trees have as children and when and where they are born almost none of it lines up. Which I find very frustrating. I would like an accurate bloodline to follow further back. Which I have gone ahead and added all the way back to the late 1200's, but it still feels as if something isn't correct in the Francis Bryan generation. He is my 14th Gr. Grandfather, I hope I have the correct son of his as my direct descendant. I have seen many trees that have francis and Philippa having a child long after she had died, some that have a son listed to him and Joan a good 20 years after his death. .

Keep up the good work and the faith. There is good solid evidence that you are quite right and I am on the cusp of being able to demonstrate that the traditional well written about account of the link between Sir FB and FB III is sound if a little distorted by mountains of interpretation. I am reluctant to publish my work at present because the internet is awash with cynical hack researchers who don't seem to understand what they are doing. Their attitude is hampering solid research and doing a great disservice to serious Bryan researchers.