Douglas Richardson did not make all the claims that http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/p1786.htm# attributes to him. That web site is very unreliable and repeatedly cites Richardson for data that seems to be largely fanciful. More to the point, these dates and info for John Anne are wrong in most respects. First, John Anne was not a knight, no "Sir" John Anne. John Anne was actually born around 1434, since he came of age sometime before 28 Aug 1455, ("Folios 281-290: July 1455 - ," in Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: K, Henry VI, ed. Reginald R Sharpe (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1911), 369-380. British History Online, accessed July 30, 2018, http://www.british-history.ac.uk/london-letter-books/volk/pp369-380.) The above record states that he was a son of Alexander Anne, John Anne is mentioned as alive in 1484. (London, Vera C. M.,. The Cartulary of Bradenstoke priory / edited by Vera C.M. London, Wiltshire Record Society Devizes 1979, p. 17,) and was deceased by 1495 (UK National Archives C 1/183/7).
