William Shakespeare's grandfather - Richard Shakespeare - is recorded in written records as spelling his surname at least "five" different ways! As most people were either illiterate or semi-literate - it is probably far more accurate to state that five different scribes (working in various official capacities) spelt Richard's name in five different ways. This was common - as spelling was not yet standardised in the UK and scholars were expected to write with flare - spelling names, activities and concepts in vastly different (and entertaining) ways! William Shakespeare demonstrates this convention - sometimes spelling the same word (appearing on the same page) as much as three different ways! A fully literate scribe was expected - in the old days - not only to "read" a text but also "decipher" what was being said and conveyed by the author! A lack of standard language usage made this process a highly skilled event - arguably far more difficult than reading modern English! The type of officials we are discussing included "Church" and "Civic" representatives. Invariably, these persons wrote according to how words "sounded" - rather than by any associated convention. This was usually the case as their illiterate clients had no idea (or preference) as to how their surnames were spelt. Indeed, this difference in spelling the Bard's surname is one of the planks in the "Oxfordian" verses the "Stratfordian" debate - but is it a red herring? Literate individuals could (and did) often insist on a certain way of spelling their surname if they were given the choice. It is equally true that if such individuals wished to disappear - the waters might be muddied by placing the odd letter in a different place when signing their names! Of course, it could also be the case that some people like to spell their names differently at various times - seeing this as an essential aspect of their individual freedom and identity. Who could blame them? Today, of course, with the modern standardisation of the English language, there has arisen an almost Confucian obsession with spelling surnames in a specific manner (the Chinese people venerate their ancient surnames). Surnames, like DNA, have become an important part of an individual's identity. In the 1500s (primarily through Tax Returns) all the people of my family living in Duddington and King's Cliff spell their surname "Wyles" without exception. During the early to middle 1600s - two individuals (spouses) - have their name spelt as "Wiles" on their gravestones. During the middle to late 1600s - two individuals (spouses) - possess a grave-marker which spells their names as "Wyles". From there on in - around 95% of the Wyles family occupants of the graveyard of St Mary's Church (Duddington) spell their surname "Wyles". One couple in the 1800s use "Wiles" - with one or two on official records having their surname spelt "Whyles" - when their gravestones clearly state "Wyles". Anthony Holden, William Shakespeare - His Life and Work, ABACUS, (1999), Pages 52-54
0 Comments
Believe or not, American in Utah (possibly Mormons) spend their time accessing British genealogical records - and presenting this data for sale in the public domain. Of course, as we - the British people - own this data, we are entitled to access it for free if we are prepared to visit Records Offices and Libraries and carry-out the research ourselves. As these places like to 'charge' us by placing a pay-wall between ourselves and our historical data - it is not always easy to access the information that defines our very being. Still, once one or two of us gains access to this data - we can (as a matter of duty) - place it in the public domain for free consumption. We may have used some of this data already in our family research - but there is much more general information to be gleamed! This may well be useful to "Wyles" people living in other areas! These four-county Parish Records include 'Births', 'Christenings', 'Deaths', 'Marriages' and 'Court Cases', etc. My partner - Gee - accessed this CD disc and what is reproduced here are the screenshots she carefully made:
'My knowledge begins with Thomas and Mary Wyles who lived during the first half of the 1700s in Frinstead, which is a tiny, ancient town in the Maidstone borough of county Kent, in south-east England. This earlier Thomas was born in 1711 in nearby Bredgar Parish. We don’t know much more about him, or his wife, whose maiden name is still a mystery to me.' prairie wordsmith - Researching America's history, one family at a time - Wyles 'The next two generations also give up very little more than their names and where they lived. Thomas’ son, John Wyles married Sarah Frost in Linstead, Suffolk in 1773. Their son, also John Wyles, was born in 1775, and married Frances Sears in 1805, in Boxley, Maidstone, Kent. In 1806, they were in Stockbury; in 1814 they were in Newington Geat, Sittingbourne, Kent; and they were still there in 1818 when their son Thomas was born there, and he was my third-great-grandfather.'
Dear E
Thank you for your interesting email: Wyles Paternal DNA (Duddington) UK The above article provides the Paternal DNA results of our 'Wyles' name clan as associated with the Lincolnshire village of 'Duddington'. Both Scottish (Pictish) and Russian historians are of the opinion that 'Wyles' is the plural of 'Wyle' - and that 'Wyle' is an Anglicisation of the Viking (Cyrillic) title of 'Уайл' (Uayl) - meaning 'a dominant warrior whose fighting skills unite the people'. Sometimes, 'Uayl' is written today as 'Jarl' - with the 'J' retaining the 'U' sound. The Anglo-Saxons took this non-Germanic title and renamed it 'Earl' - using it as a noble status linked to 'birth' and not to 'ability' (within Viking culture any would could become a 'Uayl' providing they could 'fight' and quell any enemy). Today, in modern Russia the surname 'Wyles' is written as 'Уайлс' (Uayls) - and this is how I am referred to in all written communication, etc. The Vikings, as you know, settle vast parts of the UK and Eire, and so their DNA is everywhere, being particularly linked with the Celtic areas. However, as there are so many sounding similar names, such as 'Wills', 'Wells' and 'Willis', etc, all possessing different origins and distinct (unrelated) lineages, correct association can be difficult. I believe the Oxford definition of 'Wyles' (Wiles) - stating it is linked to eel traps and trickery - relates only to one lineage variant of an entire host of similar sounding but very different names! Of course, I know nothing about the 'van Wyk' surname as such, but 'Wyk' is written as 'Вик' in Cyrillic and pronounced 'Vik'. Within the Russian language this word is a noun meaning to 'cry', 'shout', and 'call-out', etc. I presume 'van' is Dutch for 'of' or 'from' and 'Wyk' refers to a place in the Netherlands. I have seen some people in the UK referred to as 'de Wyle' or 'de Wyles' on occasion - usually in the 12th and 13th centuries - with the 'de' (Norman French for 'of') eventually being dropped. There are theories that assume there were a number of disconnected places all over the UK - all carrying similar sounding names that possessed no direct historical association with one another. Perhaps a place with a water 'Well' might figure greatly in the old days (as we all need to drink) and at least in that sense the name 'Well' or 'Wells' might be laterally associated in a conceptual sense, whilst not sharing a DNA lineage. I personally believe that 'Wyles' is distinct from 'Wiles' - even though confusion is sometimes caused due to both lineages borrowing one another's spelling from time to time - usually by mistake. Therefore, we can be 'related' but by the 'error' of poor spelling! In the days before full literacy and the stabilisation of language - scribes would often spell exactly same word on a single page in many different ways! All Best Wishes Adrian PS: A Scottish historian stated that 'Wyles' is pronouced 'Wy-les' in in Scotland - and is the proper or correct surname associated with who is today known as 'William Wallace' - with 'Wallace' being a modern re-invention of his clan name. If this is correct - then this probably reinforces the Viking hypothesis! Dear Adrian I have been researching my ancestors, the WILES family of Ruskington for many years. They were yeoman farmers in the village. Thomas Wiles who married Maria Claricoates are my 3 x Great Grandparents. Maria Wiles, sister of Thomas, married Walter Baldock who was in mamy ways "all things Ruskington." He was landlord of the Shoulder of Mutton Public House in the village. Always good to be in contact with fellow researchers. Robert Turner of Newark, Notts. Dear Richard
Thank you for your very interesting email. Although my research has centred upon Duddington, I am always interested to learn more about other lineages of the 'Wiles' - 'Wyles' surname. As a matter of interest, what is the earliest known example of 'Wiles' in the Ruskington area? Prof. Peter McClure has provided documentary evidence to me (the 'lay subsidy rolls') that a man named 'Wyles' existed in Oundle (situated around 13 miles South of Duddington) as early as 1301. For Duddington at the moment. (this could change if older documents are discovered), the earliest documentary evidence is a tax return for a number of men named 'Wyles' dated as '1523'. I suspect this is a father and a number of sons who have perhaps just entered the area under Henry VIII, although this is a contentious issue that needs more research (obviously, the 1523 tax return is for the Crown of Henry VIII). The next document is a 1588 tax return for a number of 'Wyles' men living in Duddington to be paid to Elizabeth I. The first observable burials in St Mary's Church (Duddington) is of 'Robert Wiles' (1619) and his wife 'Agnus Wiles' (1646). The earlier Oundle and tax returns version of the surname is 'Wyles' with the above graves being 'Wiles'. There is only one other burial spelt 'Wiles' in the graveyard but even this is spelt 'Wyles' in other documents. I would like to see more research into the 'Wiles-Wyles' dichotomy as I think with regards to other (unrelated) geographical areas the use of the name might well be unrelated and a product of a different (ancient) Celtic or Anglo-Saxon origins and linguistic evolutions. Of course, spelling was not 'standardised' in the past as it is today, and I have even seen the name spelt 'Whyles' in Church records - which gives a clue to its pronunciation. Again, yet another area of contention as Scottish researchers have suggested to me that the name should be pronounced 'Wy-les' as in 'Wallace' with this latter name being a modern invention, etc. This narrative feeds into the Viking origination theory (that 'Wyles' = 'Jarls') c, 9th century CE. All these theories date to before the Norman Conquest - but I have no direct evidence that 'Wyles' existed prior to this time (Although I am always seeking the possibility of such evidence). On the other hand, names such as Wills, Wylls, Wiles, Wyles, Willes, Wylles and Willes, Wylles etc, could all be derivatives of 'William' or 'Wilhelm', etc, and possibly be inspired by 'William the Conqueror'. Research as to the historicity of the surname is ongoing. All Best Wishes Adrian Wyles Ruskington Cemetery and Churchyard Burials
Grave 69 WILES, John 1772 – 1827 54 Grave 69 WILES, Ann 1773 – 1854 Probably husband and wife but interesting that there are no more in the area spelt with a 'y' or an 'i'! Dear Adrian (from Gillian) Well written as ever. Can't comment really on your history of letters of the alphabet. It is something I know nothing about but it seems to all fit together logically. But because I am me, I will pass comment on Pagan Wyles and his assimilation into Christianity. In the 7th Century both Leicester and Peterboough (Medeshamstede) were centres of Christianity, and Duddington lies nearly half way between the two. I wonder if there was a road there before the A47? It's position in the Heptarchy would also suggest an Angle settlement not a Saxon one. The arrival of the Danes is interesting. Leicester certainly submitted to the Danelaw and most of the religious foundations in the area were plundered, but there is evidence for the monastery at Peterborough surviving. Personally I don't see the total destruction of Christianity by the Danes, a bit like the Mongols, they plundered for the gold and jewels but didn't really give a thought to 'religion' as such. The thing is, the ordinary working Danes who came over to trade and work the land, in their Paganism recognised the geometry of Christianity (as it was then, before it was turned into a linear chronology and weapon during the Renaissance). Where Christianity survived, and where the genuine Christian spirit of fraternity existed, I can see Danes being attracted and seeing their own essence in the Christian symbolism and narrative. The surviving Icelandic sagas seamlessly progress from pagan to Christian, but this may not be the whole story. Obviously, Vikings would have had centres of non Viking power in their sites and would have treated them mercilessly like Lindesfarne, but where the church existed not as a threat, I am sure an assimilation occurred. What people forget is that the god of the Christians claimed something that none of the other gods dared claim. That is absolute sovereignty over everything, material and immaterial. A most high god who is a loving father of all. All the other gods had problems with other gods, had spirits they couldn't tame, had weaknesses as well as superpowers. You could invoke them for help, but you never claimed they had total sovereignty. The 'most high god' of the Christian and Jewish tradition was the god who ruled over all the other gods. The narrative that Christianity and Judaism are monotheistic is quite modern and doesn't actually fit scripture. Any pagan with a pantheon of gods, might indeed be attracted to a most high god who was without hang-ups and who needed no tribute, only love. Dear Gillian (from Adrian) When we drive to Duddington, we pass Peterborough which seems to sit more or less exactly in a valley. A monastery is a good idea. I suppose it was Peter Burgh or Peter's Fort? The Anglo-Saxon King was known as Burgred or 'Red Fort'. In the back of my mind I think 'Peter' means 'stone' so we are looking at a 'Stone Fort'. Having just checked wiki you are right - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medeshamstede - perhaps St Mary's was related to this monastery. There is talk of a deadly Viking attack in 864 CE - ten years before the Duddington Hoard was hidden in 874 CE. Perhaps it took ten years to head in land or they were distracted. What kind of Christians were the Anglo-Saxons? I am assuming different from the earlier Celts and the later Normans? The Vikings did what they were told so if a Jarl took on Christianity then his entire army did! Dear Adrian (from Gillian)
Interesting question regarding the church in England around 860CE... I include an extract from a book showing the structure of the church system a century or so earlier. There is no reason to think it had changed much in the intervening period. Later reforms to secular and monastic clergy, (driven by the French church) probably didn't reach England till late Saxon times shortly before the Norman conquest (and accelerated by it). It was these reforms which led to the all powerful grand monasteries of the Middle Ages. Monasteries in England in the 9th Century would look very different to what we think of as a medieval monastery. The Irish church (Celtic) church had been heavily influenced by Egyptian monasticism (evidence of strong trade links between Ireland and North Africa) and was entirely based around monasteries of monks living much like the desert fathers. England developed another model more influenced by continental Europe, where there were parallel groupings of secular and monastic clergy. It is this which the text I have scanned talks about. The worship in Duddington at the time would more closely resemble the worship in an Orthodox church today, than a Tridentine rite Catholic church. It was before the cult of Purgatory set-in which radically changed the devotional life of Western church, everyone would be standing, there would be a roodscreen and the sacred mysteries would take place behind that. There would be no pulpit as we know them today. The priest would be among the people for the Gospel and any homily. People would come and go during services, zoning in and out, taking in as much as they could, it was not a performance to be watched. The question is: was Duddington a church run by secular or monastic clergy? My view is that the general dictionary views of surnames are a mixture of localisms, broad definitions and speculations. Some surnames, such as those obviously involving a profession such as referring to a ‘Black Smith’, for instance, tell us nothing about the origination and location of a particular family but everything about what that vocation involves. This is not uncommon as a similar situation is found with ecclesiastical rank (such as ‘Bishop’, ‘Priest’, or ‘Monk’, etc) and military rank (such as ‘Sergeant’, ‘Marshal’ and ‘Captain’, etc). Other names involve a specific locality within a known geographical area, with those involving particular or outstanding physical characteristics (such as ‘handsome’, ‘Tall’ and ‘Beautiful’, etc), or types of outstanding characteristics (such ‘Trustworthy’, ‘Joyful’ and ‘Love’, etc). Surnames can even involve precious metals (such as ‘Gold’ ‘Silver’ and ‘Steel’, etc) and valuable stones (such as ‘Daimond’, ‘Sapphire’ and ‘Ruby’, etc). There are no set rules for the definition of a surname. Although many ancient surnames in China (which are all over two-thousand years old) are indicative of a specific geographical location – this is not always the case. One ethnic Chinese person I know carries the surname ‘Qiu’ [邱 - Qiu1] (pronounced ‘Yau’ in Cantonese). Over two-thousand five-hundred-years ago, ancestors from her family faithfully served the family of the Sage Scholar known in the West as ‘Confucius’ (born ‘孔丘’ or ‘Kong Qiu’). As a reward, this peasant family was elevated up the social ranks by being granted the surname ‘丘’ (Qiu) - which is the first-name of Confucius denoting ‘small bumps’ he possessed on the top of his head. However, in 1725 CE, the Yongzheng Emperor of the Qing Dynasty took exception to this history decreed that a naming taboo should be placed upon those carrying the name of Confucius, ordering each surname lineage to add the particle ‘阝’ (Yi4) to the right of the ideogram ‘丘’ thus creating the combination of ‘邱’- With ‘阝’ (Yi4) being a contraction of ‘邑‘ (Yi4) - which denotes a ‘town’, ‘district’ or ‘state’, etc. This was carried-out to remove direct association between the lineal descendants of the servants of the House of Confucius and Confucius himself – and instead change that history so as to associate it instead with the far-older personage of Jiang Ziya (姜子牙), a military advisor at the start of the Zhou Dynasty (1046 - 256 BCE) who would later found the powerful State of Qi (a place Confucius visted). The capital of Qi was a place named Yingqiu (营丘), located in present-day Shandong province. Some of Jiang Ziya’s descendants thus adopted Qiu (丘) as their surname. Many actual descendants of the servants of Confucius today, however, still remember their humble roots in the House of Confucius. As for ‘Wyles’ no one is sure of its exact origins. Dictionaries speculate that there could have been specific places named after local attributes all over the UK – with talk of ‘tricksters’ and ‘hunters of eels’ or a ‘special trap’ for capturing eels! (As in a ‘Wiley’ device)! I suspect that ‘Wyles’ might have many different (and unrelated’) origins and that we must carry-out our own genealogical research. Certainly, my paternal DNA, the known physical history of my family and the area within which they lived bear no resemblance to prevailing name-dictionary theories!
Jarls-Yarls = Scandinavia for ‘social status and influence acquired by a dominant fighter’.
‘J’ and ‘Y’ replaced by ‘W’ ‘ar’ replaced with ‘y’ or ‘i’ Jyles-Jiles Variant: Earl (English) UUyles-UUiles Wyles-Wiles Variant: UUyles = ‘Wallace’ The usage of a double ‘U’ (that is written as a ’UU’) as found within the Latin alphabet stems from between the 1st century BCE and 7th centuries CE, and emerged from a requirement for Latin speakers to represent a (Germanic) sound falling somewhere between ‘B’ and ‘V’ - at a time when ‘V’ and ‘U’ were not yet distinguished. From the 4th centuries CE, ethnic (Gothic) Germanic speakers, however, used the Greek ‘Y’ (borrowed from the ‘Phoenician Y - or waw’. Named Upsilon (capital) and Ypsilon (lower-case) - represented as ‘Y’ (capital) and ‘u’ (lower-case) - to represent the ‘UU’ sound. When writing within classical Greek, ‘Upsilon’ is written as ‘ʌpsɪlɒn’ with ‘Ypsilon’ as ‘ύψιλον’. This is where a contradiction emerges within modern English but which is logical within ancient Greek. ‘Upsilon-ʌpsɪlɒn’ is represented as a capital ‘Y’ (correct in ancient Greek but visually ‘odd’ when written within modern English as U-ʌ change place) - as this is where an apparent ‘U’ is actually a ‘Y’ as two alphabets merge whilst retaining their distinctive meaning. Things are further confused when it is learned that ‘Ypsilon-ύψιλον’ is represented as lower-case ‘u’ - again, correct within ancient Greek but odd-looking within modern English when Y-ύ change place). This ‘change of place or position’ takes place within a dominant alphabet when it expresses the meanings inherent in a subordinate alphabet. Modern English is comprised of ancient British-Celtic, Greek, Roman Latin, German and Scandinavian languages – hence the inherent (and apparent) diversity and complication. Here, ‘Y’ is a ‘capital’ version of the lower-case ‘u’ - whilst within modern English, a ‘Y’ is a ‘capital’ representation of the lower-case ‘y’ with its tale written below the line. By the time of the 8th century, however, Germany writers started to also use the Latin ‘UU’ to represent he sound between ‘V’ and ‘U’ - as the Romans had been using ‘VV’ and uu’ when writing Germanic names such as ‘Wamba’, etc. This ‘VV’ and ‘uu’ was also useful for translating Hebrew terms from the Bible into Latin, hence the development of its popularity throughout a Christianised Roman empire. By the 8th century CE, there existed ‘Y’, ‘U’, ‘VV’, ‘uu’ and ‘u’ all representing what is now represented by ‘W’ and ‘w’. All these letters have been used within an ever evolving and highly idiosyncratic English language that never started to developed a ‘standard’ version until the 15th century onwards – with the development of the printing-press, and the expansion of English beyond the British shores into the world at large (during the process of imperialist expansion). As English-speakers encountered other speakers – natural challenges occurred to the hitherto foregone conclusion inherent with the English language. As English was continuously thrown-back upon itself, a number of ‘standardisations’ developed which saw language continuously evolving. Although much more stable today, British English comes under pressure from American and Canadian English, as well as the English spoken in non-European parts of the world. As the majority of English-speakers in Britain were illiterate up until the advent of widespread ‘free’ education in the UK in the 20th century, the recording of ‘names’ relied upon local pronunciations rather than standardised spellings. Church-trained scholars, however, would write-down names when individuals were Christian, married or when being buried, whilst in the latter case stone-masons (a rare example of working-class literacy over the last four-hundred years – perhaps 1600s onwards) would ‘spell’ the name to the best of their ability. These Church records (that evolved out of Latin script and into the English script post-Reformation), have taken on the only legitimate ‘official’ records of the ‘proof’ of the existence of an individual. Genealogy today, when examining the ‘earliest’ records of an individual existence must begin with extant Church records. This is the case even for non-Christian (European) groups such as the Celts, Vikings, Germanics and Jews, etc. The ‘Wyles’ surname is not ‘Christian’ and is not historically linked to the Christian religion. This is true despite the fact that the ‘Wyles’ people who settled in Duddington started to frequent what was probably the ‘Catholic Church’ which was then forcibly converted to the ‘Protestantism’ after 1539 CE. This is why the ‘Wyles’ genealogical records are recorded in St Mary’s Church in Duddington back to the early 1600s on surviving grave-stones – but is also recorded on two Duddington tax-returns for 1524 CE and 1581 CE of local Wyles people owing tax to Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, but then expands outside the geographic boundaries of Duddington and into the surrounding area – with the earliest found so far dating to 1301 CE – but even this name is recorded in broader Church records. Whoever the Pagan ‘Wyles’ were – they became ‘Christianised’ by association. As Anglo-Saxons are known to have been occupying Duddington since at least 874 CE (according to discovered coins), it is probable that the Viking ‘Wyles’ people arrived in the area at some point around 874 CE or there abouts - and 1301 CE (a time period of just over four-hundred-years) – the earliest known ‘written’ recording of a ‘Wyles’ living in Oundle situated 14 miles South of Duddington. Queen Elizabeth I - and the Use of 'Wyles' in Her Letter to King James VI of Scotland (1602)11/19/2021 Elizabeth I to James VI, 4 July 1602 (SP 52/68 f.75)
This letter is an affirmation of her friendship towards the King of Scots, and also concerns a proposed league of their two kingdoms with France against Spain. The King of France, Henry IV, had sent an ambassador to James that summer to broach the matter. Although England and France had traditionally been rivals, Henry was a great admirer of Elizabeth, and is reported to have remarked on her superior skill in suppressing rebels against the crown: ‘She only is a king! She only knows how to rule.’ By the closing years of her reign, Elizabeth had finally won not just acceptance but respect as a female sovereign in a man’s world. Transcript My good Brother. Who longest drawes the thryd [thread] of life, and viewes the strange accidents that Tyme makes doth not fynd out a rarer gift than thanckfulnes is, that is most pretious and seldomest found, which makes me well gladded that you me thinkes beginnes to feele, howe necessary a Treasure this is to be imployed where best it is deserved, as may appeare in those lynes that your last letters express, in which your thanckes be great for the sondry cares that of your state and honour my dere friendshipp hath afforded you being ever ready to give you ever such subjects for your wrytinge, and thinckes my self happie, when ether my warnings or counsells may in fittest tyme avayle you. Wheras it hath pleased you to impart the offer that the French King hath made you with a disyre of secresie, believe that request includes a trust, that never shall deceave; for thoughe many exceed me in many thinges, yet I dare professe, that I can ever kepe taciturnity for my self and my freindes. My hedd may faile but my tounge shall never, as I will not say but your self can in your selfe thoughe not to me wytnes: but of that no more, preterierunt illi dies [‘those days will be past’]. Nowe to the Frenche in playne dealing without fraude or guile, if he will doe as he pretends, you shalbe more beholdinge to hym then he is to himself, who within one yeare hathe wyncked at suche injuries and affronts as or [ere] I would have indured that am of weakest sex I should condemne my Judgement, I will not enter into his, And therefore if his verba come ad Actionem [‘words come to action’], I more shall wonder then doe suspect, but if you will needes have my single advice, try hym if he contynue in that mynde; And as I knowe that you would none of suche a league as my self should not be one, so doe I see by his ouvreture, that hymself doth, or if for my assistance you should need of all help he would give it; so as synce he hath so good consideration of me you will allowe hym therein, and doubt nothing but that he will have me willingly for Company. For as I may not forgett howe their League with Scotland was recyproke when wee had warres with them: so is it good reason that our freindships should be mutuall. Nowe to confesse my kind taking of all your loving offers and vowes of most assured oathes that nought shalbe concealed from me, that ether Prynce or subject shall to your knowledge worck against me or my estate; surely (dere brother) you right me muche if so you doe. And this I vowe that without you list, I will not willingly call you in questoon for suche warninges, if the greatnes of your cause may not counsell me thereunto, And do intreat you to thincke that if any accydent so befall you, as ether secrecy or speed shalbe necessary, suppose your self to be sure of suche a one as shall neglect neyther to performe so good a worck; let others promise and I will do as muche with truth as others with wyles, And thus I leave to molest your eyes with my scribling with my perpetuall prayers for your good estate as desyreth your most loving and affectionat syster. [postscript] As for your good considerations of border causes I aunswere you by my Agent and infinitely thanck you therefore. |
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles - Last Male Descendant of the 'Wyles' Family of Duddington! Archives
November 2023
Categories
All
|
- Home
- Wyles family of Duddington Facebook
- Wyles Blog
- Duddington: Etymology
- Duddington Land Survey (1984)
- Statement Of Inclusivity (17.7.2019)
- Wyles Family Tree (1301-2016)
- Origins of the Wyles Family of Kings Cliffe
- Deciphering the Wyles Enigma of Duddington
- Etymology: Wyles Family Name
- Wyles Family Portraits
- Kilmurray Clan (Eire)
- 69th South Lincolnshire Regiment
- Duddington Hoard (1994)
- Duddington Church & Graveyard
- Duddington Videos
- Duddington Digest
- Wyles Family Coat of Arms
- Wyles Family Paternal DNA
- Wyles Family Certificates
- Wyles-Wiles Extra Parish Records Data
- Wyles Marriages
- Northamptonshire Record Cards
- Duddington Militia List – 1777
- Wyles Wills & Marriages (1601-1790)
- Wyles Marriages Cambridgeshire (1618-1830)
- Duddington area: Baptisms (1650-1812)
- Duddington area: Baptisms (1813-1843)
- Duddington area: Marriages (1650-1860)
- Duddington area: Burials (1700-1865)
- Duddington Burials (1735-1966)
- Contact
©opyright: Site design, layout & content (2009) Adrian Peter Chan-Wyles. No part of this site (or information contained herein) may be copied, reproduced, duplicated, or otherwise distributed without prior written agreement
from [email protected].
from [email protected].