Question

does thomas fitz alan 650 have a son

Comments

His ancestors are well known to me.....as for Thomas himself....information is not as commonly available. I take it that identifying any descendants would be of interest to your line..... will investigate available sources.

---

There is no mention of this Thomas on any commonly available sites.

---

Thanks John, i have my line up to John Allan 1525-1634, but cant find his father, will DNA give a sure result, thanks Bill

---

Hi Bill, I've been away for a day. My lines branch away about 1400, however, you may have found John FitzAlan down to Mary Berkeley on fabpedigree.com . I hope someone more knowledgeable will advise you, here, about which type of DNA, if any, will connect you. If help doesn't arrive......you might ask a new question.

---

thanks for now John

Answer 1

What does 650 mean? Date and location would be helpful to narrow it down a bit. Thomas Fitz Alan isn't a unique name.

Comments

Probably this person https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/FitzAlan-650

His profile has no spouse or children.

---

And from a comment on that profile and the father's profile, looks like at the least he doesn't belong in that family, with the potential that he is 'invented'.

---

The profile for his alleged mother https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Wydeville-5, which is a shambles and definitely needs attention from somebody with pre-1500 authorisation, claims without explicit evidence that she died on exactly 6 Mar 1490. So this otherwise unknown Thomas has been craftily slotted in as her last child. It has already been pointed out that he did not manage to marry or father any children, so unlinking him should do no harm to the universal tree.

---

There's also no response by the PMs to any of the comments on the bottom of these profiles and nothing amended on the profiles, because none of them have pre-1500 certification. Why are people without pre-1500 certification allowed to be PMs of such profiles?

---

And the profile for his alleged grandmother at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Luxembourg-30 has unanswered comments about oddities that really should be removed.

---

Two of the 3 PMs for that one have no pre-1500 certification and neither has been active in a long time.

---

I learn from all these comments.......and,from a lot of cross checking.....once heard practice makes perfect.

---

so what happens now

---

thanks

---

Have you contacted the profile manager or would you like assistance?

---

Is Thomas or any of the family members important to your interests?

---

As the profile manager has not replied to a comment made on 3 Mar 2017, I wouldn't have high hopes of a helpful answer. I'd suggest that the profile mangers of this man and of his supposed mother and maternal grandmother are all reported for failure to respond. But I don't know how to do it!

And we need a pre-1500 volunteer to unlink this man, marking his existence as uncertain (since records might always turn up to prove he was real).

---

i am trying to find the father of John Allan 1525-1634, it has been put that Richard Berkeley Allan but i dont think this is right, so a possibility Thomas Fitz Alan or someone in the Fitz Alan family, i am willing to do a DNA if it would give a result. Bill

Answer 2

This seems to be an error originating at Ancestry: https://www.ancestry.com/family-tree/person/tree/89802323/person/370159832799/facts

Someone has mixed up this Thomas with William FitzAlan and has Anne Percy married to both of them at once (two versions of the Thomas with different birth dates).

Comments

Lois,thanks for the reply

Answer 3

It seems there is no reliable evidence for Thomas FitzAlan-650 being a son of Thomas, 10th/17th Earl of Arundel.

I have therefore detached him from his parents, with appropriate notes on all profiles concerned.

Comments

thanks Nic