Merging Waller-596 into Waller-116

Question

These 2 files have been waiting to be merged since 2021, but required someone with pre-1500 certification. As of right now, neither one has a profile manager, and I am not pre-1500 certified.

Answer 1

-596 into -116 has been rejected as a match.

Comments

Then the common spouse should be removed from one of them.

---

This looks like two different people, in Suffolk and in Bucks.

For example here, in lay subsidy, 1524, Robert Waller. £40, in Beaconsfield, Bucks
Page 13:
https://www.bucksrecsoc.org.uk/BRS-VOLUMES/brs-vol-08.pdf

---

Fryer-57 should most likely be removed as spouse to Waller-116. All of his family, children have been removed. On the other hand, John Waller, listed under Waller-596, was born in Rattlesden while all the other children were born in Buckinghamshire. So, I'm going with "it's a bit of a mess." Thanks for the input, but I don't have the resources or the pre-1500 to adopt and research that time period.

---

This whole line is a bit of a mess. They skip around between Bucks, Kent and Suffolk. Waller is not a particularly uncommon name; it originated all over England. Someone has connected a lot of unrelated people because they share a surname.

Rather than being the son of Richard Waller of Kent, Robert is much more likely the son of John Wallar/Waller of Beaconsfield, who left a will in 1521 and mentions his wife Isabel and sons William, Robert, and Thomas.

Page 358, No. 438:
https://www.bucksrecsoc.org.uk/BRS-VOLUMES/brs-vol-19.pdf