C.P. Addition: Isabel le Despenser, 1st wife of Richard de Arundel, Earl of Arundel & Surrey

62 views
Skip to first unread message

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 5, 2010, 12:58:04 PM11/5/10
to
Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage, 1 (1910): 242–244 (sub Arundel) has a somewhat
flawed account of the life history of Sir Richard de Arundel, died
1376, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, and his immediate family. The
account contains several errors, one being referrring to this man as
Richard Fitz Alan. During his lifetime, he was known to his
contemporaries as Richard, son of Edmund Earl of Arundel, Richard de
Arundel, or Richard, Earl of Arundel (and Surrey), but never as
Richard Fitz Alan. For contemporary instances of him using the
surname, de Arundel (or d'Arundel), or being so styled, see Cal.
Patent Rolls, 1327–1330 (1891): 562; Cal.Fine Rolls, 4 (1913): 181,
218; Cal.Close Rolls, 1330–1333 (1898): 81, 381; Cal. Close Rolls,
1333–1337 (1898): 154; Strachey, Rotuli Parliamentorum, 2 (1777): 55–
56, 226–227; National Archives, SC 8/156/7787.

Regarding Earl Richard de Arundel's 1st marriage, it is well known
that he married in 1321 at age about seven to Isabel le Despenser,
daughter of Hugh le Despenser the younger, the hated favorite of King
Edward II. Isabel le Despenser was near kinswoman to the king, her
mother Eleanor de Clare being a granddaughter of King Edward I.
Richard and Isabel are credited by Complete Peerage with one son,
Edmund de Arundel (which is correct), but they are also assigned two
additional children, one of whom, Mary (here called Isabel!) was
actually Earl Richard's sister, and one of whom, Philippe, was
actually Earl Richard and Isabel's granddaughter. These points have
been discussed numerous times in previous posts here on the newsgroup,
which posts may be viewed in the soc.genealogy.medieval newsgroup
archives. They are also addressed in my books, Plantagenet Ancestry
and Magna Carta Ancestry.

In 1344 Earl Richard obtained an annulment of his marriage to Isabel
le Despenser, and subsequently married (2nd) Eleanor of Lancaster,
Isabel's cousin. Due to the near kinship between Isabel and Eleanor,
a papal dispensation was needed for Earl Richard and Eleanor's
marriage. This matter of the dispensation is discussed by Complete
Peerage.

Complete Peerage gives no particulars whatsoever regarding the
subsequent history of Isabel le Despenser, the discarded wife of Earl
Richard de Arundel. However, Isabel appears to have survived for some
time after the annulment of her marriage to Earl Richard. In the
book, For Her Good Estate: the Life of Elizabeth de Burgh, by Frances
Ann Underhill, published 1999, page 90, Underhill states that the
account books of Elizabeth de Burgh show that Isabel le Despenser
"sent a gift of fish in 1351-2" to her aunt, Elizabeth de Burgh, lady
of Clare. This item may be viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=xdJBYcSDX60C&pg=PA90

A more recent and less well documented book, The Traitor's Wife, by
Susan Higginbotham, published 2009, pages 485-486, states that Isabel
le Despenser was provided with some estates by her former husband
(here again called Richard Fitz Alan) and that Isabel was alive in
1355. Sadly no documentation is provided by the author for these
statements. Ms. Higginbotham's information may be viewed at the
following weblink:

pp. 485-486:
http://books.google.com/books?id=SHPaf8XEY_0C&pg=PR9&dq=Isabel+Despenser+Richard&hl=en&ei=aKbTTJLTCdGknQe9vcTbBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=1355&f=false

Fortunately, there is another set of contemporary records which proves
that Isabel le Despenser was living in the period, 1349-1356, which
information is found in the book, English Law in the Age of the Black
Death 1348–1381, by Robert Palmer, published in 1993, page 397. This
material may be viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=J83HrulLqMUC&pg=PA397

Palmer includes the abstract of a lengthy lawsuit in which Isabel
daughter of Hugh le Despenser repeatedly brought action against Prior
of St. John of Jerusalem in England, concerning a tenurial and
prescriptive duty to repair walls in a marsh in Great Wakering, Essex
against the ebb and flow and flooding of seawater; the defendant
refused to repair the walls that threatened ruin whereby the said
Isabel, by flooding, lost her profit.

Palmer doesn't date the lawsuit but he does provide exact references
for this information: CP40/356; CP40/359; CP40/367; CP40/371;
CP40/379; CP40/381; and CP40/387.

Using Robert Palmer's own website, Anglo-American Legal Tradition,
available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/EdwardIII.html, these court
references can be dated as follows:

1348, 1349, 1351, 1352, 1354, 1355, 1356

Thus it appears that Isabel le Despenser's lawsuit is dated from 1348
to 1356.

I haven't yet located a death date for Isabel le Despenser. However,
it appears that at her death, she was buried in the Chapter House of
Westminster Abbey. That information is found in the book, The Well in
the Desert, by Emily Sarah Holt, published 1872, pages 379–380, which
may be viewed at the following weblink:

pp. 379-380:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RgcCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22The+Well+in+the+Desert%22&hl=en&ei=DinUTOemOIyasAO-nb2NCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&sqi=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Despenser&f=false

A more modern edition of Holt's work (with a different pagination!)
may be viewed at the following weblink:

pg. 110: http://books.google.com/books?id=rnPwc317CGoC&pg=PA110

Holt states that "Isabel la Despenser" was named as a tenant of her
former husband, Earl Richard, on 24 June 1345, citing Patent Rolls.
She further relates that "Dame Isabel, daughter of Sir Hugh Spencer,"
is among those buried in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey. Ms.
Holt cites as her source for Isabel's place of burial as Harleian
Manuscript 544, folio 78.

Reviewing the above records, we find that Isabel le Despenser occurs
in various records following the annulment of her marriage in 1345,
1348, 1349, 1351, 1351-2, 1352, 1354, 1355, and 1356. Ms. Holt has
provided an indication of Isabel's place of burial as the Chapter
House of Westminster Abbey.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

unread,
Nov 5, 2010, 5:12:47 PM11/5/10
to
[cross-posting removed]

"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:0219f9f0-ba44-4ea2...@w38g2000pri.googlegroups.com...


> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Complete Peerage, 1 (1910): 242–244 (sub Arundel) has a somewhat
> flawed account of the life history of Sir Richard de Arundel, died
> 1376, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, and his immediate family. The
> account contains several errors, one being referrring to this man as
> Richard Fitz Alan. During his lifetime, he was known to his
> contemporaries as Richard, son of Edmund Earl of Arundel, Richard
> de Arundel, or Richard, Earl of Arundel (and Surrey), but never as
> Richard Fitz Alan.

So what? Most members of the royal family at that time were never known as
"Plantagenet" but that doesn't stop even professional genealogists from
using the familiar surname to cover them all, even in book titles.

Or will the next edition of *Plantagenet Ancestry* have the "error" in its
title corrrected, since only a few of the many ancestors in it were actually
called by this name?

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 5, 2010, 6:31:22 PM11/5/10
to
Dear Newsgroup ~

In my previous post, I stated that Emily Sarah Holt in her book, The
Well in the Desert, indicated that Isabel daughter of Hugh le
Despenser was buried in the Chapter-House of Westminster Abbey.
However, it appears that Ms. Holt was in error.

There is an interesting article on the Austin Friars of London in
Gentleman’s Magazine, n.s. 8 (1860): 372–376. This article may be


viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=2aLPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA373

This article makes it clear that Isabel le Despenser and her brother,
Philip le Despenser, were actually buried in the Chapter House of the
Austin Friars, London, not in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey.

Furthermore, I've determined that following the annulment of her
marriage to Earl Richard de Arundel, Isabel le Despenser is recorded
in 1345 as holding the following manors for life [by grant] of her
former husband: High Roding, Ovesham (in Matching), Prittlewell,
Margaretting, Woolston (in Chigwell), and Little Canfield, Essex [see
Cal. Patent Rolls, 1343–1345 (1902): 487–488; Cal. Patent Rolls, 1345–
1348 (1903): 18; VCH Essex 4 (1956): 24–32; VCH Essex 8 (1983): 196–
206]. One of these manors, Prittlewell, is near Southend, Essex and
lies in the same vicinity as Great Wakering, Essex where Isabel le
Despenser sued the Prior of St. John of Jerusalem in England,
concerning a duty to repair walls.

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 12:42:44 PM11/6/10
to
On Nov 5, 4:31 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:

> This article makes it clear that Isabel le Despenser and her brother,
> Philip le Despenser, were actually buried in the Chapter House of the
> Austin Friars, London, not in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey.

I should add that this Philip le Despenser would be a new great-
grandson of King Edward I of England.

The article in Gentleman's Magazine,n.s. 8 (1860): 372–376 indicates
that Edmund Holand, the "first son" of Joan of Kent and half-brother
of King Richard II of England, is buried in the quire of of the church
of the Austin Friars, London. Edmund Holand was named for his
maternal grandfather, Edmund of Woodstock, Earl of Kent (younger son
of King Edward I). Edmund Holand would thus be yet another great-
grandson of King Edward I buried in this place.

Here is the weblink to the article again:

http://books.google.com/books?id=2aLPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA373

The statement that Edmund Holand was Joan of Kent's "first son"
corrects Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 153, footnote d (sub Kent), in
which Thomas Holand is called Joan of Kent's "eldest son." Assuming
that Edmund Holand was in fact Joan of Kent's first born son, then
Edmund's brother, Thomas Holand (died 1397), would have been Joan of
Kent's 2nd but 1st surviving son and heir.

Does anyone know a contemporary record in which Edmund Holand is
listed among the children of Joan of Kent?

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 1:13:24 PM11/6/10
to
Dear Newsgroup ~

I see that Charles James Fleet, in his book, Fulham Old and New,
Volume 1 (published 1900), pages 120-121, states that Sir Thomas
Holand (died 1397) was Joan of Kent's "second son." Unfortunately Mr.
Fleet doesn't provide his documentation for this information.

Here is a weblink to that source:

http://books.google.com/books?id=gnX3I_1OTxYC&pg=PA120

Mr. Fleet's statement would contradict Complete Peerage which alleges
that Sir Thomas Holand was Joan of Kent's "eldest son."

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 1:44:31 PM11/6/10
to
On Nov 6, 11:13 am, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:

< I see that Charles James Fleet, in his book, Fulham Old and New,
< Volume 1 (published 1900), pages 120-121, states that Sir Thomas
< Holand (died 1397) was Joan of Kent's "second son."  Unfortunately
Mr.
< Fleet doesn't provide his documentation for this information.

< Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

For "Charles James Fleet," please read "Charles James Fèret."

DR

CE Wood

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 5:38:41 PM11/6/10
to
Are not the Isabel and Philip "Spencer" mentioned in the article
actually the children of Hugh and Isabella (de Beauchamp) le Despenser
rather than Hugh and Alianore (de Clare) le Despenser?


CE Wood

On Nov 5, 3:31 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
snip

Peter Stewart

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 7:47:39 PM11/6/10
to
[Cross-posting removed]

"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message

news:57c3171a-7ab0-41b0...@r6g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...

Is this an attempt to kid us or yourself?

Are you so desperate to score points over the authros of CP that you are
Googling for anything in print that might disagree with them in any way on
any point whatsoever? And so besotted with the novelty of every instance
that you can't help making a fool of yourself by posting it immediately,
without rudimentary analysis and even with the author's name wrong?

It is well known that Joan had three sons by Thomas Holand. The evidence you
have available strongly suggests that firstborn was Thomas - as CP says, he
was reportedly "aged 9 and more or 10 and more" at his father's death, in
December 1360, and the remarriage of his parents took place after the pope
had ordered Joan to be restored to Holand on 17 November 1349 (before which
she was tied up in another, bigamous, marriage). This leaves scant time for
Edmund to have been born before Thomas even if "10 and more" was inaccurate.

But of course you have the sniff of a "correction" to CP, so what does that
matter? Or the fact that this comes from secondary works of little or no
authority (a snippet transcribed from Harleian MS 6033 - written ca 1600 by
the way - in the 1860 *Gentleman's Magazne* article bolstered only by
another publication predating CP VII, *Fulham, Old and New*, stating without
a shadow of proof that Thomas was born "circa 1352-5") turned up by idle
Googling rather than systematic research...

Can this really be your idea of scholarly method?

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 7:55:14 PM11/6/10
to
On Nov 6, 3:38 pm, CE Wood <wood...@msn.com> wrote:
< Are not the Isabel and Philip "Spencer" mentioned in the article
< actually the children of Hugh and Isabella (de Beauchamp) le
Despenser
< rather than Hugh and Alianore (de Clare) le Despenser?
<
< CE Wood

Thank you for your post. You asked a great question.

You're correct that the elder Hugh le Despenser and his wife, Isabel,
had a son, Philip, and a daughter, Isabel.

But their son Philip was knighted (which the Philip buried in London
was not) and their daughter Isabel was buried with her 3rd husband,
Ralph de Monthermer, at the church of the Grey Friars, Salisbury,
Wiltshire.

Thus the Philip and Isabel buried in London must belong the another
generation.

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 6, 2010, 8:11:54 PM11/6/10
to
Does anyone know a contemporary record in which Edmund Holand is
listed among the children of Joan of Kent?

When replying, please cite your sources and provide weblinks if you
have them. Thanks!

Peter Stewart

unread,
Nov 7, 2010, 6:25:08 PM11/7/10
to
[cross-posting removed]

"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message

news:78d815d3-6aa7-421b...@p7g2000prb.googlegroups.com...

<snip>

> The article in Gentleman's Magazine,n.s. 8 (1860): 372–376
> indicates that Edmund Holand, the "first son" of Joan of Kent
> and half-brother of King Richard II of England, is buried in the
> quire of of the church of the Austin Friars, London. Edmund
> Holand was named for his maternal grandfather, Edmund of
> Woodstock, Earl of Kent (younger son of King Edward I).

> Edmund Holand would thus be yet another great-grandson of


> King Edward I buried in this place.
>
> Here is the weblink to the article again:
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=2aLPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA373
>
> The statement that Edmund Holand was Joan of Kent's "first son"
> corrects Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 153, footnote d (sub Kent), in
> which Thomas Holand is called Joan of Kent's "eldest son." Assuming
> that Edmund Holand was in fact Joan of Kent's first born son, then
> Edmund's brother, Thomas Holand (died 1397), would have been
> Joan of Kent's 2nd but 1st surviving son and heir.

Once again Richardson has neglected to read the material he is relying on
for information that supposedly "corrects Complete Peerage".

The late 16th or early 17th century record of Edmund Holand's burial in the
choir of the Austin Friars church quoted in the article linked above says:

"Edmund, first son of Joan, mother of King Richard II., 1375".

This ought to have given Richardson at least the faint glimmer of a hint
that Edmund might not have been the "first son" after all - since his father
died in 1360, when Thomas Holand was heir, it is reasonable to assume that
Edmund, said to be buried 15 years later, was perhaps not their parents'
eldest son.

But no, instead the trained historian and professional genealogist chose to
post away first, and then to seek out the mighty authority of *Fulham, Old
and New* - by an author whose name he did not know - in support of his
"correction"...

Peter Stewart


Peter Stewart

unread,
Nov 7, 2010, 8:35:40 PM11/7/10
to

"Peter Stewart" <pss...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:ib7cgt$9cc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...

> [cross-posting removed]
>
> "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:78d815d3-6aa7-421b...@p7g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
>
> <snip>
>
>> The article in Gentleman's Magazine,n.s. 8 (1860): 372�376

>> indicates that Edmund Holand, the "first son" of Joan of Kent
>> and half-brother of King Richard II of England, is buried in the
>> quire of of the church of the Austin Friars, London. Edmund
>> Holand was named for his maternal grandfather, Edmund of
>> Woodstock, Earl of Kent (younger son of King Edward I).
>> Edmund Holand would thus be yet another great-grandson of
>> King Edward I buried in this place.
>>
>> Here is the weblink to the article again:
>>
>> http://books.google.com/books?id=2aLPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA373
>>
>> The statement that Edmund Holand was Joan of Kent's "first son"
>> corrects Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 153, footnote d (sub Kent), in
>> which Thomas Holand is called Joan of Kent's "eldest son." Assuming
>> that Edmund Holand was in fact Joan of Kent's first born son, then
>> Edmund's brother, Thomas Holand (died 1397), would have been
>> Joan of Kent's 2nd but 1st surviving son and heir.
>
> Once again Richardson has neglected to read the material he is relying on
> for information that supposedly "corrects Complete Peerage".
>
> The late 16th or early 17th century record of Edmund Holand's burial in
> the choir of the Austin Friars church quoted in the article linked above
> says:
>
> "Edmund, first son of Joan, mother of King Richard II., 1375".

The word "first" before "son", rather than "firstborn", is a rather odd
locution and may be an error on the part of Thomas Hugo, whose paper on the
Austin Friars read to the London & Middlesex Archaeological Society in
December 1859 was the basis of this article.

The quotation as printed in *Gentleman's Magazine* continues:

"Lady Margery de Ilderton. 'In the wall,' Guy de Meyrick, Earl of St. Paul;
Lucie, Countess of Kent, and one of the heirs of barnaby, Lord of Millaine."

However, in the Society's Transactions, vol. 2 part 4 (1861) pp. 5-8 Hugo
printed the list in Harleian MS 6033, under the heading "The Bodyes buryed
in the ffryers Augustyn of London, founded by the Earle of Hereford", as
follows:

"In the Quyre. Ffirst, Edmund, first sonne of Joan mother of King Richard
the second. It'm, in the wall lyeth Sir Gwydon de Meyrick, Earle of St.
Paules."

The year 1375 and Lady Margery de Ilderton have disappeared in this version
of his transcription. The burials in most sections of the church start with
the "first" person there, for instance "In St Johns Chapell. Ffirst, John,
sonne of Sr John Wingfeild", and "In the Chapter House. First, Phillipp
Spencer, sonne of Sr Hugh".

It may be that Hugo simply repeated "first" after the name of Edmund by
mistake - however, I can't check this as Harleian MS 6033 doesn't appear to
have been printed by anyone else.

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Nov 8, 2010, 12:39:25 PM11/8/10
to
On Nov 7, 6:35 pm, "Peter Stewart" <pss...@bigpond.com> wrote:

< It may be that Hugo simply repeated "first" after the name of Edmund
by
< mistake - however, I can't check this as Harleian MS 6033 doesn't
appear to
< have been printed by anyone else.
<
< Peter Stewart

And it may be that you are simply grasping at straws.

DR

Peter Stewart

unread,
Nov 8, 2010, 2:48:50 PM11/8/10
to

"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:a7c90d28-494b-43d5...@f16g2000prj.googlegroups.com...

My foot. You're projecting again.

From the same transcription of a document Hugo printed two versions, with
many variants and not even the spelling of Edmund's name consistent between
the two of them.

The simple solution is to get a copy of Harleian MS 6033.

Then the problem will either be resolved, if the second "first" is absent,
or else the question will become did the original compiler repeat this word
in error rather than Hugo.

I am told off-list that Edmund occurs in an IPM of his father, and if so
there is no possibility that he was the eldest son since he was not the
heir. Again, I am unable to check this - but of course it would be a simple
matter for someone in SLC to go to the library rather than relying on
Google.

Then you could possibly make a brick using the straws you have clutched over
this. *Fulham, Old and New* by F�ret aka Fleet should make one all on its
own.

Peter Stewart

jonathan kirton

unread,
Mar 14, 2011, 11:19:42 AM3/14/11
to Gen-Med LastGEN-Medieval@rootsweb.com
Dear Group,

Does anyone on this list have access to this book ?

Edited by Carolyn C. Fenwick, and published by Oxford University Press
in 2005.

I am seeking a lookup for: SIMON de KIRKETONE of Yorkshire in the
1379 Poll Tax.

I particularly wish to know the page reference, and hopefully a more
precise location where he lived and paid the tax, and his occupation
or status.

None of my local libraries seem to have it yet.

Many thanks in advance for any assistance,

Jonathan Kirton, Canada

Colin B. Withers

unread,
Mar 14, 2011, 11:33:29 AM3/14/11
to jonathan kirton, Gen-Med LastGEN-Medieval@rootsweb.com
I have it.

Unfortunately, all three volumes of this work are not indexed.

However, an index can be consulted on the UK Data Archive website (registration and approval required)

Colin

Dear Group,

Jonathan Kirton, Canada

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Colin B. Withers

unread,
Mar 14, 2011, 11:58:50 AM3/14/11
to jonathan kirton, Gen-Med LastGEN-Medieval@rootsweb.com
Oops, sorry, wrong info for my last reply.

The UK data Archive does NOT have the index to this book, I was confusing it with the index to the COEL database.

For info, here are some of the data sets at the UK data Archive, accessible through the Economic and Social Data Service (ESDS):

Set Title
4816 Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, 1384-1858
4338 Records of Central Government Taxation in England, c.1190-1690; Bedfordshire, Berkshire,Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire and Oxfordshire
5570 English Landholding in Ireland, c. 1200-c. 1360
5325 Advance Contracts for the Sale of Wool, c. 1200-1330
4668 English Episcopal Acta, 1064-1305
4988 Medieval Marriage Sermons, 1200-1299
3897 Taxatio Database, 1291-1292
5687 COEL Database: Continental Origins of English Landholders, 1066-1166
5478 Acta of the Plantagenets, 1154-1204
3958 Acta of Henry II and His Family, 1154-1204
33295 Indexes to A.B. Emden's Biographical Registers of the Universities of Oxford to 1540 and Cambridge to 1500
5694 Electronic Edition of Domesday Book: Translation, Databases and Scholarly Commentary, 1086
5607 Durham Tithes Database, 1270-1536
4997 National Archives Class C.131 : Extents on Debt, 1284-1530
3527 Medieval Title Deeds for the City of York, 1080-1530
4848 Sources for Medieval Ireland in the National Archives of the United Kingdom, c. 1200 - c. 1485

There are more, and many for the post medieval period, and some for certain locales. It is well worth a look.

Most of the databases simply need registering, while others require you register AND to submit a short para or two on why you want access to the database. I found I had to provide this for the "Medieval Title Deeds for the City of York, 1080-1530" which then went to the Borthwick, which had supplied the database. It was approved around 2 weeks later, but well worth waiting for.

To get a full list of what is available, do these steps:

1. Go to http://www.data-archive.ac.uk/
2. Click on 'Data' in the dark blue Menu Bar
3. In the left sidebar, click on 'Browse by Subject'
4. Scroll down till you see 'History' in the left column, click the box next to 'History' to select them all
5. Click on Go at bottom right

Colin B. Withers

unread,
Mar 14, 2011, 12:08:44 PM3/14/11
to Colin B. Withers, jonathan kirton, Gen-Med LastGEN-Medieval@rootsweb.com
If the last link no longer works (the website has been updated recently), try this page from the WaybackMachine to get to Step 4:

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090525060206/http://www.esds.ac.uk/findingData/browsebySubject.asp

Message has been deleted

Colin B. Withers

unread,
Mar 23, 2011, 11:10:10 AM3/23/11
to Derek Howard, gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Hi Derek,

No Derwentwaters I'm afraid (I searched for Derw*). There was one Alice de Derwent, if that is of any use, donating land to Kirkham Priory.

Colin

-----Original Message-----
From: gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com [mailto:gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Derek Howard
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 9:55 AM
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: The Poll Taxes of 1377, 1379 and 1381, Part 3 Wilts. - Yorks.

Thanks Colin for this very useful post.

While waiting for approvals, may I be impertinent and ask if you have
time for a quick check for me on the York title deeds? I am searching
for all refs to the name Derwentwater and varients, especially in the
15-early-16 cent.

All the very best
Derek Howard.


On Mar 14, 4:58 pm, "Colin B. Withers" <Colin.With...@eumetsat.int>
wrote:


> Oops, sorry, wrong info for my last reply.
>
> The UK data Archive does NOT have the index to this book, I was confusing it with the index to the COEL database.
>
> For info, here are some of the data sets at the UK data Archive, accessible through the Economic and Social Data Service (ESDS):
>
> Set     Title
> 4816    Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, 1384-1858
> 4338    Records of Central Government Taxation in England, c.1190-1690; Bedfordshire, Berkshire,Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire and Oxfordshire
> 5570    English Landholding in Ireland, c. 1200-c. 1360
> 5325    Advance Contracts for the Sale of Wool, c. 1200-1330
> 4668    English Episcopal Acta, 1064-1305
> 4988    Medieval Marriage Sermons, 1200-1299
> 3897    Taxatio Database, 1291-1292
> 5687    COEL Database: Continental Origins of English Landholders, 1066-1166
> 5478    Acta of the Plantagenets, 1154-1204
> 3958    Acta of Henry II and His Family, 1154-1204
> 33295   Indexes to A.B. Emden's Biographical Registers of the Universities of Oxford to 1540 and Cambridge to 1500
> 5694    Electronic Edition of Domesday Book: Translation, Databases and Scholarly Commentary, 1086
> 5607    Durham Tithes Database, 1270-1536
> 4997    National Archives Class C.131 : Extents on Debt, 1284-1530
> 3527    Medieval Title Deeds for the City of York, 1080-1530
> 4848    Sources for Medieval Ireland in the National Archives of the United Kingdom, c. 1200 - c. 1485
>
> There are more, and many for the post medieval period, and some for certain locales. It is well worth a look.
>
> Most of the databases simply need registering, while others require you register AND to submit a short para or two on why you want access to the database. I found I had to provide this for the "Medieval Title Deeds for the City of York, 1080-1530" which then went to the Borthwick, which had supplied the database. It was approved around 2 weeks later, but well worth waiting for.
>
> To get a full list of what is available, do these steps:
>

> 1. Go tohttp://www.data-archive.ac.uk/


> 2. Click on 'Data' in the dark blue Menu Bar
> 3. In the left sidebar, click on 'Browse by Subject'
> 4. Scroll down till you see 'History' in the left column, click the box next to 'History' to select them all
> 5. Click on Go at bottom right
>
> Colin
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com [mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of jonathan kirton
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: Gen-Med LastGEN-Medie...@rootsweb.com
> Subject: The Poll Taxes of 1377, 1379 and 1381, Part 3 Wilts. - Yorks.
>
> Dear Group,
>
> Does anyone on this list have access to this book ?
>
> Edited by Carolyn C. Fenwick, and published by Oxford University Press  
> in 2005.
>
> I am seeking a lookup for: SIMON  de  KIRKETONE  of  Yorkshire in the  
> 1379 Poll Tax.
>
> I particularly wish to know the page reference, and hopefully a more  
> precise location where he lived and paid the tax, and his occupation  
> or status.
>
> None of my local libraries seem to have it yet.
>
> Many thanks in advance for any assistance,
>
> Jonathan Kirton,  Canada
>
> -------------------------------

> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages