T***@aol.com
2004-09-26 21:51:44 UTC
Sunday, 26 September, 2004
Dear Rosie, and Chris (et al.),
Your professional persistence and Fine work is much appreciated! Am
planning to spend a bit more time on the subject before the other demands
of the week intrude....
I hope to get to a copy of VCH (directly or otherwise) to see what the
North Riding volumes might provide re: Thornton Bridge and Cundall - and I
see Chris has already noted that possible avenue. Chris, your putting the
VCH contents on medievalgenealogy.org.uk is a major assist.
~ I see that Cundall with Leckby is covered in Vol. I, under
Hallikeld wapentake. Interestingly, while Brafferton appears
under Bulmer wapentake, in Vol. II on the medievalgenealogy.org
site, GENUKI queries reflect Brafferton as being also in
Hallikeld. I wonder if that's an error, or perhaps an older
status that may have been adjusted in a jurisdictional change
after 1890......? Obviously accessing the 2 volumes for North
Riding will solve that riddle.
Again, thanks for all ye do. If anyone of the list might access the
VCH volumes in question before the coming weekend, any information that
would be pertinent to this subject would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
John
____________________________________________
Chris Phillips <***@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote:
Presumably the gateway is broken again, so I'm taken the liberty of posting
Rosie Bevan's two contributions to soc.genealogy.medieval, which John
kindly copied to me.
Rosie's observation that there are two different Thorntons involved
certainly clears up one puzzle.
I wonder if the VCH accounts of Cundall and Thornton Bridge would shed any
light on things. Volume 1 for the North Riding has an article on Cundall
with Leckby, and volume 2 one on Brafferton (the parish containing Thornton
Bridge).
On the face of it, it does look as though the 1321/2 transaction may have
been effectively a sale to de Ledes, preserving Margaret's dower rights.
On the possible significance of Adam de Everingham having had a son named
Alexander, one thing that's not clear is whether Alexander was his son by
Margaret, or by his first wife Clarice. It does seem possible that all the
sons named in CP v 187 note g could have been sons of Clarice, as the
marriage lasted at least 13 years.
Chris Phillips
_________________________________________
Dear Rosie, and Chris (et al.),
Your professional persistence and Fine work is much appreciated! Am
planning to spend a bit more time on the subject before the other demands
of the week intrude....
I hope to get to a copy of VCH (directly or otherwise) to see what the
North Riding volumes might provide re: Thornton Bridge and Cundall - and I
see Chris has already noted that possible avenue. Chris, your putting the
VCH contents on medievalgenealogy.org.uk is a major assist.
~ I see that Cundall with Leckby is covered in Vol. I, under
Hallikeld wapentake. Interestingly, while Brafferton appears
under Bulmer wapentake, in Vol. II on the medievalgenealogy.org
site, GENUKI queries reflect Brafferton as being also in
Hallikeld. I wonder if that's an error, or perhaps an older
status that may have been adjusted in a jurisdictional change
after 1890......? Obviously accessing the 2 volumes for North
Riding will solve that riddle.
Again, thanks for all ye do. If anyone of the list might access the
VCH volumes in question before the coming weekend, any information that
would be pertinent to this subject would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
John
____________________________________________
Chris Phillips <***@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote:
Presumably the gateway is broken again, so I'm taken the liberty of posting
Rosie Bevan's two contributions to soc.genealogy.medieval, which John
kindly copied to me.
Rosie's observation that there are two different Thorntons involved
certainly clears up one puzzle.
I wonder if the VCH accounts of Cundall and Thornton Bridge would shed any
light on things. Volume 1 for the North Riding has an article on Cundall
with Leckby, and volume 2 one on Brafferton (the parish containing Thornton
Bridge).
On the face of it, it does look as though the 1321/2 transaction may have
been effectively a sale to de Ledes, preserving Margaret's dower rights.
On the possible significance of Adam de Everingham having had a son named
Alexander, one thing that's not clear is whether Alexander was his son by
Margaret, or by his first wife Clarice. It does seem possible that all the
sons named in CP v 187 note g could have been sons of Clarice, as the
marriage lasted at least 13 years.
Chris Phillips
_________________________________________