The mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

Back in 2006 James Cummings kindly asked for help in identifying the mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London, and of Roughey, Sussex (born c.1430, living 1472-3), younger son of Richard Copley, Knt. (died 1434), of Batley, Yorkshire, and London. James noted that various sources claimed that Roger Copley's mother was Margaret Denton, while other sources claimed his mother was Elizabeth Harington, daughter and heiress of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire.

The chief reason for the confusion regarding Roger Copley's mother seems to be an overall lack of records and differing visitation records which give Roger Copley, Esq., both sets of mothers.

Since 2006, I've had the opportunity to research the extended family and history of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire. My current findings prove that it is chronologically impossible for John Harington, Esq., to be the grandfather of Roger Copley, Esq., much less to be the father of Elizabeth, the surviving wife of Richard Copley, Knt.

At the present time, I have no position as to the identity of the mother of Roger Copley, Esq., and have removed the name of his mother from my recent work, Royal Ancestry, published this year. Should Roger Copley's mother eventually prove to be an Elizabeth Harington, all I can say is that she is definitely NOT the daughter and heiress of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire, as alleged in multiple secondary sources.

The pedigree below commences with William Harington, K.G. (died 1440), and his wife, Margaret Neville (died 1450), which couple are the parents of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire. The account shows that William and Margaret had three sons, namely Robert, Knt., Thomas, Knt., and John, Esq., not two sons as commonly thought. The eldest son, Robert Harington, Knt., predeceased his father and is usually overlooked in accounts of the Harington family.

For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from William Harington, K.G., and Margaret Neville, through their daughters, Isabel (wife of John Boteler, Knt.) and Agnes (wife of Alexander Radcliffe, Esq.):

Robert Abell, Thomas Booth, Grace Chetwode, Agatha, Alice, Eleanor, Jane & Martha Eltonhead.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Harington family of Farleton and Hornby, Lancashire

15. MARGARET NEVILLE, married before 17 April 1401 (date of fine) WILLIAM HARINGTON, K.G., of Farleton (in Melling), Aighton (in Mitton), Bolton-le-Moors, Chorley, Ellel, and Over Kellet, Lancashire, and Farleton in Kendale, Westmorland, son and heir of Nicholas Harington (or Haverington), Knt., of Farleton (in Melling), Bolton-le-Moors, Heath Charnock, Aighton, Lancashire, Farleton in Kendale, Westmorland, Knight of the Shire for Lancashire, Sheriff of Lancashire, by Isabel, daughter and heiress of William English, Knt., of Appleby, Little Strickland, and Hasket, Westmorland. They had three sons, Robert, Knt. (living 1436, died before 1440), Thomas, Knt., and John, Esq., and three daughters, Isabel (wife of John Boteler, Knt.), Ellen (wife of Richard Molyneux), and Agnes (wife of Alexander Ratcliffe, Esq.). In 1401 her parents settled the reversion of the manor of Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire on Margaret and her male heirs. He was a standard bearer at the Battle of Agincourt in 1415. He was one of the executors in 1417 will of his brother, James Harington, Knt. In 1420 he presented to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire. His wife, Margaret, was co-heiress in 1424 to her niece, Margaret Neville, wife of Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, by which she inherited Hornby Castle, Lancashire, and the manors of Aintree, Lancashire and Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire. In 1426 he and Henry Marchall, clerk, were summoned to reply to Robert Willoughby, Knt., of Rerisby, and two others in a plea that they should permit them to present a suitable rector to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire, then in their gift and vacant. He was one of the executors of the 1434/5 will of his nephew, Thomas Tunstall, Knt. In 1436 the Abbot of Whalley bound himself to pay 40 marks to Margaret, wife of William Harington, Knt., and her sons, Robert, Knt., Thomas, Esq., and John, Esq. SIR WILLIAM HARINGTON died testate 15 Feb. 1439/40. His widow, Margaret, served as one of the executors of her husband’s will. She presented to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire in 1448. She died in 1450.

References:

Whitaker, Hist. & Antiqs. of the Deanery of Craven (1812): 10 (Neville ped.). Whitaker, Hist. of Richmondshire 2(2) (1823), unpaginated, Harrington chart. Wainwright, Hist. & Topog. Intro. to the Wapentake of Strafford & Tickhill (1829): 92–94. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Beltz, Mems. of the Order of the Garter (1841): clvii, clx. Hulton, Coucher Book or Chartulary of Whalley Abbey 4 (Chetham Soc. 20) (1849): 1148–1151 (obligation of Margaret widow of William de Harington, Knt., of Hornby, and her sons, Robert, Knt., Thomas, Esq., and John, Esq. dated 1436). Annual Rpt. of the Deputy Keeper 37 (1876). 350. Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Flower, Vis. of Yorkshire 1563–4 (H.S.P. 16) (1881): 360 (Harrington ped.: “Sir William Harrington = Elizabeth on of theires of Sir Robert Nevill of Hornby”). Harrison, Hist. of Yorkshire: Wapentake of Gilling West (1885): 300. Croston, County Fams. of Lancashire & Cheshire (1887): 242–266 (sub Harington). Genealogist n.s. 17 (1901): 109–110. Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 86–87, 123, 125, 128. C.P.R. 1429–1436 (1907): 257–258. Wedgwood, Hist. of Parliament 1 (1936): 426–427 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Price, Yorkshire Deeds 10 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 120) (1955): 61–63. Roskell, House of Commons 1386–1421 3 (1992): 821–824 (biog. of Sir Robert Neville). Smith, Art, Identity & Devotion in 14th Cent. England (2003): 43–47. National Archives, CP 25/1/279/149, #13 [see abstract of fine at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html].

Children of William Harington, K.G., by Margaret Neville:

i. ROBERT HARINGTON, Knt., son and heir apparent. He served as a feoffee for his cousin, John Langton, Knt., in 1433. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his younger brothers, Thomas and John, are named in an obligation dated 1436. He married before 25 March 1438 (date of fine) CHRISTIAN _____. They had no issue. In 1438 he and his wife, Christian, purchased a moiety of the manor of Caton and Priest Hutton, Lancashire from Thomas Fleming and his wife, Isabel, and Robert Crakanthorp and his wife, Elizabeth. SIR ROBERT HARINGTON died before 15 Feb. 1439/40. In 1443 his widow, Christian, settled a moiety of the manors of Caton and Priest Hutton, Lancashire on herself for life, with remainder to her brother-in-law, Thomas Harington, of Hornby. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 103, 110, 125, 127–128. VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 79–85, 182–183. Price, Yorkshire Deeds 10 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 120) (1955): 63.

ii. THOMAS HARINGTON, Knt., of Hornby, Aintree, Bolton-le-Moors, Chorley, Ellel, Farleton (in Melling), Heath Charnock, Melling, and Shevington, Lancashire, Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire, etc., Knight of the Shire for Lancashire, 1432, 1437, 1442, 1447, 1449, Knight of the Shire for Yorkshire, 1455–6, Parker of Quernmore, 1440, Sheriff of Yorkshire, 1455–6, 2nd but 1st suriviving son and heir, born about 1400–10 (aged 30 or 40 in 1440). He married shortly before 13 March 1419/20 (date of inquisition) ELIZABETH DACRE, daughter and heiress of Thomas Dacre, of Tatham and Heysham, Lancashire, by Jane Banastre. She was born about 1405 (aged 15 in 1420). They had three sons, John, Knt., James, Knt. [see GASCOIGNE 16], and Robert, Knt., and five daughters, Margaret, Joan (wife of John Savile), Anne, Katherine, and Agnes. He went with the king to France in 1430. In 1430 he and his wife, Elizabeth, conveyed the advowson of a moiety of the church of Sedbergh, Lancashire to Cuthbert, Abbot of Coverham. In 1431 he led 130 men to the relief of Calais and Crotoy. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his younger brothers, Robert, Knt., and John, are named in an obligation dated 1436. He joined Thomas Radcliffe, Knt., in a lease of Wyresdale, Lancahire, in 1438, which was renewed in 1443. He served as one of the executors of his father’s will. In 1445 he went to France with a large retinue to bring over Margaret of Anjou. He was taken prisoner by the Scots c. 1448, and therefore was exempted from resumption in 1450. In 1450 Thomas Parr, Knt. sued him in the Court of Common Pleas regarding the detention of charters. In 1454 he was one of four knights summoned to a Great Council. He was appointed to be a keeper of the peace with Scotland in 1457. In 1458 he took part in a Yorkist party council at Middleham Castle. He fought with the Yorkists at Blore Heath in 1459. While pursuing the Lancastians after the battle, he was captured the next day at the bridge of Acton, Cheshire. In October 1459 his lands were ordered to be confiscated, and he was attainted Dec. 1459. SIR THOMAS HARRINGTON was wounded at the Battle of Wakefield 30 Dec. 1460, and died the next day. His son, John, was killed in the same battle. In 1462 his widow, Elizabeth, settled the manors of Tatham and Heysham, Lancashire on herself for life, with successive remainders to her sons, James and Robert, and then to her daughters, Maragaret, Joan, Anne, Katherine, and Agnes. In 1463 she made a similar settlement of a moiety of the manor of Sedbergh, Yorkshire, together with 40 messuages and lands in Sedbergh, Yorkshire. She died in 1485. Whittaker Hist. of the original Parish of Whalley (1818): 476 (Harrington ped.), 540. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Langton, Abs. of Inqs. post Mortem (Chetham Soc. 95) (1875): 139–140. Poynton, Memoranda, Hist. & Gen., rel. to the Parish of Kelston 1 (1878):13–14 (Harington ped.). Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Flower, Vis. of Yorkshire 1563–4 (H.S.P. 16) (1881): 274–276 (Savell ped.: “John Savill son and heyr of Sir John = Jane doughter of Sir Thomas Haryngton by Elsabeth doughter & heyr of Thomas Dacre and Jane Banastre. Sir Thomas was son of Sir William Haryngton by a doughter & on of theyres of Robert Nevell of Hornby.”). Selby, Lancashire & Cheshire Recs. 2 (Lancashire & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 8) (1883): 330. Croston, County Fams. of Lancashire & Cheshire (1887): 242–266 (sub Harington). Clay, Dugdale’s Vis. of Yorkshire Pt. 1 (1894): 62–69 (sub Savile). Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 110, 128–129, 131–132. VCH Lancaster 6 (1911): 199–203; 8 (1914): 109–118 (Dacre arms: Gules three escallops argent), 217–225. Wedgwood, Hist. of Parliament 1 (1936): 426–427 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Roskell, Knights of the Shire for the County Palatine of Lancaster (Chetham Soc. n.s. 96) (1937): 179–186 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Grimble Harington Fam. (1957). National Archives, CP 25/1/280/156, #13; CP 25/1/281/162, #8 [see abstract of fines at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html]. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/758, rot. 394f (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no758/aCP40no758fronts/IMG_0394.htm).

iii. JOHN HARINGTON, Esq., of Nether Hall in Doncaster, Yorkshire, younger son. He married before 27 October 1427 (date of fine) ISABEL SEWER, daughter of Richard Sewer, of Doncaster, Yorkshire, merchant of the Staple of Calais, by his wife, Joan. In 1427 he and his wife, Isabel, settled 50 messuages and lands in Doncaster, Crimpsall (in Doncaster), Bentley (in Arksey), and Arksey, Yorkshire on themselves and the heirs of Isabel. In 1434 he and his wife, Isabel, sold a moiety of one messuage in Doncaster, Yorkshire to Busio Bernard and his wife, Alice. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his two older brothers, Robert, Knt., and Thomas are named in an obligation dated 1436. He served as one of the executors of his father’s will. In 1440, as “John Haryngton, esq.,” he sued John Grene, yeoman, of Doncaster, Yorkshire in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a trespass. The same year he sued William Hoton, husbandman, of Doncaster, Yorkshire, and another regarding debts. In 1453, as “John, son of William Harrington,” he and his wife, Isabel, were granted license to found a chantry at the altar of Saint Katherine in the church of St. George of Doncaster, Yorkshire. In 1454 as “John Haryngton esquire,” he witnessed a grant of William Holme to Thomas Pygburne, William Bramwith, and others of one barn, gardens, and lands in Doncaster, Yorkshire. In 1456 he and his wife, Isabel, sold five messuages and lands in Doncaster, Wheatley (in Doncaster), Long Newton (in Doncaster), and Bentley (in Arksey), Yorklshire to Richard Wymark and Thomas Sotehill, clerks. In 1460 he witnessed a grant of Alice, daughter of John Snaythe, late of Doncaster, Yorkshire to Arthur Nowell. In 1462 he and his wife, Isabel, conveyed the manor of Balby (in Doncaster), and 45 messuages in Doncaster, Crimpsall (in Doncaster), Wheatley (in Doncaster), Carhouse (in Doncaster), Hexthorpe (in Doncaster), Loversall (in Doncaster), and Wadsworth, Yorkshire to Thomas Neville and his heirs. His wife, Isabel, died 23 April 1462. JOHN HARINGTON, Esq., died 8 Sept. 1465. He and his wife were buried in the chapel of the chantry which they founded in Doncaster, Yorkshire. He was mentioned in the 1482 will of his nephew, James Harington, Knt. Hunter, South Yorkshire 1 (1828): 40 (Sewer arms: three silver ewers on a bend sable on a silver shield). Wainwright, Hist. & Topog. Intro. to the Wapentake of Strafford & Tickhill (1829): 92–94. Jackson, Hist. & Desc. of St. George’s Church at Doncaster (1855): 35–38. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Poynton, Memoranda, Hist. & Gen., rel. to the Parish of Kelston 1 (1878): 11 (will of Sir James Harington dated 1482), 13–14 (Harington ped.). Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Jackson, Doncaster Charities, Past & Present (1881): 119–120. Page, Certificates of the Commissioners appointed to survey the Chantries, Guilds, Hospitals, etc., in the County of York 1 (Surtees Soc. 91) (1894): 176–177. Arch. Cantiana 23 (1898): 79–81. Dodsworth, Yorkshire Church Notes, 1619–1631 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1901): 70–72. Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 128–129. Nottinghamshire Archives: Foljambe of Osberton: Deeds & Estate Papers, DD/FJ/1/211/118 (available at www.a2a.org.uk/search/index.asp). National Archives, CP 25/1/280/155, #41; CP 25/1/280/157, #4; CP 25/1/281/161, #17; CP 25/1/281/162, #4 [see abstract of fines at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html]. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 499f (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/aCP40no717fronts/IMG_0499.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 1030d (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/bCP40no717dorses/IMG_1030.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 1659d (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/bCP40no717dorses/IMG_1659.htm).

[Peter Cockerill]

Post by Douglas Richardson
Dear Newsgroup ~
Back in 2006 James Cummings kindly asked for help in identifying the mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London, and of Roughey, Sussex (born c.1430, living 1472-3), younger son of Richard Copley, Knt. (died 1434), of Batley, Yorkshire, and London. James noted that various sources claimed that Roger Copley's mother was Margaret Denton, while other sources claimed his mother was Elizabeth Harington, daughter and heiress of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire.
The chief reason for the confusion regarding Roger Copley's mother seems to be an overall lack of records and differing visitation records which give Roger Copley, Esq., both sets of mothers.
Since 2006, I've had the opportunity to research the extended family and history of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire. My current findings prove that it is chronologically impossible for John Harington, Esq., to be the grandfather of Roger Copley, Esq., much less to be the father of Elizabeth, the surviving wife of Richard Copley, Knt.
At the present time, I have no position as to the identity of the mother of Roger Copley, Esq., and have removed the name of his mother from my recent work, Royal Ancestry, published this year. Should Roger Copley's mother eventually prove to be an Elizabeth Harington, all I can say is that she is definitely NOT the daughter and heiress of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire, as alleged in multiple secondary sources.
The pedigree below commences with William Harington, K.G. (died 1440), and his wife, Margaret Neville (died 1450), which couple are the parents of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire. The account shows that William and Margaret had three sons, namely Robert, Knt., Thomas, Knt., and John, Esq., not two sons as commonly thought. The eldest son, Robert Harington, Knt., predeceased his father and is usually overlooked in accounts of the Harington family.
Robert Abell, Thomas Booth, Grace Chetwode, Agatha, Alice, Eleanor, Jane & Martha Eltonhead.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Harington family of Farleton and Hornby, Lancashire
15. MARGARET NEVILLE, married before 17 April 1401 (date of fine) WILLIAM HARINGTON, K.G., of Farleton (in Melling), Aighton (in Mitton), Bolton-le-Moors, Chorley, Ellel, and Over Kellet, Lancashire, and Farleton in Kendale, Westmorland, son and heir of Nicholas Harington (or Haverington), Knt., of Farleton (in Melling), Bolton-le-Moors, Heath Charnock, Aighton, Lancashire, Farleton in Kendale, Westmorland, Knight of the Shire for Lancashire, Sheriff of Lancashire, by Isabel, daughter and heiress of William English, Knt., of Appleby, Little Strickland, and Hasket, Westmorland. They had three sons, Robert, Knt. (living 1436, died before 1440), Thomas, Knt., and John, Esq., and three daughters, Isabel (wife of John Boteler, Knt.), Ellen (wife of Richard Molyneux), and Agnes (wife of Alexander Ratcliffe, Esq.). In 1401 her parents settled the reversion of the manor of Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire on Margaret and her male heirs. He was a standard bearer at the Battle of Agincourt in 1415. He was one of the executors in 1417 will of his brother, James Harington, Knt. In 1420 he presented to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire. His wife, Margaret, was co-heiress in 1424 to her niece, Margaret Neville, wife of Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, by which she inherited Hornby Castle, Lancashire, and the manors of Aintree, Lancashire and Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire. In 1426 he and Henry Marchall, clerk, were summoned to reply to Robert Willoughby, Knt., of Rerisby, and two others in a plea that they should permit them to present a suitable rector to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire, then in their gift and vacant. He was one of the executors of the 1434/5 will of his nephew, Thomas Tunstall, Knt. In 1436 the Abbot of Whalley bound himself to pay 40 marks to Margaret, wife of William Harington, Knt., and her sons, Robert, Knt., Thomas, Esq., and John, Esq. SIR WILLIAM HARINGTON died testate 15 Feb. 1439/40. His widow, Margaret, served as one of the executors of her husband’s will. She presented to the church of Badsworth, Yorkshire in 1448. She died in 1450.
Whitaker, Hist. & Antiqs. of the Deanery of Craven (1812): 10 (Neville ped.). Whitaker, Hist. of Richmondshire 2(2) (1823), unpaginated, Harrington chart. Wainwright, Hist. & Topog. Intro. to the Wapentake of Strafford & Tickhill (1829): 92–94. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Beltz, Mems. of the Order of the Garter (1841): clvii, clx. Hulton, Coucher Book or Chartulary of Whalley Abbey 4 (Chetham Soc. 20) (1849): 1148–1151 (obligation of Margaret widow of William de Harington, Knt., of Hornby, and her sons, Robert, Knt., Thomas, Esq., and John, Esq. dated 1436). Annual Rpt. of the Deputy Keeper 37 (1876). 350. Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Flower, Vis. of Yorkshire 1563–4 (H.S.P. 16) (1881): 360 (Harrington ped.: “Sir William Harrington = Elizabeth on of theires of Sir Robert Nevill of Hornby”). Harrison, Hist. of Yorkshire: Wapentake of Gilling West (1885): 300. Croston, County Fams. of Lancashire & Cheshire (1887): 242–266 (sub Harington). Genealogist n.s. 17 (1901): 109–110. Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 86–87, 123, 125, 128. C.P.R. 1429–1436 (1907): 257–258. Wedgwood, Hist. of Parliament 1 (1936): 426–427 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Price, Yorkshire Deeds 10 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 120) (1955): 61–63. Roskell, House of Commons 1386–1421 3 (1992): 821–824 (biog. of Sir Robert Neville). Smith, Art, Identity & Devotion in 14th Cent. England (2003): 43–47. National Archives, CP 25/1/279/149, #13 [see abstract of fine at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html].
i. ROBERT HARINGTON, Knt., son and heir apparent. He served as a feoffee for his cousin, John Langton, Knt., in 1433. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his younger brothers, Thomas and John, are named in an obligation dated 1436. He married before 25 March 1438 (date of fine) CHRISTIAN _____. They had no issue. In 1438 he and his wife, Christian, purchased a moiety of the manor of Caton and Priest Hutton, Lancashire from Thomas Fleming and his wife, Isabel, and Robert Crakanthorp and his wife, Elizabeth. SIR ROBERT HARINGTON died before 15 Feb. 1439/40. In 1443 his widow, Christian, settled a moiety of the manors of Caton and Priest Hutton, Lancashire on herself for life, with remainder to her brother-in-law, Thomas Harington, of Hornby. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 103, 110, 125, 127–128. VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 79–85, 182–183. Price, Yorkshire Deeds 10 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 120) (1955): 63.
ii. THOMAS HARINGTON, Knt., of Hornby, Aintree, Bolton-le-Moors, Chorley, Ellel, Farleton (in Melling), Heath Charnock, Melling, and Shevington, Lancashire, Brearley (in Halifax), Yorkshire, etc., Knight of the Shire for Lancashire, 1432, 1437, 1442, 1447, 1449, Knight of the Shire for Yorkshire, 1455–6, Parker of Quernmore, 1440, Sheriff of Yorkshire, 1455–6, 2nd but 1st suriviving son and heir, born about 1400–10 (aged 30 or 40 in 1440). He married shortly before 13 March 1419/20 (date of inquisition) ELIZABETH DACRE, daughter and heiress of Thomas Dacre, of Tatham and Heysham, Lancashire, by Jane Banastre. She was born about 1405 (aged 15 in 1420). They had three sons, John, Knt., James, Knt. [see GASCOIGNE 16], and Robert, Knt., and five daughters, Margaret, Joan (wife of John Savile), Anne, Katherine, and Agnes. He went with the king to France in 1430. In 1430 he and his wife, Elizabeth, conveyed the advowson of a moiety of the church of Sedbergh, Lancashire to Cuthbert, Abbot of Coverham. In 1431 he led 130 men to the relief of Calais and Crotoy. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his younger brothers, Robert, Knt., and John, are named in an obligation dated 1436. He joined Thomas Radcliffe, Knt., in a lease of Wyresdale, Lancahire, in 1438, which was renewed in 1443. He served as one of the executors of his father’s will. In 1445 he went to France with a large retinue to bring over Margaret of Anjou. He was taken prisoner by the Scots c. 1448, and therefore was exempted from resumption in 1450. In 1450 Thomas Parr, Knt. sued him in the Court of Common Pleas regarding the detention of charters. In 1454 he was one of four knights summoned to a Great Council. He was appointed to be a keeper of the peace with Scotland in 1457. In 1458 he took part in a Yorkist party council at Middleham Castle. He fought with the Yorkists at Blore Heath in 1459. While pursuing the Lancastians after the battle, he was captured the next day at the bridge of Acton, Cheshire. In October 1459 his lands were ordered to be confiscated, and he was attainted Dec. 1459. SIR THOMAS HARRINGTON was wounded at the Battle of Wakefield 30 Dec. 1460, and died the next day. His son, John, was killed in the same battle. In 1462 his widow, Elizabeth, settled the manors of Tatham and Heysham, Lancashire on herself for life, with successive remainders to her sons, James and Robert, and then to her daughters, Maragaret, Joan, Anne, Katherine, and Agnes. In 1463 she made a similar settlement of a moiety of the manor of Sedbergh, Yorkshire, together with 40 messuages and lands in Sedbergh, Yorkshire. She died in 1485. Whittaker Hist. of the original Parish of Whalley (1818): 476 (Harrington ped.), 540. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Langton, Abs. of Inqs. post Mortem (Chetham Soc. 95) (1875): 139–140. Poynton, Memoranda, Hist. & Gen., rel. to the Parish of Kelston 1 (1878):13–14 (Harington ped.). Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Flower, Vis. of Yorkshire 1563–4 (H.S.P. 16) (1881): 274–276 (Savell ped.: “John Savill son and heyr of Sir John = Jane doughter of Sir Thomas Haryngton by Elsabeth doughter & heyr of Thomas Dacre and Jane Banastre. Sir Thomas was son of Sir William Haryngton by a doughter & on of theyres of Robert Nevell of Hornby.”). Selby, Lancashire & Cheshire Recs. 2 (Lancashire & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 8) (1883): 330. Croston, County Fams. of Lancashire & Cheshire (1887): 242–266 (sub Harington). Clay, Dugdale’s Vis. of Yorkshire Pt. 1 (1894): 62–69 (sub Savile). Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 110, 128–129, 131–132. VCH Lancaster 6 (1911): 199–203; 8 (1914): 109–118 (Dacre arms: Gules three escallops argent), 217–225. Wedgwood, Hist. of Parliament 1 (1936): 426–427 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Roskell, Knights of the Shire for the County Palatine of Lancaster (Chetham Soc. n.s. 96) (1937): 179–186 (biog. of Sir Thomas Harington). Grimble Harington Fam. (1957). National Archives, CP 25/1/280/156, #13; CP 25/1/281/162, #8 [see abstract of fines at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html]. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/758, rot. 394f (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no758/aCP40no758fronts/IMG_0394.htm).
iii. JOHN HARINGTON, Esq., of Nether Hall in Doncaster, Yorkshire, younger son. He married before 27 October 1427 (date of fine) ISABEL SEWER, daughter of Richard Sewer, of Doncaster, Yorkshire, merchant of the Staple of Calais, by his wife, Joan. In 1427 he and his wife, Isabel, settled 50 messuages and lands in Doncaster, Crimpsall (in Doncaster), Bentley (in Arksey), and Arksey, Yorkshire on themselves and the heirs of Isabel. In 1434 he and his wife, Isabel, sold a moiety of one messuage in Doncaster, Yorkshire to Busio Bernard and his wife, Alice. He and his mother, Lady Margaret, and his two older brothers, Robert, Knt., and Thomas are named in an obligation dated 1436. He served as one of the executors of his father’s will. In 1440, as “John Haryngton, esq.,” he sued John Grene, yeoman, of Doncaster, Yorkshire in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a trespass. The same year he sued William Hoton, husbandman, of Doncaster, Yorkshire, and another regarding debts. In 1453, as “John, son of William Harrington,” he and his wife, Isabel, were granted license to found a chantry at the altar of Saint Katherine in the church of St. George of Doncaster, Yorkshire. In 1454 as “John Haryngton esquire,” he witnessed a grant of William Holme to Thomas Pygburne, William Bramwith, and others of one barn, gardens, and lands in Doncaster, Yorkshire. In 1456 he and his wife, Isabel, sold five messuages and lands in Doncaster, Wheatley (in Doncaster), Long Newton (in Doncaster), and Bentley (in Arksey), Yorklshire to Richard Wymark and Thomas Sotehill, clerks. In 1460 he witnessed a grant of Alice, daughter of John Snaythe, late of Doncaster, Yorkshire to Arthur Nowell. In 1462 he and his wife, Isabel, conveyed the manor of Balby (in Doncaster), and 45 messuages in Doncaster, Crimpsall (in Doncaster), Wheatley (in Doncaster), Carhouse (in Doncaster), Hexthorpe (in Doncaster), Loversall (in Doncaster), and Wadsworth, Yorkshire to Thomas Neville and his heirs. His wife, Isabel, died 23 April 1462. JOHN HARINGTON, Esq., died 8 Sept. 1465. He and his wife were buried in the chapel of the chantry which they founded in Doncaster, Yorkshire. He was mentioned in the 1482 will of his nephew, James Harington, Knt. Hunter, South Yorkshire 1 (1828): 40 (Sewer arms: three silver ewers on a bend sable on a silver shield). Wainwright, Hist. & Topog. Intro. to the Wapentake of Strafford & Tickhill (1829): 92–94. Jackson, Hist. & Desc. of St. George’s Church at Doncaster (1855): 35–38. Baines, Hist. of the County Palatine & Duchy of Lancaster 4 (1836): 648 (Harington ped.). Poynton, Memoranda, Hist. & Gen., rel. to the Parish of Kelston 1 (1878): 11 (will of Sir James Harington dated 1482), 13–14 (Harington ped.). Misc. Gen. et Heraldica n.s. 3 (1880): 236–237, 269–272. Jackson, Doncaster Charities, Past & Present (1881): 119–120. Page, Certificates of the Commissioners appointed to survey the Chantries, Guilds, Hospitals, etc., in the County of York 1 (Surtees Soc. 91) (1894): 176–177. Arch. Cantiana 23 (1898): 79–81. Dodsworth, Yorkshire Church Notes, 1619–1631 (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1901): 70–72. Clay, Yorkshire Church Notes (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. 34) (1904): 70–72. Farrer, Final Concords of the County of Lancaster 3 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 50) (1905): 128–129. Nottinghamshire Archives: Foljambe of Osberton: Deeds & Estate Papers, DD/FJ/1/211/118 (available at www.a2a.org.uk/search/index.asp). National Archives, CP 25/1/280/155, #41; CP 25/1/280/157, #4; CP 25/1/281/161, #17; CP 25/1/281/162, #4 [see abstract of fines at http:// www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html]. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 499f (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/aCP40no717fronts/IMG_0499.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 1030d (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/bCP40no717dorses/IMG_1030.htm). Court of Common Pleas, CP40/717, rot. 1659d (available at http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no717/bCP40no717dorses/IMG_1659.htm).

Are you able to help me with this Harrington connection in Dodsworth's Church notes for Wakefield notes (York. Arch Soc. Vol 34 page 49) which refers to Richard Pek (aka Peck)whose arms quarter Harrington, Sewer and Lacy.The various visitations refer to Richard Peck(d. 1490)marrying Joan dau. of John Harrington (d. 1514)of Doncaster. I have yet to find this marriage recorded on any pedigree and and can't find any other evidence for this event. Can you help please.
Ty Peter

[TJ Booth]

On Wed, August 07, 2013 12:20 PM, "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry . . >
wrote

<Snip>
Since 2006, I've had the opportunity to research the extended family and
history of John Harington, Esq., of Doncaster, Yorkshire. My current
findings prove that it is chronologically impossible for John Harington,
Esq., to be the grandfather of Roger Copley, Esq., much less to be the
father of Elizabeth, the surviving wife of Richard Copley, Knt.
<Snip>

Douglas,

Glad you said 'current'. You may recall a 2010 SGM discussion of Sir Richard
Copley's family and chronology, where other valued posters also noted the
problem. If Sir William Harington & Margaret Neville's son Sir Thomas was b.
1400 or after, how could a dau of John Esq., Sir Thomas' younger brother,
have any children bef husband Sir Richard Copley d. in 1434?

Below is some overlooked and new Harrington and Copley family evidence that
the Copley pedigree is valid. It is Sir Thomas' traditional "1400-1410"
birthdate that needs revision.

The only evidence for the birthdates of any of Sir William's 3 sons, are
many disparate statements found in secondary sources about when Sir Thomas
was b. As noted in John Higgins' 2010 post, [1] , a Deputy Keeper's summary
said he was age 30 & more in 1440, Hunter's South Yorkshire ii:402 had him
age 40 in 19 Hen VI (1440/41) (repeated in the Testamenta Eboracensia
footnote to Thomas' 14 Sep 1459 will), and a Harington pedigree had him age
60 at his death. Whitaker's Harington pedigree (he was Hunter's likely
source) also had him age 40 in 19 Hen VI. [2] Roskell also shows him 'age 30
and more' at his father's death, and later makes him age 22 in 1432.[3] Most
versions of Thomas' birthdate appear based either on the IPM cited in Deputy
Keeper (for property held by Sir Thomas bro-in-law Boteler, not by Thomas),
or Whitaker. Have not seen the original ipm, but a transcription error is
possible. Even if not, as you and others note, age statements in IPM's can
be wrong.

In an important record not previously cited here, Whitaker recorded that
"Tho. de Haryngton ar." was appointed the rector of Tatham on 28 Jun 1420.
Tatham and its advowson belonged to Dacre, and this date is only months
after Sir Thomas m. Eliz Dacre. While I don't know if one needed to be an
adult to appoint a rector, he was certainly more than age 10.[4]

The marriage date of Sir Thomas' parents is not documented. While a 1401
settlement of property on William and Margaret was noted, that is no
evidence they were not m. well before then. Margaret's father was b. abt
1321, and her parents were m. Michelmas 1344 (CP ix:490/91). Margaret and
her sister were likely born within the next 20 years, and a marriage by or
before 1380 to William Haryngton is a reasonable chronology, given that
women often m. young at that time (Sir Thomas m. Eliz Dacre when she was age
15).

The 15 Mar 1489/90 will of Sir Richard Copley's son William, provides
valuable evidence about the Copley family. William, m. twice but d.s.p.,
held much property he bequeathed to his relatives. As Dugdale(Clay) and
others note, it is the only source naming Sir Richard's sons [5] -
"Leonelli, Johannis, Oliveri, Percivalli, Rogeri, et Thomae" (which seems
their likely birth order, since Lionel, the heir of his father, was the
oldest). Of equal but overlooked importance, the will makes two separate
bequests for masses and services to be held for his parents, "Ricardi
Copeley militis, et Elizabethae consortis, parentum meorum". Last but not
least, there is a bequest that "Thomas Pikburn shall have £20 to distribute
for the soul of Isabel Harington." Isabel Harington can be none other than
William's gr-mother, Isabel Sewer, wife of John Harington Esq. Thomas
Pikburn is listed in the 20 Jan 1462 fine involving John Harington and
Isabel, and has a memorial in Doncaster Church (as do John & Isabel).

Hunter ii:51 has a lengthy discussion of the Copleys of Nether Hall, and is
clearly convinced that the family's properties came to them from John
Harrington Esq. and Isabel Sewer.

Eldest son Lionel Copley was b. bef 27 Jul 1422 (proof of age 21 years
later). [6] A record I recently found proves that Lionel's mother was also
Elizabeth. "I, Lionel Copley, have granted to . . my manor of Malsis and
Okeworth . . in Luteryngton, . . and also the reversion of the manor of
Batley, which the Lady Elizabeth Copley, my mother, holds as her dower from
my father, Sir Richard Copley, her former husband." The 20 Jan 1464/65 grant
was made when John Copley, "son and heir of the said Lionel" m. Agnes dau of
Sir Geoffrey Pigot. [7]

Most pedigrees state Lionel was the son of Sir Richard by a 1st wife,
Margaret Denton. The above grant disproves that parentage. This is
consistent with Glover's pedigree for 'Copley of Doncaster' (page 526), that
Sir Richard had all his children by 'Elizabeth dau and heir of John
Harrington', the informant a descendant of that line. One suspects one
reason Lionel was sometimes assigned an earlier mother, is that Doncaster
and Nether Hall were among those held by William Copley in his 15 Mar
1589/90 will. He granted them to nephew Edward Copley, son of bro Thomas,
from whom the Nether Hall Copley's descend.[8]

My 2010 posts noted Dodsworth's 26 Jul 1619 evidence for Doncaster Church.
His notes clearly show John Harrington Esq. as the son of Sir William and
Margaret, and the husband of Isabel Sewer. [9] The couple were founders of
their own chapel on 18 Jan 1456, their tombs there also described by
Dodsworth. There was an elaborate seven panel window in the church
containing inscriptions about the family, each panel noting a couple. The
windows, as noted by Dodsworth and reconstructed by Jackson in greater
detail, were contemporary, and contain the couple's arms.[10] They were 1)
John Harrington (with arms of Harrington and Neville) and wife Isabella
Sewer; 2) Sir William and Margaret Neville parents of John; 3) Sir Thomas
bro of John w wife Eliz Dacre; 4) James 2nd son of Sir Thomas and his wife
Joan [Neville]; 5) Richard Sewer and Joan his wife (no arms for her) parents
of Isabella; 6) Richard Sewer and Katherine his wife (no arms for her)
gr-parents of Isabella; 7) Richard Sewer and Katherine his wife Uncle of
Isabella. The link of this couple to Doncaster is clear, as is the link of
succeeding generations of several of Sir Richard's younger sons to Doncaster
and Nether Hall, and to Doncaster Church where many later Copley generations
were buried.

In my view, the consistent contemporary evidence for the relationships noted
above, descent of Doncaster properties to Copley of Nether Hall, and mention
of Isabel Harington in William Copley's will, are far more credible evidence
than the widely disparate (and thus unreliable) secondary source statements
about Sir Thomas Harrington's birthdate. The evidence also conforms (except
for Lionel's mother) to Whitaker's, Hunter's, Glover's, and other careful
pedigrees for Harrington and Copley. If one considers the reasonableness of
a 1380 to 1385 marriage date for Sir William Harington and Margaret Neville
(no evidence contradicts it), one cannot rule out a marriage date of before
1405 for John Esq. and Isabelle Sewer. That chronology is consistent with
the evidence that their dau Elizabeth m. Sir Richard Copley sometime bef
1422 (when eldest son Lionel was likely b). This also means that Lionel's
younger siblings - including the subject of your post - were Elizabeth
Harrington's children.

Terry Booth
Chicago IL

Footnotes
---------
[1] John Higgins SGM post of 3 Dec 2010 @
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/gen-medieval/2010-12/1291415172 .
[2] Rev. T.D. Whitaker; History of Richmondshire (Vol II); London; Longman
Hurst; 1823; Harington pedigree follows page 250.
[3] J.S. Roskell; The Knights of the Shire of Lancaster (1377-1460); Remains
Historical & Literery (Chetham Society); Vol 96 (1937); pages 179 & 180.
[4] Whitaker;, op.cit.; rector appointment page 264. Thomas ar. also
appointed the rector on 13 Jul 1429, and 4 Mar 1441.
[5] "Testamenta Eboracensia Vol 4"; Surtees Soc; Vol 53 (1868); p.46
http://books.google.com/books?id=9arRAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA46. In addition to
William Copley's will, there are summaries in the footnotes for the wills of
his father Sir Richard of Nether Hall, Doncaster, and for his brother Thomas
who d. before William. An English translation of William Copley's will can
be found in Michael Sheard; Records of the Parish of Batley; Worksop; White;
1894; page 298 @ http://books.google.com/books?id=NqYKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA298.
Since Sir Richard Copley's will does not name his children (only his wife
Elizabeth and 'my daughters'), his son's will is invaluable.
[6] Cal Close Rolls; Hen VI Vol 4 [1441-1446], page 101+ @
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=110050 . July 27 1443.
Westminster. To the escheator in Yorkshire. Order to take the fealty of
Lionel Coppeley, son and heir of Richard Coppeley knight tenant by knight
service of Thomas lord Clyfforde late a minor in ward of the king, and to
give him seisin of his father's lands; as he has proved his age before the
escheator.
[7] Michael Sheard; Records of the Parish of Batley; Worksop; White; 1894;
page 324 @ http://books.google.com/books?id=NqYKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA324 .
[8] Testamenta Eboracensia; op.cit.; page 46. This from William's separate
will granting his numerous properties. "I will that Edward Copley, son and
heir of my brother Thomas Copley, be 25 before he get anything of mine, and
then he to have my ten[emen]te in Wadworth, Wilsick, Loversall, Warmsworth,
and Doncaster, to him and his heirs male with remainder to Wm. Copley of the
Middle Temple, jun., and his heirs male. The said [Edward Copley and Isabel
his sister], until their marriage, and their lands, to be in the custody of
my ex."
[9] Roger Dodsworth; 'Yorkshire Church Notes 1619-1631'; Yorkshire
Archaelogical Society; Record Series Vol 34 (1904); page 71 & 72 @
http://books.google.com/books?id=zegGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA71 .
[10] John Edward Jackson; The History and Description of St. George's Church
at Doncaster; London, J.B. Nichols; 1855; page 35 @
http://books.google.com/books?id=psQ_AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA35 .

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Terry ~

While your long post on the Harington family, of Hornby, Lancashire, contains many helpful items, the sum total of your post is basically "wishful thinking." You've attempted to re-write the chronology of the Harington family, but your reconstruction depends on forcing the evidence to fit your theory, rather than letting the evidence speak for itself.

For starters, you've dismissed without rhyme or reason the estimated birthdate of Sir Thomas Harington, of Hornby, Lancashire. That birthdate indicates that he was born about 1400–10, he being aged 30 or 40 in 1440. Since either birthdate all but destroys the notion that Thomas Harington's younger brother, John Harington, Esq., could possibly be the grandfather of Roger Copley, Esq., you simply push it out of the way. Not so fast, Terry.

When one is looking at the chronology of a family, one must look at all available dates to see if they harmonize and give you sound footing. In this case, we know that Thomas Harington had two proven sisters, Isabel and Agnes. Available records indicate that Isabel's husband, John Boteler, was born in 1403 (solid date) and that Agnes' husband, Alexander Ratcliffe, was born about 1412 (aged 30 in 1442). Moreover, Thomas Harington's own wife, Elizabeth Dacre, was born about 1405, she being aged 15 in 1420.

So we have four dates for members of this family and they are all in rough agreement with one another. As such, I see no reason whatsoever to dismiss the estimated birthdate of Sir Thomas Harington out of hand as you have done. Rather, the parallel evidence gives Thomas Harington's estimate birthdate a rather good foundation.

One helpful record you've located is that Thomas Harington (then esquire) presented to the church of Tatham, Lancashire in 1420, shortly after his marriage to Elizabeth Dacre, the heiress of Tatham [your reference: Whittaker, History of Richmondshire, 2 (1823): 264].

This item can be found at the following weblink:

http://archive.org/stream/historyofrichmon12whit#page/264/mode/2up

However, in your account of this record, you state that it was Thomas Harington himself who was was appointed the rector of Tatham. Not correct. Thomas Harington was actually the patron, not the rector. In any case, from the wording of your footnotes, I assume you meant to say that Thomas Harington was the patron, not the rector.

You further state "While I don't know if one needed to be an adult to appoint a rector, he was certainly more than age 10."

The answer to that question is that Thomas Harington could present to any of his wives' holding, once their marriage was consummated and she was deemed to be of full age. Full age for a medieval woman could run anywhere between 12 and 18. Elizabeth Dacre was aged about 15 in 1420. She presumably already had her lands granted to her.

You're correct that Thomas Harington was certainly more than 10 in 1420, as he had to be able to consummate the marriage for he and his wife to be granted livery of her lands. But he need not have been 21, as I think you are suggesting. He could have been as young as 12.

I'll let you muse over these facts before I address the other issues in your long post.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[TJ Booth]

Douglas,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. The issues are complex, you make
excellent comments.

The 1420 record in which Thomas Harrington appoints the rector at a minimum
reduces the 'born by' date to - per your suggestion - at least 1408. In my
view, likely much more. It is difficult to imagine a 15 year old girl being
interested in consumating a marriage with a 12 year old boy. I'd also think
anyone accepting a rectorship might want it authorized by someone with
authority to enter into a contract - i.e. having a parent make the
appointment if one were not yet an adult. But I defer to you and other
medieval scholars.

My suspicion is that the 1420 record is the one that made Whitaker (copied
by Hunter) state Harrington was b. 1400. There is no other record noted by
Whitaker which might support the 1400 date. If this is Whitaker's evidence,
it is unfortunate he didn't state 'born by 1400'.

As earlier noted, none of us has seen the original of the ipm which states
Thomas Harington was 'age 30 and more' in 1440/41. Transcription error
cannot be ruled out until it is re-examined, and as already noted, ipm dates
are often off by decades.

As for the reliability of the 'age 30 and more' statement, the post below
states that Alexander Radclyffe was b. 1412, since he was 'age 30 and more'
in 1442. Alexander Radclyffe m. Agnes Harington 20 Aug 1404 by marriage
contract.[1] This is a clear example of an 'age 30 and more' ipm date from
the same time period being - if not wrong - at least misleading. Age 40 and
more would seem more appropriate for Alexander.

Making estimates about a person's age based on their spouse's age - as
appears suggested below - can be a useful search tool. But there were many
arranged marriages of partners of disparate ages in medieval times. I do not
think you mean that one can always estimate a person's age based on a
spouses age, although it almost sounds like that.

Terry Booth
Chicago IL

Footnote
--------
[1] UK National Archives; P/156/2; 20 Aug 1404. Settlement on the marriage
of Alexander son of John de Radclyffe son of John de Radclyffe and a
daughter of William de Haveryngton; also mentions Hugh de Standisshe . See
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=055-p&cid=75-1-2&kw=#75-1-2


----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <***@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: The mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London


Dear Terry ~

While your long post on the Harington family, of Hornby, Lancashire,
contains many helpful items, the sum total of your post is basically
"wishful thinking." You've attempted to re-write the chronology of the
Harington family, but your reconstruction depends on forcing the evidence to
fit your theory, rather than letting the evidence speak for itself.

For starters, you've dismissed without rhyme or reason the estimated
birthdate of Sir Thomas Harington, of Hornby, Lancashire. That birthdate
indicates that he was born about 1400–10, he being aged 30 or 40 in 1440.
Since either birthdate all but destroys the notion that Thomas Harington's
younger brother, John Harington, Esq., could possibly be the grandfather of
Roger Copley, Esq., you simply push it out of the way. Not so fast, Terry.

When one is looking at the chronology of a family, one must look at all
available dates to see if they harmonize and give you sound footing. In
this case, we know that Thomas Harington had two proven sisters, Isabel and
Agnes. Available records indicate that Isabel's husband, John Boteler, was
born in 1403 (solid date) and that Agnes' husband, Alexander Ratcliffe, was
born about 1412 (aged 30 in 1442). Moreover, Thomas Harington's own wife,
Elizabeth Dacre, was born about 1405, she being aged 15 in 1420.

So we have four dates for members of this family and they are all in rough
agreement with one another. As such, I see no reason whatsoever to dismiss
the estimated birthdate of Sir Thomas Harington out of hand as you have
done. Rather, the parallel evidence gives Thomas Harington's estimate
birthdate a rather good foundation.

One helpful record you've located is that Thomas Harington (then esquire)
presented to the church of Tatham, Lancashire in 1420, shortly after his
marriage to Elizabeth Dacre, the heiress of Tatham [your reference:
Whittaker, History of Richmondshire, 2 (1823): 264].

This item can be found at the following weblink:

http://archive.org/stream/historyofrichmon12whit#page/264/mode/2up

However, in your account of this record, you state that it was Thomas
Harington himself who was was appointed the rector of Tatham. Not correct.
Thomas Harington was actually the patron, not the rector. In any case, from
the wording of your footnotes, I assume you meant to say that Thomas
Harington was the patron, not the rector.

You further state "While I don't know if one needed to be an adult to
appoint a rector, he was certainly more than age 10."

The answer to that question is that Thomas Harington could present to any of
his wives' holding, once their marriage was consummated and she was deemed
to be of full age. Full age for a medieval woman could run anywhere between
12 and 18. Elizabeth Dacre was aged about 15 in 1420. She presumably
already had her lands granted to her.

You're correct that Thomas Harington was certainly more than 10 in 1420, as
he had to be able to consummate the marriage for he and his wife to be
granted livery of her lands. But he need not have been 21, as I think you
are suggesting. He could have been as young as 12.

I'll let you muse over these facts before I address the other issues in your
long post.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah


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

[Douglas Richardson]

My comments are interspersed below. DR

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 3:11:14 PM UTC-6, TJ Booth wrote:
< Douglas,

< Thank you for your thoughtful reply. The issues are complex, you make <excellent comments.

Yes, the issues in this case are complex, but not unknown.

< The 1420 record in which Thomas Harrington appoints the rector at a minimum <reduces the 'born by' date to - per your suggestion - at least 1408. In my <view, likely much more. It is difficult to imagine a 15 year old girl being <interested in consumating a marriage with a 12 year old boy. I'd also think <anyone accepting a rectorship might want it authorized by someone with
<authority to enter into a contract - i.e. having a parent make the appointment <if one were not yet an adult. But I defer to you and other medieval scholars.

It's possible that Sir Thomas Harington's wife, Elizabeth Dacre, still had a guardian in 1420. But I believe their marriage was consummated in or before 1420 and that she and her husband already had her lands. Once Thomas Harington had her lands, I believe he could present to advowsons of churches which he held in her right, even though he himself was not aged 21. Conversely, a young man had to be aged 21 before he could have livery of his father's lands.

<My suspicion is that the 1420 record is the one that made Whitaker (copied by <Hunter) state Harrington was b. 1400. There is no other record noted by <Whitaker which might support the 1400 date. If this is Whitaker's evidence, it <is unfortunate he didn't state 'born by 1400'.

Possibly Matt Tompkins would be willing to examine the IPM of William Harington for us.

<As earlier noted, none of us has seen the original of the ipm which states
<Thomas Harington was 'age 30 and more' in 1440/41. Transcription error cannot <be ruled out until it is re-examined, and as already noted, ipm dates are <often off by decades.

Mark Ormrod, Lord Lieutenants and High Sheriffs of Yorkshire, 1066–2000 (2000): 90 states that Sir Thomas Harington (husband of Elizabeth Dacre) was born about 1400. See the following weblink for that statement:

http://books.google.com/books?ei=jPUTUtS5CtPcqAHi2YBQ&id=OkSAAAAAIAAJ&dq=William+Haryngton+1440&q=%22William+Haryngton%22#search_anchor

Ormrod, who is a competent historian, adds the following information regarding Sir Thomas Harington:

"He began his career as a soldier, joining the young Henry VI for his French coronation in 1430, and in 1436 he led a force to relieve Calais." END OF QUOTE.

Ormrod is in error, however, in stating Sir Thomas Harington was his father's eldest son. As I have shown in an earlier post, Sir Thomas was actually his father's 2nd son.

<As for the reliability of the 'age 30 and more' statement, the post below <states that Alexander Radclyffe was b. 1412, since he was 'age 30 and more' in <1442. Alexander Radclyffe m. Agnes Harington 20 Aug 1404 by marriage <contract.[1] This is a clear example of an 'age 30 and more' ipm date from the <same time period being - if not wrong - at least misleading. Age 40 and more <would seem more appropriate for Alexander.

Good work, Terry. I wasn't aware of the 1404 marriage contract for Alexander Radliffe and an unnamed daughter of Sir William Harington. However, given that Alexander Radcliffe's age is given as 30 and more in 1442, one should consider that there might have been two successive brothers named Alexander Radcliffe, and that the younger Alexander replaced the older Alexander as the groom in this marriage. Usually when a marriage contract involved children, a provision was made that if the intended groom died, he could be replaced by a younger brother. Ditto the intended bride.

Possibly Matt Tompkins can check the IPM of Alexander Radcliffe's father as well.

<Making estimates about a person's age based on their spouse's age - as appears <suggested below - can be a useful search tool. But there were many arranged <marriages of partners of disparate ages in medieval times. I do not think you <mean that one can always estimate a person's age based on a spouses age, <although it almost sounds like that.

Usually the groom and bride were within three years age of each other on their first marriage. The groom was not always the elder of the two.

Post by TJ Booth
Terry Booth
Chicago IL
Footnote
--------
[1] UK National Archives; P/156/2; 20 Aug 1404. Settlement on the marriage
of Alexander son of John de Radclyffe son of John de Radclyffe and a
daughter of William de Haveryngton; also mentions Hugh de Standisshe . See
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=055-p&cid=75-1-2&kw=#75-1-2

[TJ Booth]

Douglas,

Thank you for the further thoughtful comments. Some replies are also
interspersed below.

Before noting the two big issues, the comment about the National Archives
record for Alexander Radcliffe's 1404 marriage is beneath your usual high
level of demanding scholarship. That is, suggesting he 'might have died',
and then he 'might have had a younger brother named Alexander who later m.
Agnes Harington.' Possible, yes, but 'might haves' don't constitute
contemporary evidence. The ipm record also states Alexander was '30 years
and more' in 1442. There is no inconsistency between the 2 records, unless
one interprets '30 years and more' as excluding the possibility that
Alexander might have been born some 10 or more years earlier than suggested
in the ipm. Which leads into issue 1.

1. While statements made in ipm's must be respected, that does not mean they
don't contain errors about evidence which is not directly material for the
passage of property. Ipm ages can sometimes be based on hearsay if noone on
the inquisition panel (or witnesses) has direct knowledge of a person's age.
Expediency may then be involved. Did it make a difference if a person were
'30 years or more', '40 years or more' or '50 years or more' in these cases?

2. Disproof by chronology is a slippery slope, especially when - as here -
two sets of evidence are in apparent conflict, and the competing chronology
is inexact. On the one hand there is the Copley pedigree - accepted by
Hunter and many other competent genealogists (with minor revisions for
Lionel's mother). That pedigree is consistent with Copley family wills, the
descent of Doncaster properties, Doncaster Church evidence, and other items
I've noted. On the other hand, there is no definitive evidence of Sir Thomas
Harington's birthdate (the birthdates of the Harington sisters and their
husbands are irrelevant unless they can disprove my suggested chronology
that their mother was likely born bef 1365 and m. perhaps 1380). Does the
ipm record stating Thomas was age 30 and more in 1440 (if that's what it
says) exclude the possibility he might have been 40 or 50 years more if the
panel didn't know his age and took the conservative approach? The rectorship
record certainly cannot prove that Thomas 'ar.' (as he was then identified)
was born after 1400, and cannot exclude the possibility he was born well
before that date.

Based on the silence of other newsgoup members, the consensus would appear
they are agreeing with your view - i.e. that ipm statements regarding
people's ages should be considered more sacrosanct than the evidence of
wills and property descents. While tolerant of those views, absent new
evidence I continue to respectfully disagree.

Disclaimer. AFAIK my family doesn't descend from Richard Copley.

Terry Booth
Chicago IL

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <***@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: The mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London


<Snip>
Once Thomas Harington had her lands, I believe he could present to advowsons
of churches which he held in her right, even though he himself was not aged
21. Conversely, a young man had to be aged 21 before he could have livery
of his father's lands.
<Snip>
[Reply] "I believe?" Perhaps another newsgroup member might provide further
validation for the statement. Please also note that the patron presenting
the rector was identified as "Thos Haryngton ar." - do not know if that
identification has significance, other than he was entitled to bear arms and
thus - if I understand it correctly - was at least age 14.

<Snip>
Mark Ormrod, Lord Lieutenants and High Sheriffs of Yorkshire, 1066–2000
(2000): 90 states that Sir Thomas Harington (husband of Elizabeth Dacre) was
born about 1400. See the following weblink for that statement:
http://books.google.com/books?ei=jPUTUtS5CtPcqAHi2YBQ&id=OkSAAAAAIAAJ&dq=William+Haryngton+1440&q=%22William+Haryngton%22#search_anchor
Ormrod, who is a competent historian, adds the following information
regarding Sir Thomas Harington:
"He began his career as a soldier, joining the young Henry VI for his French
coronation in 1430, and in 1436 he led a force to relieve Calais." END OF
QUOTE.
Ormrod is in error, however, in stating Sir Thomas Harington was his
father's eldest son. As I have shown in an earlier post, Sir Thomas was
actually his father's 2nd son.
<snip>
[Reply] Ormrod is not a contemporary source, and cites no contemporary
source for his 'c. 1400' statement. He is most likely just repeating the
date found in other secondary sources like Whitaker/Hunter. Interesting he
doesn't note 1410. Ormrod's competency apparently isn't original research,
if he overlooked the many records Sir Robert was the oldest son.

<Snip> "one should consider that there might have been two successive
brothers named Alexander Radcliffe, and that the younger Alexander replaced
the older Alexander as the groom in this marriage. <Snip>
[Reply] Considered and dropped - as noted earlier 'might haves' don't
constitute evidence.

<Snip>
Usually the groom and bride were within three years age of each other on
their first marriage. The groom was not always the elder of the two.<Snip>
[Reply] There are many examples where - especially if major estates were
involved - age differences didn't much matter. In this case, Sir William
Harington purchased Eliz Dacre's guardianship 11 Dec 1418/19, surely
expecting to marry her to his son Thomas (then Esq.). As above, 'might be's'
and 'likely's' are not evidence, about which there is none here.

One good example was documented by John Ravilious and John Watson last
January 13/14. Records show Isabel Eland was b. aft 25 Jun 1348, and m. bef
Easter 1353 Sir John Savile, b. bef 17 Sep 1326. She was thus age 4, he at
least age 26. The prize was Eland.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by TJ Booth
Douglas,
Thank you for the further thoughtful comments. Some replies are also
interspersed below.
Before noting the two big issues, the comment about the National Archives
record for Alexander Radcliffe's 1404 marriage is beneath your usual high
level of demanding scholarship. That is, suggesting he 'might have died',
and then he 'might have had a younger brother named Alexander who later m.
Agnes Harington.' Possible, yes, but 'might haves' don't constitute
contemporary evidence. The ipm record also states Alexander was '30 years
and more' in 1442. There is no inconsistency between the 2 records, unless
one interprets '30 years and more' as excluding the possibility that
Alexander might have been born some 10 or more years earlier than suggested
in the ipm. Which leads into issue 1.
1. While statements made in ipm's must be respected, that does not mean they
don't contain errors about evidence which is not directly material for the
passage of property. Ipm ages can sometimes be based on hearsay if noone on
the inquisition panel (or witnesses) has direct knowledge of a person's age.
Expediency may then be involved. Did it make a difference if a person were
'30 years or more', '40 years or more' or '50 years or more' in these cases?
2. Disproof by chronology is a slippery slope, especially when - as here -
two sets of evidence are in apparent conflict, and the competing chronology
is inexact. On the one hand there is the Copley pedigree - accepted by
Hunter and many other competent genealogists (with minor revisions for
Lionel's mother). That pedigree is consistent with Copley family wills, the
descent of Doncaster properties, Doncaster Church evidence, and other items
I've noted. On the other hand, there is no definitive evidence of Sir Thomas
Harington's birthdate (the birthdates of the Harington sisters and their
husbands are irrelevant unless they can disprove my suggested chronology
that their mother was likely born bef 1365 and m. perhaps 1380). Does the
ipm record stating Thomas was age 30 and more in 1440 (if that's what it
says) exclude the possibility he might have been 40 or 50 years more if the
panel didn't know his age and took the conservative approach? The rectorship
record certainly cannot prove that Thomas 'ar.' (as he was then identified)
was born after 1400, and cannot exclude the possibility he was born well
before that date.
Based on the silence of other newsgoup members, the consensus would appear
they are agreeing with your view - i.e. that ipm statements regarding
people's ages should be considered more sacrosanct than the evidence of
wills and property descents. While tolerant of those views, absent new
evidence I continue to respectfully disagree.

Terry, you can rest assured that silence of other newsgroup members certainly does not indicate concurrence with DR's views - but rather that it's fruitless to carry on such a discussion with one whose views are so fixed and who is so ready to manufacture evidence to support his views when they're challenged (e.g., a second Alexander Radcliffe - !!) I think you've stated your position very clearly above - and very conservatively.

Post by TJ Booth
<Snip>
Once Thomas Harington had her lands, I believe he could present to advowsons
of churches which he held in her right, even though he himself was not aged
21. Conversely, a young man had to be aged 21 before he could have livery
of his father's lands.
<Snip>
[Reply] "I believe?" Perhaps another newsgroup member might provide further
validation for the statement. Please also note that the patron presenting
the rector was identified as "Thos Haryngton ar." - do not know if that
identification has significance, other than he was entitled to bear arms and
thus - if I understand it correctly - was at least age 14.

Since we're in the realm of "I believe" as supposed evidence for genealogical statements, we should take note of DR's earlier statement: "I believe their marriage [Thomas Harrington and Elizabeth Dacre] was consummated in or before 1420". THIS is scholarship?? What is DR's evidence for this, especially if the boy was 12 and the girl was 15 as is suggested?

Post by TJ Booth
<Snip>
Mark Ormrod, Lord Lieutenants and High Sheriffs of Yorkshire, 1066–2000
(2000): 90 states that Sir Thomas Harington (husband of Elizabeth Dacre) was
http://books.google.com/books?ei=jPUTUtS5CtPcqAHi2YBQ&id=OkSAAAAAIAAJ&dq=William+Haryngton+1440&q=%22William+Haryngton%22#search_anchor
Ormrod, who is a competent historian, adds the following information
"He began his career as a soldier, joining the young Henry VI for his French
coronation in 1430, and in 1436 he led a force to relieve Calais." END OF
QUOTE.
Ormrod is in error, however, in stating Sir Thomas Harington was his
father's eldest son. As I have shown in an earlier post, Sir Thomas was
actually his father's 2nd son.
<snip>
[Reply] Ormrod is not a contemporary source, and cites no contemporary
source for his 'c. 1400' statement. He is most likely just repeating the
date found in other secondary sources like Whitaker/Hunter. Interesting he
doesn't note 1410. Ormrod's competency apparently isn't original research,
if he overlooked the many records Sir Robert was the oldest son.

Mark Ormrod is apparently a "competent historian" (or least gratuitously labeled as such by DR) only to the extent that his conclusions agree with DR's desired results. This is simply selective scholarship - otherwise known as "cherry-picking the evidence".

[Matt Tompkins]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:56:27 PM UTC+1, TJ Booth wrote:
<snip>

The ipm record also states Alexander was '30 years and more' in 1442. There is no inconsistency between the 2 records, unless one interprets '30 years and more' as excluding the possibility that Alexander might have been born some 10 or more years earlier than suggested in the ipm. Which leads into issue 1.
1. While statements made in ipm's must be respected, that does not mean they don't contain errors about evidence which is not directly material for the passage of property. Ipm ages can sometimes be based on hearsay if noone on the inquisition panel (or witnesses) has direct knowledge of a person's age. Expediency may then be involved. Did it make a difference if a person were '30 years or more', '40 years or more' or '50 years or more' in these cases?

<snip>

Based on the silence of other newsgoup members, the consensus would appear they are agreeing with your view - i.e. that ipm statements regarding people's ages should be considered more sacrosanct than the evidence of wills and property descents. While tolerant of those views, absent new evidence I continue to respectfully disagree.

I haven't been following this discussion, Terry, but I'd certainly agree that statements of the ages of heirs in IPMs need to be used cautiously, especially those of the '40 and more' sort. There's an interesting, if perhaps a little optimistic, discussion of these in Joel Rosenthal's book, Old Age in Late Medieval England (Philadelphia, 1996), in chapter 1.

Christine Carpenter had the following to say in her Introduction to vol. 22 of the Calendar of Inquisitions post Mortem, at p. 32:

"...with respect to the information about the date of death and age of the heir, there is enough variation between inquisitions taken on the same person in different counties for serious unease. In this volume, to take just one example, the Lincolnshire IPM for Elizabeth wife of Peter Melburne gives the date of her death as 13 May 1412 and the ages of her heirs as thirty- eight and forty- six years, while the Derbyshire return has the date of death as 1 March 1409 and the ages of the heirs as twenty-two and twentyfour. This was one of those inquisitions done long after the event – in this case in 1426 – and so some vagueness on both pieces of information might be excused but this is in fact a widespread problem. There are other instances of conflicting declarations
on the age of the heir when the death of the tenant and the IPM were much closer in time; for example, Thomas Erpingham died in June 1428 and inquisitions
held on him in July 1428 and April 1429 give the age of William Philip his heir as either thirty years and more or forty years and more. J. C. Russell, one of the first to use IPMs for demography, noted the same phenomenon of ages varying from county to county. He also noted how concern to record the exact age of heirs diminished when the heir was twenty - one or over, so that the ages given go up by even numbers in the twenties and then by still rounder numbers from thirty or thirty-two. Similarly, Rosenthal has observed that the entries seem to be at their most precise when they deal with heirs who are very close to their majority – either just about to reach it or just past – and those who are very young. Encouragingly, Russell found that, where he was able to check proofs of age against the recorded age of the minor at his or her parent’s death, in the great majority of cases the figures measured up to within a year
or two. We might still wonder why dates of death and figures for the age of the heir are not more accurate, if so much of the information came direct from the family; surely it could be relied on to get this sort of thing right? It may be that inaccurate information on these matters came largely from juries in counties rarely or never visited by the family and that there was greater accuracy in counties where the family had frequently-used residences; comparison of returns between counties on this basis might reveal such a pattern. But it is also possible that, as the round figures for heirs who are indubitably of age suggest, no one was really interested in getting these things right."

Matt Tompkins

[TJ Booth]

On Thursday, August 22, 2013 6:54 AM, "Matt Tompkins" <***@le.ac ..> wrote

<Snip>
I haven't been following this discussion, Terry, but I'd certainly agree
that statements of the ages of heirs in IPMs need to be used cautiously,
especially those of the '40 and more' sort. There's an interesting, if
perhaps a little optimistic, discussion of these in Joel Rosenthal's book,
Old Age in Late Medieval England (Philadelphia, 1996), in chapter 1.
</Snip>

Thank you Matt for your insight and quote. Also thanks to John Higgins for
his comments.

Since I had raised the possibility of transcription error, Mr. Richardson
suggested you might review two ipm originals to verify their '30 and more'
language was a correct transcription. Given your reply, I don't think that
is necessary - i.e. even if the transcription is 100% correct, one cannot
arbitrarily assume such 'or more' age statements are 100% correct.

Terry Booth
Chicago IL

[Matt Tompkins]

Thank you Matt for your insight and quote. Also thanks to John Higgins for his comments. Since I had raised the possibility of transcription error, Mr. Richardson suggested a review of two ipm originals to verify their '30 and more' language was a correct transcription. Given your reply, I don't think that is necessary - i.e. even if the transcription is 100% correct, one cannot arbitrarily assume such 'or more' age statements are 100% correct.
Terry Booth Chicago IL

Rosenthal's Old Age in Late Medieval England suggests an interesting explanation for the '30 years and more'-type ages which supports your view, Terry - see p. 17, here:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=L6rq99eCWaMC&pg=PA17&dq=rosenthal+%22Inquisitions+post+mortem%22+%22aged+30+years+and+more%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LTYWUu2AO_Su7Aad6oC4CQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=rosenthal%20%22Inquisitions%20post%20mortem%22%20%22aged%2030%20years%20and%20more%22&f=false

Matt

[TJ Booth]

Matt,

Thank you for this, which is right on topic. Joel T. Rosenthal is a
respected medieval scholar, and one of the co-editors of the 'Medieval
England: Encyclopedia'.

Since it is a 'preview' page of a 1996 book (thus subject to disappearance),
below is a transcription of the key paragraph from the page cited, for
future SGM users. The reader is encouraged to read Mr. Rosenthal's book for
added insight:

"Once the new heir was beyond the law's most serious demarcation - the age
of legal majority - the need for precision obviously became less pressing.
If the heir were clearly too old for the question of legal majority to be a
serious issue, such formulaic phrases as 'aged 30 years and more' or 'aged
33 years and more' could suffice for the interested parties; it must also
suffice for us. Since the jury returning the information was composed of
those with local knowledge, and since the findings usually seem to have been
accepted without demur, it behooves us to work from the idea that the ages
attested were unexceptional to and harmonious with local culture and memory,
if not accurate by our standards. Adter all, medieval society was not
anumeric. Nor was it a world with a different framework regarding the
definition of life, either in terms of ultimate chronology or longevity, or
in terms of the stages of the life cycle. To the neighbors, if one was
clearly more than 21, one was old enough; if one were well beyond that, a
rough-and-ready '30 or more' sufficed. And if one were considerably beyond
the latter plateau, a less common '40 or more' or even the occasional '50
and more' did the trick. No vested interests were threatened by such
categorication, no larger truths about the law and life were disarranged. A
really advanced age was givem for the next heir with neither gloss nor
explanation. If someone was said to be 55 or 60 when he or she inherited
from a parent or sibling, the data just went into the record as offered."
Joel Thomas Rosenthal; Old Age in Late Medieval England; Univ PA Press;
1996; page 18

Terry Booth
Chicago IL

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Tompkins" <***@le.ac.uk>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: The mother of Roger Copley, Esq., Citizen and mercer of London

Post by Matt Tompkins

Post by TJ Booth
Thank you Matt for your insight and quote. Also thanks to John Higgins for
his comments. Since I had raised the possibility of transcription error,
Mr. Richardson suggested a review of two ipm originals to verify their '30
and more' language was a correct transcription. Given your reply, I don't
think that is necessary - i.e. even if the transcription is 100% correct,
one cannot arbitrarily assume such 'or more' age statements are 100%
correct.
Terry Booth Chicago IL

Rosenthal's Old Age in Late Medieval England suggests an interesting
explanation for the '30 years and more'-type ages which supports your
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=L6rq99eCWaMC&pg=PA17&dq=rosenthal+%22Inquisitions+post+mortem%22+%22aged+30+years+and+more%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LTYWUu2AO_Su7Aad6oC4CQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=rosenthal%20%22Inquisitions%20post%20mortem%22%20%22aged%2030%20years%20and%20more%22&f=false
Matt
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[j***@gmail.com]

I am a neutral observer on the matter of whether Elizabeth the wife of Richard Copley was a Harrington, but from my researches I believe I can add to the Copley side of the story. Most of what I know is on my website,

https://sites.google.com/site/copleyhistory/rc

which includes sources so I'm afraid I am not going to retype it all here. The key points are:

1. The confusion over Margaret Denton / Elizabeth Harrington flows from a footnote in one of Foster's pedigrees.

MS18,011 states the above mentioned sons of Sir Richard Copley to be by the 2nd match, whereas MS 1415, 1571 and 6070 state them to be by the 1st match. The pedigree is altered as above, in conformity with the pedigree which appear in Hunter’s So. Yorkshire Vol1 p51 and my Yorkshire collection.

Unfortunately the footnote is incorrect. MS Add 18011 contains no mention of Elizabeth Harrington. MS 1487 does name her but does not attrubute the sons to either wife.

2. There is additional evidence for Lionel Copey's age from William's IPM (1491) where Lionel is said to be aged 69

3. Surtees Society 207 A "Perambulation of Cumberland 1687-1688 by Thomas Denton" gives a grant of arms attributed to Richard Copley which is consistent with Margaret Denton being his grandmother. Ths fits with the arguments advanced by William Paley Baildon, which has been referenced in earlier threads on this subject, but so far as I am aware thi sgrant was not known to Baildon.

John Copley