Display Records

Displaying results from place name of

Prior of Holy Island’s Accounts

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: MonasticDocument category 1: Priors' or abbots' accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1342 to 1537
Holy Island (or Lindisfarne) was historically the most significant of all the Durham cells, and one of the oldest Christian sites in Northumbria. Given by St. Oswald to St. Aidan as the seat of his new bishopric in 634, it had also been the seat of St. Cuthbert, and hence of the Community of St. Cuthbert, from which the Priory, City and Bishopric of Durham were all derived.


*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from REED: Durham editors Mark Chambers and John McKinnell, using the contact form provided on this site.

Sacrist of Coldingham’s Accounts

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: MonasticDocument category 1: Priors' or abbots' accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1363 to 1367
Coldingham had been the site of a famous Anglo-Saxon monastery, which was re-founded by 1139 following grants to Durham Priory from the Kings of Scots. Wars between the English and the Scots led to disputes over control of the monastery, which ended with Durham’s loss of control (to Dumferline) in 1462.


*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from REED: Durham editors Mark Chambers and John McKinnell, using the contact form provided on this site.

Prior of Finchale’s Accounts

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: MonasticDocument category 1: Priors' or abbots' accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1365 to 1529
Originally founded as a hermitage by St. Godric in the early 12th century and bequeathed to Durham priory when he died, Finchale became one of the richest of the cells and a place where Durham monks frequently took retirement or holidays.

*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from REED: Durham editors Mark Chambers and John McKinnell, using the contact form provided on this site.

Wentworth Household Records

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: FamilyDocument category 1: Correspondence
From region: Yorkshire, WestFrom place:
Relevant material from 1612 to 1638
WENTWORTH HOUSEHOLD.
Edited by Sylvia Thomas.

These transcriptions appear with the permission of Sheffield City Council, Libraries, Archives and Information: Sheffield Archives. WWM (Wentworth Woodhouse Muniments): reproduced with permission from The Milton (Peterborough) Estates Company and the Director of Communities, Sheffield City Council (the Wentworth Woodhouse papers have been accepted in lieu of Inheritance Tax by HM Government and allocated to Sheffield City Council).

INTRODUCTION:

Wentworth Woodhouse is in the parish of Wath-upon-Dearne, five miles from Rotherham and nine from Barnsley. It was the seat of the Wentworth family from the fourteenth century.

William Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse, baronet (1562—1614), ‘a wealthy Yorkshire landowner whose family had long been established in the West Riding, was lord of two manors and master of a yearly income of several thousand pounds. Something less than a nobleman, something greater than a country squire, he belonged to that rising aristocracy of wealth who counted themselves inferior to none. His wife [Anne] was the daughter and heiress of Sir Robert Atkinson of Stowell in Gloucestershire… Sir Robert had a house in London and it was here that his daughter gave birth to her son’ [Thomas, on 13 April 1593]. [Wedgwood, chapter 1]

Thomas Wentworth, first earl of Strafford (1593--1641), lord lieutenant of Ireland, was the second and eldest surviving son of William Wentworth. He was first elected to parliament in 1614, and again in 1620. His guiding belief was that there should be ‘a harmonious union betwixt the kinge, the nobles and Commons’ in order to achieve successful legislation (Cooper, Wentworth Papers, 153--5) but, as an opponent of the policies of the duke of Buckingham, he became allied to men hostile to the royal favourite.

Wentworth’s first wife Margaret died on 14 August 1622, and by 1624 he was looking for an heiress to be his new wife, eventually settling on Lady Arabella Holles (1608/9 – 1631), daughter of John Holles, first earl of Clare. They were married on 24 February 1624/5.

The influence of Buckingham, and of Sir John Savile, who was also hostile to Wentworth, resulted in the king’s decision to appoint him sheriff of Yorkshire in November 1625, so that he could no longer sit in Parliament. Over the next few years he continued to align himself with opponents of royal policy, refused to pay the forced loan raised to finance the war against France in 1626-7, and was imprisoned from June to December 1627.

Elected a knight of the shire again in 1628, he spoke in favour of the bill of right, whilst at the same time believing that only adequate financial resources would enable the king to govern in accordance with the law and tradition, a principle in which Wentworth had a profound belief. His moderation in opposition earned him elevation to the peerage as Baron Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse and baron of Newmarch and Oversley on 22 July 1628. This apparent change of sides was seen as controversial in Yorkshire.

After Buckingham’s death in August 1628 Wentworth was in December created Viscount Wentworth and on 25 December lord president of the north. He was successful in this office but ruthless in his methods, which made him a number of enemies.

His second wife died on 5 October 1631, and he was deeply affected, all the more because her family, with whom he was on poor terms, held him responsible. They had four children, three of whom survived. Wentworth married again in October 1632. His third wife was Elizabeth (c.1614 – 1688), daughter of Sir Godfrey Rodes of Great Houghton, Yorkshire. This marriage produced a daughter, Margaret (d. 1681).

On 12 January 1631/2 he was appointed lord deputy of Ireland, arriving in Dublin on 23 July 1633. Over the next six years he successfully and again ruthlessly exercised power on behalf of the king, increasing revenues for the crown, and also enriching himself, although opposing corruption. He again made powerful enemies. In August 1639 Charles I, whose government was under threat from Parliament and from the Scots covenanters, recalled Wentworth to England to become his chief councillor, making him in January 1639/40 lord lieutenant of Ireland and creating him earl of Strafford. On the illness of the earl of Northumberland, the official commander, Strafford was sent to lead the king’s forces in northern England in August 1640, but the situation was hopeless, and his authority declined rapidly. ‘Black Tom Tyrant’ was held responsible for the king’s disastrous policies and mistakes of the past ten years.

In November the Commons accused him of high treason and impeached him in the House of Lords. Strafford was so skilful in his own defence that the proceedings seemed likely to collapse, but the Commons passed a bill of attainder on 21 April 1641. In the face of intense public hysteria against him whipped up by his enemies the bill was passed and given assent by the king on 10 May (despite an earlier royal promise to save his life). He was beheaded on Tower Hill on 12 May 1641.

[SOURCES:
C.V.Wedgwood, Thomas Wentworth, First Earl of Strafford, 1593-1641: a Revaluation, London, 1961.

Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB): Thomas Wentworth.

J.P.Cooper, ed., Wentworth Papers, 1597-1628, Royal Historical Society, Camden Fourth Series, vol. 12, 1973.]


*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from Sylvia Thomas.



Durham Priory Almonry Accounts

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: MonasticDocument category 1: Obedientiaries' accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1367 to 1480
The charitable responsibilities of the Almoner included the welfare of elderly men and women in an infirmary outside the abbey gate, old people’s hostels at St. Mary Magdalen, Durham and at Witton Gilbert, a house for four widows, and the Almonry School, whose schoolroom was immediately above the abbey gate. Although the Almonry Bishop was selected from among the boys of the school, there is no evidence that the Almoner ever received payment from other officers on his behalf; rather, these contributions probably went direct to the expenses of the ceremony, and it seems likely that they were administered by the Master of the Almonry School. After 1474 they went to the Feretrar’s Office, and it is doubtful whether the actual ceremony continued.

Most of the dramatic records in the Almoners\' accounts relate to local folk customs. Records include payments for the folk custom of the harvest goose and perhaps a plough festival connected to it (1337-39ff), to further plough ceremonies (such as those at Elvethall Manor in New Elvet in 1413), as well as numerous regular, usually annual, payments for the Almonry Bishop (Episcopo Elemosinarie) - the Boy Bishop - selected from the boys of the monastery\'s Almonry School.

There are also payments recorded to minstrels attached to noble households, including minstrels Ralph, Lord Neville (later first Earl of Westmoreland, born c.1364, d.1425), his son-in-law Ralph of Lumley (first Lord Lumley, 1384-1400), and Sir Ralph Euer of Witton-le-Wear, Co. Durham (c.1350-1422).

Payment to a ‘Dominus Nicholas’ (Seynteler) appears under ‘Pensiones’ in the account of 1458-9, as master of the children of the Almery School; he appears to have been paid for copying the words and music for the Corpus Christi service and for a service for dedicating a church.

*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from REED: Durham editors Mark Chambers and John McKinnell, using the contact form provided on this site.

Accounts of Ingram of Temple Newsam

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: FamilyDocument category 1: Household accounts
From region: Yorkshire, WestFrom place:
Relevant material from 1612 to 1642
Accounts of Ingram of Temple Newsam*

Sir Arthur Ingram (before 1571-1642), financier and politician, was born in London, son of Hugh Ingram, a tallow chandler of Yorkshire origin and his wife Anne, daughter of Richard Goldthorpe, a haberdasher of York.

Sir Arthur took over his father’s business and became a successful money-lender, gaining influence with powerful men at court. As a result of such support he was returned as a member of parliament for the first time in 1609. An active parliamentarian all his life, Ingram sat for York during the 1620s. He collaborated with Sir Thomas, later Lord,Wentworth at various times during his career, particularly in the late 1620s, but they fell out in the early 1630s, and Ingram resigned his secretaryship. He subsequently attached himself to Henry Rich, 1st earl of Holland, an opponent of Wentworth. Sir Arthur married three times: first (by 1599) to Susan Brown (d. 1613); secondly (in 1613) to Alice Ferrers (d. 1615); and thirdly (in 1615) to Mary Greville. He spent his considerable wealth on building and furnishing his houses. His principal residence in Yorkshire was his house in York, built between 1616 and 1630 on the site of the old archbishop’s palace, next to the Minster. He died on 24 August 1642. He died in York and is buried in the Minster.

Sir Arthur Ingram’s Stewards’ Accounts:

John Matteson was steward for Sir Arthur Ingram. By the 1620s he had general oversight of all Ingram’s northern affairs, apart from the alum industry. He was in charge of estate management, collecting rents, holding manorial courts, leasing property, supervising farming and dealing with tenants and neighbours. He was also in charge of building operations at Sir Arthur’s three houses, at York, Sheriff Hutton and Temple Newsam, and had oversight of the household, sorting out supplies of provisions, and transport of goods and money between Ingram’s London residence and Yorkshire. In addition to all this Matteson acted as Ingram’s treasurer in Yorkshire. Matteson was assisted in his work by his nephew, another John Matteson. Christopher Ellison was also a steward, but he was probably subordinate to Matteson. John Matteson the elder may have died in December 1642, just four months after Sir Arthur.

Edmund Pawson’s notes:

Copies and abstracts from stewards’ accounts (1604—42) from the Temple Newsam archives were made by Edmund D Pawson. Pawson, with Sidney D Kitson, prepared the first guide book to Temple Newsam house after it was bought by Leeds Corporation in 1922. The archive was not acquired by Leeds City Library until 1938. He attempted to create a chronological sequence of entries from the various accounts, not all of which can now be traced among the WYL100/EA MSS at West Yorkshire Archive Service, Leeds. His transcriptions are selective, and do not necessarily help to decipher the handwriting of Sir Arthur Ingram’s steward John Matteson. The three separate hands involved in writing the original accounts quoted here have been identified. John Matteson’s is often very difficult; his servant Richard Stones sometimes wrote accounts on his behalf; Christopher Ellison (‘Kitt’) was also a steward for Sir Arthur Ingram, and wrote some of the accounts.

The Ingram records include evidence of the prominent role of musical performance in the life of a prosperous businessman’s household. Sir Arthur Ingram was willing to spend lavishly on his several organs, which were moved from house to house, even when finances were otherwise tight. He employed an organist, and a number of ‘singing boys’, who travelled to and from his various residences, and he regularly paid musicians to sing and play for himself and his guests. In addition his family owned and played their own instruments, including at least two harps. He also frequently brought in other kinds of entertainers, such as ‘the man that playes the birdes’, ‘the dog’, ‘the tonges’, ’the Jewes trumpes’ and ‘the Jugler’.

In contrast to the family, Sir Arthur’s steward, John Matteson, records many more modest visits to hostelries, where he paid for ‘the musicke’ at convivial evenings with friends.

Sources:
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB): Sir Arthur Ingram.
Anthony F. Upton, Sir Arthur Ingram, c.1565-1642: a study in the origins of an English landed family, Oxford, 1961.
Sidney D Kitson and Edmund D Pawson, Temple Newsam, 7th edn, Leeds City Council, 1936.
Edmund D Pawson, manuscript notes (WYL178).
Catalogues to WYL100 and WYL178 at WYAS Leeds.

* These transcriptions appear with the permission of West Yorkshire Archive Service, Leeds (www.wyjs.org.uk/archives). The transcription and accompanying detail are provided by the REED West Riding co-editor Sylvia Thomas.

Durham Priory Feretrars Accounts

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: MonasticDocument category 1: Obedientiaries accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1376 to 1538
Because the Feretrar was responsible for the Shrine of St. Cuthbert and its relics, his income and status returns provide as much relevant material as his expenditure. His income includes details of payments at processions, especially during the week of Pentecost, both from incumbents who attended and (following a legal process that began in 1398-9) also from those who were absent, as well as some idea of the banners and relics carried in these processions, especially the Banner of St. Cuthbert, which was also used to accompany military campaigns, e.g. Richard II’s Scottish campaign in 1385 and probably the Flodden campaign in 1513, which may explain why it needed repair (Feretrar’s Account 1513-4). It was repaired again in 1536-7 after being damaged by the common people of Durham (perhaps as a result of the heightened sectarian unrest which preceded the Pilgrimage of Grace).

From the mid-1470’s, the Feretrar’s office also received the Boy Bishop payments from other officers of the priory – see the Prior of Finchale’s account 1474-5, Feretrar’s Account 1480-1 and end notes. As there are no Feretrar’s expenses that can be linked to the Boy Bishop, this may imply that the actual ceremony had lapsed and survived merely as an annual levy on the other obedientiaries and cells; this may also explain why the Boy Bishop is not mentioned in The Rites of Durham.

These records are offered in a pre-pub format, meaning they have not yet been through REED\'s vigorous editorial procedures. Permission to use, share or quote the records must be sought from the REED: Durham editors John McKinnell and Mark Chambers.

Durham Cathedral Treasurers Books

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: DiocesanDocument category 1: Cathedral dean and chapter accounts
From region: County DurhamFrom place:
Relevant material from 1597 to 1634
After the death of the first dean (and last prior), Hugh Whitehead, in 1548, Durham had a succession of strongly protestant deans, one of whom, William Whittingham, dean 1563-79, had even spent some years in Geneva and was married to John Calvin’s sister. It is therefore not surprising that most Treasurer’s Books from this period yield no evidence of performance, and the solitary payment to the Earl of Leicester’s players on 28th July 1580 probably reflects the unique privileges enjoyed by that company as a result of its royal patent rather than any appreciation of drama by the dean and chapter (see End Note). But a more relaxed attitude began to appear in the affairs of the cathedral after the arrival of William James (as dean 1596-1606, then as bishop until 1617), for he was famous for the quality of his entertainment. This trend was maintained under Bishop Richard Neile (1617-28) and Dean Richard Hunt (1620-38), when the Cathedral came under increasing Laudian, high-church influence.

The statutes of the Dean and Chapter also required continued annual accounts in roll form, but these continue the trend towards mere formality which is already apparent in the late rolls of the Bursar. Treasurer’s rolls survive between 1547 and 1607 and have all been searched, but they present the finances of the Cathedral in such a summarised form that they contain no material relevant to performance.

These records are offered in a pre-pub format, meaning they have not yet been through the vigorous editorial procedures for full REED publication (which will take place over the next year). Permission to use, share or quote the records must be sought from the REED: Durham editors John McKinnell and Mark Chambers.

Thorner Records

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: Star ChamberDocument category 1: N/A
From region: Yorkshire, WestFrom place:
Refers to location(s): Yorkshire, West, Thorner
Relevant material from 1619 to 1621
STAC 8/225/30: Oglesthorpe v. Clough et al

In 1620, William Oglesthorpe of Oglethorpe, esquire, submitted a bill of complaint to the Court of Star Chamber alleging that four men had conspired together to defame him with false, malicious accusations of felony. The conspirators were William Clough, the Puritan vicar of Bramham (now \'Bramham cum Oglethorpe\'); his brother Robert Clough of Bramham, husbandman; his kinsman James Beale, also of Bramham; and Clement Stephenson, labourer, of North Dighton. They allegedly soborned John Spink and Richard Sayner, two of Oglethorpe\'s servants, to testify that he had, over the preceding five years, stolen sheep in the manors of Oglethorpe, Bramham, and Clifford. Sir Francis Baildon, JP for Yorkshire, heard their complaint and Oglesthorpe\'s defence and exonerated him.

William Oglesthorpe\'s bill of complaint began with a charge that William Clough had delivered a seditious sermon early in August 1619 in which he objected to a rushbearing at Thorner that some parishioners of Bramham attended and criticized King James I for making laws contrary to the laws of God.

In the transcription of the document, square brackets ([...]) are used to indicate material that is crossed through or otherwise cancelled. Caret brackets (< ... >) mark parts of the text that are damaged or illegible.

Beverley Great Guild Book

Download PDF Warning: Use of undefined constant upload_files - assumed 'upload_files' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/homeblue01/2/dng0zz12/public_html/wp-content/themes/professional/display_records.php on line 116
Jurisdiction 1: CivicDocument category 1: Other
Jurisdiction 2: GuildDocument category 2: Accounts
From region: Yorkshire, EastFrom place:
Refers to location(s): Yorkshire, East, Beverley, Guildhall and Yorkshire, East, Beverley Minster and Yorkshire, East, Beverley, East Riding Archives, Treasure House
Relevant material from 1375 to 1355
The Beverley Great Guild Book, compiled between c. 1409 and 1589 (although the original dates of some of the documents copied into it, including several included here, are considerably earlier), was maintained by successive groups of Beverley town Governors over about one hundred and eighty years. The twelve Governors (Gubernatores in Latin records), also known as Keepers (custodes), were the town authority, equivalent to a town council. Not till 1573, with a new charter of incorporation, was a Mayor instituted.

The Great Guild Book, referred to within its own pages and in other contemporary records as the register or the ledger, is a large parchment book, now deposited in the East Riding Archives and Local Studies (ERALS) office in Beverley: shelfmark BC/II/3. Twentieth-century rebinding may have obscured its original gatherings, which are irregular, with the occasional single leaf; but it was evidently made up as a book, already bound, before most of the existing entries were made. The organisation, the layout and the nature of the contents strongly suggest that the initiating Governors intended it as a permanent formal register of municipal customs and regulations as well as a record of letters and proclamations addressed by state and church authorities to the town. The intended formality of the register is shown by the care with which the earliest entries have been made; they are carefully written in a formal hand, with elaborate rubrication, flourishing and decoration of headings and initials.

Copies of many local craft and trade guilds’ ordinances have also been entered into the book – a fact which may have given rise to its (presumably modern) title, ‘the Great Guild Book’ now stamped on its cover – an unfortunately misleading one. In fact no original guild records survive in Beverley, only these registered copies. The frequently confusing unchronological order in which many of the guild ordinances have been entered confirms the impression that the book was pre-bound before its first use. The internal dates of ordinances are often much earlier than their dates of entry into the book, with the result that many ordinances are double-dated. Evidently successive bodies of Governors attemnpted to keep their copies not only of town but also of guild ordinances up to date – hence the confusion in the chronology of many of the guild ordinances, as later revisions, in the absence of space beside the original clauses, have been entered in any convenient blank space elsewhere, with occasional cross-references which may reflect later Common Clerks’ efforts to keep the book in some kind of convenient order.

The scribes are generally unidentifiable, but some can be recognised by their hands, with one or two which recur frequently enabling at least tentative dates to be assigned to undated entries: an example is the Corpus Christi pageant-assignment list, which on palaeographical grounds can be cautiously dated to the first quarter of the sixteenth century, perhaps c. 1515. (However it appears here along with other undated material.)

Although the status of the Great Guild Book is evidently that of a permanent register, some entries suggest that its function was less clear-cut, though the reasons are not evident. Even at an early stage in its compilation, entries occasionally appear which are more suited to a minute book or even to accounts. For example, a fine imposed on the Smiths in 1392 for failure to perform their Corpus Christi pageant in accordance with an ordinance of 1390 (f. 12v) has been entered on f. 13. Was it recorded here as a reminder of the penalty and the seriousness with which the Corpus Christi regulations were to be regarded in future? However, some later entries do seem simply to be records of specific cases – although they may have seemed at the time to be of potential future significance as test cases.

Dated entries extracted here have been arranged in chronological order, to give some sense of change and development in the management of performance-related matters, particularly the Corpus Christi play and the tradition of the guilds’ ‘castles’, which they erected as exclusive stands from which guild masters, entertained by minstrels, watched the Rogation day procession of the shrine of St John of Beverley. The practice of minstrelsy in the castles is specifically mentioned in the Minstrels’ own ordinances (ff. 41v-42), the only version of which has the surprisingly late date of 1555 – in fact these ordinance are the latest dated relevant record in the Great Guild Book. Undated records follow the dated sequence, and are arranged in MS folio order.

Editing procedures: deleted material is shown in square brackets [ ]. Illegible letters are shown within caret brackets with dots representing the approximate number of letters <...>. Marginalia appear in smaller font at the head of each extract, with notes to indicate their postition in the MS.
*The records are presented here in draft form and have not had final checking and editing for official publication by REED staff. Permission to cite this material must be sought from REED: Yorkshire East Riding editor Diana Wyatt, using the contact form provided on this site.