Errors in medieval records

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Douglas Richardson royala

Errors in medieval records

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 30 sep 2005 16:02:07

Dear Newsgroup ~

In the discussion of the 1214 Curia Regis Rolls lawsuit involving Alan
Fitz Roland's wife, I stated that I've found errors in all classes of
medieval records. I don't even blink now when I find them.

A good example is an error I found this past week in the Pipe Rolls.
Here is what I found:

1. Sub Michaelmas 1193: "Rogerus comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

2. Sub Michaelmas 1195: "Hugo comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

3. Sub Michaelmas 1196: "Hugo comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

The above are probably old debts carried over from earlier years.
Presumably the debts above refers to Hugh, Earl of Chester, who died in
1181, but we find one instance above where Hugh is mistakenly called
Roger. Was there even a Roger, Earl of Chester? No.

How did the error occur? I have no idea. The point is that such
errors occur in all classes of medieval English records, including the
Curia Regis Rolls.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

John Townsend

Re: Errors in medieval records

Legg inn av John Townsend » 30 sep 2005 20:47:22

Douglas Richardson wrote (snipped)
In the discussion of the 1214 Curia Regis Rolls lawsuit involving Alan
Fitz Roland's wife, I stated that I've found errors in all classes of
medieval records. I don't even blink now when I find them.

A good example is an error I found this past week in the Pipe Rolls.
Here is what I found:

1. Sub Michaelmas 1193: "Rogerus comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

2. Sub Michaelmas 1195: "Hugo comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

3. Sub Michaelmas 1196: "Hugo comes Cestr' debet ccc et l m. per
cartam. Idem debet xl s. per aliam cartam."

The above are probably old debts carried over from earlier years.
Presumably the debts above refers to Hugh, Earl of Chester, who died in
1181, but we find one instance above where Hugh is mistakenly called
Roger. Was there even a Roger, Earl of Chester? No.

How did the error occur? I have no idea. The point is that such
errors occur in all classes of medieval English records, including the
Curia Regis Rolls.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

This chronology makes little sense to me. I don't see how Hugh, Earl of
Chester, can have died as late as 1181. See:

http://www.chestercc.gov.uk/main.asp?page=891

"1071 Hugh of Avranches (nicknamed Lupus, 'The Wolf') appointed Earl of
Chester

c 1150 St Mary's Nunnery founded by Earl Ranulph II"

An earlier Ranulph had also been Earl of Chester, and before the pair of
them a Richard. No Roger was Earl of Chester - should it have said Ranulph
or Richard? - and by 1193 Hugh had been dead for many decades. Those
"debts" must have been pretty ancient.

Best wishes,

John Townsend
Genealogist/Antiquarian Bookseller
http://www.johntownsend.demon.co.uk

Gjest

Re: Errors in medieval records

Legg inn av Gjest » 30 sep 2005 21:20:40

Earl Ranulph II (d 1153) was great-nephew of Hugh 'Lupus', Earl of
Chester (d 1101); he in turn was succeeded by his son, another Hugh,
called 'de Kevelioc', who died in 1181. There is no intermediate (or
successor) Roger in this line.

MAR

John Townsend

Re: Errors in medieval records

Legg inn av John Townsend » 30 sep 2005 21:57:32

Apologies for my earlier message - I overlooked that there had been a second
Hugh, Earl of Chester.

John

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»