No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
page 256 note 1 The property is the same as that disputed in document K; see statement quoting Henry de Enfield's will in Guildhall MS. Calendar of Rolls of Assizes, p. 65.
page 256 note 2 The parish of St. John is shown on the Roll to have been that of St. John Zachary.
page 257 note 1 Tuesday, 2 November 1290.
page 257 note 2 Monday, 21 May 1291.
page 257 note 3 This property is the same as that mentioned in document J.
page 261 note 1 Cf. Col. Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. 178 ; Roberts, Cal. Genealogicum, p. 634. Licence to alienate was given for a fine by the prioress 1 November 1303, Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 1301–7, p. 164.
page 262 note 1 Margaret, possibly a mistake for Margery, see M.
page 262 note 2 Parish of St. Ethelburga. Her effort to get this 12s. rent involved the prioress in a lawsuit. See City Records, Common Pleas Roll 22, for Roger Crok's action against her.
page 265 note 1 See no. 215. Cf. De Banco Roll 5, 57 (no. 6, 47d) ; Dorset (Mich. 2/3 Ed. I) ; 7, 28 (and 8, 19d) Dorset (Hilary, 3 Ed. I) ; and 123, 87 (Easter, 26 Ed. I).
page 268 note 1 Ralph, i.e. Baldock.