Talk:Brothertoft

Context tag

I added the context tag because I am not entirely sure which country the Church is in. I think, either the UK or the Republic of Ireland, but I'm really not sure. Thanks V. Joe 06:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

 Done Article clarifies this now. - Sitush (talk) 15:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Church name

Unsure of how to clarify the naming of the church - it was unnamed for a very long time, for instance Kellys directories do not have a name. It is certainly known by that name now. If anyone can help please do? Panderoona 17:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

If the church was built in medieval times then looking for a name in Kelly's (18/19th/20th century directories) isn't massively useful. I'm not hot on religious stuff but I rather thought that most Christian churches in the UK were dedicated pretty much from their foundation. Certainly, this was so in monastic Cambridge & the lands + livings that the Cantabrigian monks owned elsewhere - a situation which is surely akin to that of Sempringham? Sorry, I have no answers right now, but there has to be a reliable citation for the name (and why it was so named) somewhere. When was Gilbert "made" a saint, I wonder? - must check. - Sitush (talk) 17:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Gilbert - the 1200s I think (I havent been to check the page but it was very early. He had the distinction of starting the only purely English monastic order, the Gilbertines, at Sempringham, not far from Brothertoft.

According to the historical directories, and just about any other source Ive found, the story behind the church is very unclear - It seems it was called an "ancient" structure, used as a Chapel Of Ease, in the 1900s, and more or less rebuilt 1847-54. Even early this century there appears to be no name attached to it. I could try enquiring with the church directly, but then I wouldnt be able to verify it with an online source. Difficult one. Panderoona 19:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

It doesn't have to be an online source, but the outcome of a chat with the churchwardens etc, or a private email/letter, will not cut the mustard. Something will turn up. Bound to in due course. Was there ever a newspaper called Ye Times, published around 1200-1300? Would have had a small readership, of course, & a non-existent print run, but the quality of the graphics would have been something else! - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Hope you are right and something turns up, thanks for the edit it looks better. Wouldnt it be marvellous if there was a Ye Times it would make life so much easier. :) Thanks as always. Panderoona 19:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Adjoining land

Do any of the following relate to Brothertoft? I have a source which suggests that they do but am unwilling to include without some sort of confirmation as it could just be a formatting issue in the book.

• Hall Pits
• Pepper Gowt
• Copping Syke
• Ferry Corner
• Great Beets

Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow Sitush it looks GREAT thank you :) Im learning a lot from you. regarding your question I THINK most of them were incorporated into the Parish, Ferry Corner Plot certainly was, along with others but Im not sure which. Most if not all are still known by the locals as seperate places- but that doesnt necessarily mean they actually are! There are a lot of areas round there that retain old names (and even conflicting ones). Langrick, a mile North of the Hall, is a new township which was once "Langrett Ferry" and nothing was there apart from the ferry across the river. The fenland surrounding it was called Armtree Fen. (but thats another page!) The only sign of that now is the name Armtree Road. I can look into it further but I suspect you will probably be better at it than me ;) Panderoona 20:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Thomas Pelham-Holles

The source provided does not say that Brothertoft passed to Thomas Pelham-Holles on the death of the Duke of Newcastle. It says that much of the Duke's lands passed to Pelham-Holles. I think that we need to remove this ASAP unless someone has better evidence. There is some evidence that in fact it went to Sir Sampson Gideon, not Pelham-Holles. Thoughts? - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Just wrote a reply clicked send server too busy and its vanished. My original research (before all this) centred around data in Access To Archives (National Archives). From that I gleaned the info on Thomas Pelham Holles, and further info about his brother Henry Pelham Clinton and also Charles Lord Monson holding the land but didnt include all of it as it was simply too much info. The fact that directly north of Brothertoft is an area called Pelhams Lands suggests strongly a link with the Pelhams, whereas I have not seen a link to Sir Sampson Gideon? Im very confused please can you direct me to where you found that? I agree with you that as this is enclopediac the best course would probably be to delete until it can be proven, nothing stops it going back in with citations after all. Panderoona 21:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

OMG just read that account you referenced. Im stunned because Id never seen it before. It certainly warrents further investigation. The wierdest bit of all is his alternate surname - Eardley. That was my great grandads first name (long before they ever arrived in the vicinity. What a coincidence though. I shall make a big purpose in following that up tomorrow. Panderoona 21:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

I think I have squared the circle as Pelham-Holles was also a duke of Newcastle. I've left a clarification tag there. This entire area needs work, as you have said. I'm really not happy with the website source for Pelham-Holles inheriting the land because it does not in fact say that directly and it also doesn't say that P-H inherited all of his uncle's lands, so Brothertoft may have been an exception. Hopefully there will be something more concrete somewhere.- Sitush (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

 It certainly doesnt help that the Holles family and Duke Of Newcastle tag died out and was recreated. Its confusing enough without all that malarky, but believe me like you I really want no more than the truth.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs) 22:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC) 

sorry forgot to sign again!! Panderoona 22:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC) Im new heaven help me. In another world Id have given up and run screaming long ago. BUT my quest for the actual TRUTH keeps me here. And if Im wrong Ill stand by that fact (Im Wrong) and not care because the Truth matters. Nowhere have I found reference to Sampson Gideon/Eardley apart from here. That means a lot and means I have more research to do! Panderoona 22:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

You know what? I benefit a headache out of this, and u benefit the info. Use it, play with it destroy it, you still will have always got more of this experience than I did. Im not for you ppl, I cant live by youre rules, I know what is fact like the change from old stones I used to wander among, to a car park!! I see that I know that I lived that. I cant be arsed to keep on trying and coming up against brick walls and conflicts and arguments. I am a 46 yr old woman with rhuematoid arthritis which has crippled me far too young, and with parent thanksful they alive who loved these places and lived the life. Keep your encyclodepia and all its contstraints you wont ever be able to stop the truth emerging. I worked for that with passion and love which I dont see here half the time. Ive tried I really have but now I leave disillusioned and greatly saddened. That a TRUTH. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs) 22:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Woah. Where did that come from? I'm confused. If you're getting pestered by the signing thing, that is being generated by a robot/automated program - it is not a real person. You'll get the hang of signing and then the msgs will stop. - Sitush (talk) 22:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh I know its a bot and Im sorry I blew my stack - its just SO frustrating - there are so many things worth referencing but I dont know of a source to cite. Like Thomas Gees burial. I can cite the MI references at the Society Of Genealogists Library in London but they probably wouldnt accept it. Like the ha-ha wall at the edge of the churchyard or the fact there used to be a house at the northeast corner of the churhyard where the churchwarden lived, but I dont know of any references online. The list goes on. Its a real steep learning curve for sure. Panderoona 18:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Need help?

Wow, you two are smokin' on this article! I'm not sure how I can help, but anything I can do, please let me know!!! Being from the states, I'm not as familiar with the sources of information for this article - but happy to do what I can. --CaroleHenson (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding note : am aware photograph cuts off name Leman - but that IS what it says I promise. Naunton Thomas Orgill Leman of Brampton Hall Suffolk. Panderoona 20:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Free School

I'm not sure how fine to split hairs here.

If you do a books.google.com search on: "Thomas Gee" 1856 school Brothertoft (the best criteria it seems), then there are three results. One said he built and supported the school. Another said he was a patron (I think to the Sunday School).

For the moment to get rid of the "needs citation" message, I'm going to remove the "free school" part. But if someone can make sense of the proper way to word this and use the proper notation, that would be great!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

You've worked further down the article than I have. Yours is a sensible move. I'll dig into it. "Patron" is a term of multiple purpose in the UK in this sort of context. A founder often was also referred to as patron, to be succeeded by later patrons who act as a figurehead/focal point. But, equally, a patron could be the figurehead at the outset rather than also the founder. It needs some work, so good call. - Sitush (talk) 23:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Parish church

Are we sure that the church is a Parish Church? Is Brothertoft a parish in its own right? I ask because it definitely was a chapel of ease, which is not at all the same thing. I added the chapel of ease bit earlier but clarification is required because the section heading etc may be wrong. I wonder if there is a diocesan website that might list all the places of worship that fall under its aegis? - Sitush (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Does this article help? http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/upload/public/attachments/522/brothertoftpar.pdf (e.g., "Brothertoft PAR", etc.)--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The Church of England Site says that it's one of the churches in the Brothertoft Group ("Five in the Fen"). I'm lost in all of this, so that I think the last I can add.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure myself - religious history is not one of my strong points. I'd seen the CofE site but wasn't sure. The Archives document indicates a parish called Brothertoft & I would assume that every parish has a church. It says that the records go back to 1682 (useful info, regardless, as it predates existing info), but I've seen several references to it being a chapel of ease. I suppose my original query now needs expanding!

• can a chapel of ease also be a parish church?
• if not, then at what point did it "flip"?
• do the records listed relate to the two buildings that the article is talking about? (Almost certainly, yes)

A dead cert is that this document should be listed in "External links"

Good work, again. Getting lost in the fens is not a good idea, BTW. It was a wild and stormy night ... -- Sitush (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You're funny! I'll watch out for the fens! (I wonder if Snoopy is out there -- in the dark and stormy night)

How about if I take a stab at wording it conservatively based on what we do know - and leave out for now what we don't know. Meaning: It's one of five churches in the CofE Brothertoft group of CofE churches. But remove info now about it being a parish church, because that's not clear. I'll take a stab and see what you think. Panderoona may weigh in later with more definite information about your questions.--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, cool! I went back to the Building Listing document to correlate it to the first link I entered here -- and found that the church became a parish church in 1922... and that it was previously a chapel of ease. More to come...--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Genius! I knew there was something fishy going on but am delving into other bits about the same subj. I think your "The church" heading is more appropriate given this new information. - Sitush (talk) 01:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'm thoroughly confused. I don't see anything in the Lincolnshire records office info about "The parish hall is a late addition to the church, standing at the entrance to the park in which the church stands; it was built in 1881 originally as a school, with house attached.[37]" The records office paperwork shows the rectory completed in 1922 - plans drawn up in 1893.

Very strange. I might have had enough Brothertoft for the night - maybe my brain is on Brothertoft overload. ; ) --CaroleHenson (talk) 02:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The citation (Kelly's) looked a bit dubious to me but I hadn't yet checked it out. Of course, all buildings come and go, so it is entirely possible that one rectory was replaced by another. Anyway, I'll check that Kelly's cite, which had been in the article for quite a while & may well be a mangled left-over from a totally different edit. - Sitush (talk) 03:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

No need to check the Kelly site, I checked it for the year in the ref and there was no info that correlated to what was added to the article. (I thought maybe you saw that as you were making your edits.) So, I just removed the info. I'm guessing that there was some mix-up with another church,especially since none of the Building Listing and Lincolnshire records info backed up the info. Do you rest? (grin) --CaroleHenson (talk) 03:43, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Mornin all :) Thanks for all your hard work. Okay yes Brothertoft did become the parish church eventually.

With regard to the vicarage = thats a red brick building on the left of the entrance to the Park (and path/track to the church). On the right is a single story gatehouse and adjoining it is the Parish Hall/Village Hall. It sounds remarkably similar to the school built in 1881 with house attached mentioned in Kellys Directory. But of course, I have no proof. One further thing which I also cant prove is that at the other end of Brothertoft, near Langrick, is a farm which belonged to a man called Ted Allen (now sadly passed away) and he told my dad that they often ploughed up bits of masonry, which suggests there was some kind of stone building at that end of the village that no one can recall. I cant help but wonder if its connected with the saxon windows mentioned in the article? I supose we will never know. Panderoona 06:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Lunatics

Well, in some ways I am disappointed that there wasn't at least one. - Sitush (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

lol that would probably be me <g>. Forgot to mention my previous comment about Ted Allen finding masonry on his farm - way back when Coningsby extended right down towards Langrick. Im not sure exactly where it ended. So its possible that there is a link there, although I doubt we will ever know. Panderoona 16:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC) and why is it that every time I sign this by putting four tildes, that bot comes along and signs again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

You seem not to be using 4 tildes because if you did then it would show (talk) after your user name. Are you using the ~ character, four times with no spaces between them? Or you could use the little pen in the editing menu, fourth from left. - Sitush (talk) 16:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

def using four tildes. Not sure why this is happening. If it happens this time Ill start using the pen. Panderoona 18:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

Tilde is the shift-# on most UK keyboards. I do not understand why this is not working for you. Never come across a problem with it before. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

its very strange isnt it? Im pressing the pencil this time lets see what happens. --Panderoona 19:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs)

SORTED - went into prefs and saw something was checked against signature so I hit revert to default and now its working. So if you ever come up against it again Sitush youll know what the idiot newbie did wrong lololol :) Panderoona (talk) 19:31, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

School & the Gee family

The article currently cites the school as being built in 1856. I do not think that this was the first school because both a daily and a Sunday school are recorded at least as early as 1851.

I am also concerned about Gee's Educational Foundation as nowadays it services the East Riding (specifically Bishop Burton), not Lincs. Furthermore, there is speculation on ancestry/genealogy sites, none of which are reliable sources. The number of Google hits (general, books, scholar and news) is minimal and I would have expected it to be mentioned in the older histories, as indeed they mention Gee founding a bank in Boston (Gee, Wise & Gee). This could easily be a dud & I think that unless something turns up sharp-ish then it needs to be removed.

Finally, "In 1881 a school with house attached was built, which later closed and was converted into the Parish Hall" is uncited and vague. I presume that there must be a parish council if there is a parish hall, but without any citation it is going to be removed. - Sitush (talk) 03:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The school was built in 1856 by Thomas & the Misses Gee its referenced repeatedly in Kellys Directories. Exactly when it became a sunday school is unclear, as well as when it closed/disappeared. Kellys also cites a school built in 1881 by the Board with house attached which corresponds with the appearance of the village hall - and not with any other local building. Henry Gee, Thomas father, was the man who founded the bank in Boston, although Thomas was a banker too as is referenced in the directories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs) 07:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The problem is: why is the directory more reliable than the book? We have a discrepancy & when this happens it has to be fixed - we cannot leave something just because it has been there for a week (or a year, or whatever). As for being referenced repeatedly, well, it wasn't actually referenced to Kelly's at all, although it was referenced to White's. This isn't "having a go" at anyone, it's just working out what to do. Something is broken and it needs fixing, simple as. - Sitush (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

you mentioned on the main page and elsewhere both Brothertoft and Fishtoft being referred to as "Toft". There is also Toft Next Newton and Toft near Bourne in Lincolnshire. A Toft is a piece of high ground. And I know where in Brothertoft it is but doubt I could prove it. The whole of Brothertoft lies in the fields surrounding the B1192 north of Toft Tunnel and south of Langrick. It extends as far east as Antons Gowt and west towards the North Forty Foot Bank. But the TOFT in Brothertoft stretches approx from the site of the church in a rough elongated S (how it was described to me but I have seen refs to it offline and its a bit like a nazi SS shape but with only one S) stretching north towards the old river bed on the west side of the B1192. Where my grandad lived, and other farmsteads are today - is to the right of the B1192 and flat land, an area which would once have been under water. Panderoona (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Robert Carre

The citation is a Sleaford Council webpage that does not mention Brothertoft. It is not good enough & should be removed but I'm struggling to find an alternative. The best I have at present is this but to make the connection properly with the Carre family mentioned by the Council would need synthesis & so it is no good. Any offers? - Sitush (talk) 04:17, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you that the reference doesn't provide the needed info. I'm trying to make the link from the dis. of the monastaries to the time that John Holles had the land. Fun project! And, I'll be happy to look into it. I started looking at some records and trying to piece some info together -- one of which could the land have been called something else. As it happens, it was sometimes called Toft - which was also used for (I think this is the spelling) Fishtoft. Some wills, etc. that I found might help piece this together.

In the meantime, what should I have looked for in the ref you provided? I tried searching on Brothertoft and Carr and didn't get anything. I thought rather than keep trying I'd check in with you. I was off last week and going back tomorrow - so I won't have as much time,but when I can I'd love to work on this.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Second para of p. 329 mentions two Robert Carres holding Brothertoft at some point, but it reads a bit confusedly (?). My link should go direct to the page. I've already mentioned the issue of Toft relating to (possibly) two different places but your source for that might be better than mine ... or we might both have found the same thing. Wikipedia is timeless, so you are allowed to work every now and again. - Sitush (talk) 07:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Interesting! Yes, it's confusing to me- maybe especially because I don't understand all the terms. But a very good nugget. For the time being I took out the Sleaford Council info because it seems some more direct linkages are needed. I added where I thought we need citations (but I definitely defer to your opinion). Heading for sleep, but I'd love to work on it tomorrow after work - if Panderoona doesn't sort it out (she might know that background info and how all these bits tie together). I'll check back before getting back on the trail.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Just list any terms which you do not understand. I'll then tell you that I don't either I'll do my best to help. Believe it or not, we English folks have spoken English for quite a long time now. - Sitush (talk) 07:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Robert Carre did hold land at Brothertoft he is referenced several times in National Archives.

viz:

.

Robert Carre - 3 5 1584 Arrears of manor of Brothertoft amount 5.0.0.held at Lincolnshire Archives

same as above but 6. 5.1583 http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=057-hill&cid=23-226#23-226 Robert Carre mentioned again here:http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=057-hill&cid=23-240#23-240 http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=174-ha507&cid=3-41-3#3-41-3 .

I cant stay on this morning as have Doctors appt and blood test to do. but I can also ref Sempringham holding the lands here:

.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=7&CATID=-2434819 John Prior of Sempringham v William Crathorn: Detention of deeds relating to a messuage in Brothertoft leased to defendant by complainants predecessor, Robert Emesley 1504-15 National Archives, Kew Public Record Office.

Im suprised that after all this time the links suddenly arent good enough? Anyway, Ill be back later. Panderoona (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

In a way, the cites were not good enough the moment that they were put in. I actually remember tagging the Sleaford one as unsuitable but the tag got deleted. But, like I said to Carole, WP is timeless.

• I'm not sure that the first two of the National Archives pages you refer to actually help the cause. Unless I am misreading them, they seem to be saying that Carr(e) owed arrears on the manor, which implies that he didn't own it but rather lived there and paid some form of rent to someone. We would need to know what the arrears were for, and we're not going to find that without a trip to Kew or wherever (+ it would be original research anyway to use the docs in the archives).
• The third ref you mention also doesn't say that he owned the Brothertoft lands, merely that he owned some of the manor.
• I would have to do more digging on the Sempringham one (does it mean the religious house or the place? or were the two the same back then?)

Using library/archive catalogues for significant points is never a great idea precisely because they do not present the full picture. It may or may not be against Wikipedia policies/guidelines but it runs against every rule in the historian's book. Similarly, don't rely on Google's "snippet view" when citing a book online, because you simply do not get the context. I'm sure that these pieces of information must exist in reliable secondary sources, it is just up to us (the entire community) to find them. Until such time as we do, they need to be tagged or removed. I'm wondering about the publications of the Lincoln Record Society, many of which are online. - Sitush (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Sempringham is a dead village. There is nothing there but a church. No village. Gone. Its only importance was as the Abbey/Priory whatever they called it. I am thinking that "John Prior of Semperingham" should read "John, Prior of Semperingham" but of course I cannot prove it. Panderoona (talk) 09:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

But was it dead back in 1300 or whenever? - Sitush (talk) 09:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

It actually does say "John, prior of Sempringham", but in itself that doesn't advance things an awful lot. - Sitush (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

No it went at the dissolution early 1500s. Panderoona (talk) 09:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, assuming that can be proven. Next problem: John, prior of Sempringham. v. William Crathorn: Detention of deeds relating to a messuage in Brothertoft leased to defendant by complainant's predecessor, Robert Emesley. is what the catalogue says. Can you prove that the messuage belonged to the priory rather than to John's predecessor personally. Actually, that's a hypothetical question because it cannot be done using the NA catalogue entry. You know and I know what it means, but that is not what it says. - Sitush (talk) 10:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Ya know I have got a headache and Im fed up, and Im sick of trying to square a circle with the amount of informationa available at such an early date, its almost impossible to have an unbroken record of history especially for such small villages. Moving away from the Carres and Holles and Pelham and Clinton just a step - I will tell you where I found the original info that I tried to back up with other sources with regard to Sempringham Priory - I found it here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sempringham_Priory I am afraid I am off for a rest Its not a good day at all for me. :( Panderoona (talk) 10:07, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

You cannot use another Wikipedia article to prove a point. As you have already discovered with Fen Tigers, their quality varies. It falls under the category of WP:CIRCULAR. However, we do not have to "square a circle": if something cannot be cited then it is simply removed, no problem. Better that it goes than that we give the wrong information. I've just done that at Isaac Perrins: I'd read that he was a coppersmith, put it in the article and then when I took it to Good Article nomination I realised that I'd forgotten to cite it. Worse, I couldn't find the cite. So I just removed it. Coppersmith or ice-cream seller, makes no odds if it isn't in there. The DYK appears to have been approved, BTW - probably happen this next weekend judging by the number in the queue. - Sitush (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

My point was that when I originally started working on Brothertoft I used Wikipedia to help me on my quest. And now I begin to find that its absolutely chokka of innaccurate info and that possibly the references I had believed were encyclopaediac were in fact not and that I may have been mislead in places. However I still stand by the fact that Sir Robert Carre and his family were involved with Brothertoft. Remove what you want I feel that it was completely taken over and perhaps its a place that is just too full of emotion for me to have anymore to do with and I would be better off filling in some of the blanks on other pages with referenced material rather than getting my heart broken here. Panderoona (talk) 14:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi there! I hope you see that there's effort here to try to find the references to back up the information in the article. It's just a matter of ensuring that the content is verifiable. Only what can be verified should go into an article. If I inadvertently removed the info about the citation needing work when I went after all the "citation needed" tags, I apologize. With a bit of patience we can get the information pieced together. I think it's a great sign that you are passionate about the article. Like I said, I'm happy to piece this together tonight (in 9 hours or so) - but there's actually a lot of information in this section of the talk page to start with to resolve the verificability (a word?) of the information. I'll just check back to see if there's been progress in the meantime.

I too look at other wikipedia articles when I'm looking to piece the information. I start with the references from the article. Like Sitush says, you can't reference another article. But you can look at its references to see if it will provide information that you need.

We're on your side and we'll get there together!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=057-spaldingsewers&cid=6-3-11#6-3-11

Edward Carre to the commissioner of sewers 1614 : His Brothertoft tenants have been charged with the diking of part of South Ea as commoners in Holland fen, though this was previously done only by the towns of the Haut Huntre.

Referred to six commissioners: sir Charles Egerton, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Bawtree, Mr. Bacon, Mr. Middlecot, Mr. Barfoote, to be done upon Saturday next in the afternoon.Panderoona (talk) 14:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Woops better add Haut/Haute Huntre info : Otherwise known as the Eight Hundred Fen (smaller fen areas were included in this such as the Armtree Fen where Langrick is today.) Panderoona (talk) 14:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

One more: there is ref here to gravestones in the Sleaford church which includes "and Ermine, 2 piles Sa a crescent for difference, for Holies, referring to the alliance between Lucy Carre, Sir Robert's third sister with Sir Francis Holies, Kt. and Bart., afterwards the second Lord Holies."Panderoona (talk) 15:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: gravestones, what page please. Re: Brothertoft tenants: proves he had tenants in Brothertoft, doesn't prove he owned the entire of Brothertoft. I have a tenant at the moment in a house in North Wales but I do not own the house - it is jointly owned. I'm not saying that the guy didn't own Brothertoft; I am saying that we have to be careful how it is worded. Eg: Records show that Robert Carre had tenants on land at Brothertoft in YYYY + citation. Let the reader make the connection if they want to but we cannot make it based on the evidence. - Sitush (talk) 21:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Help with words from the artice?

Sitush, great work finding all the information to piece this together! Your Cambridge degrees are a huge help!

I think I might need to take a bit of an English "English" language class. Here's the things I had questions about regarding Sleaford ref you found:

• carucates
• sokeman
• villans
• messuage
• appurtenances
• chappel (from a will of Robert Mableson of Brothertoft, proved 1532)

Info I'm trying to understand as well:

• was Asbargy an early name for Brothertoft?
• Is Gilbert de Gant the Gilbert of Sempringham (hope I didn't butcher that)? If you don't readily now, I can research it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:29, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

No Asgarby is a seperate hamlet. Panderoona (talk) 14:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC) other questions to be answered shortly.Panderoona (talk) 14:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Helps to check out this site http://www.domesdaybook.net/helpfiles/hs3060.htm or go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carucate

* carucates - measurement of land (like Acreage) from Danelaw

One carucate was equivilant to approx 120 Acres.

• sokeman - a Sokeman was below a free tenant, but above a villein (bonded tenant)
• villans (should read Villeins) -serfs (slightly more rights than a slave)otherwise called bonded tenants.
• messuage - roughly approximates to house and outbuildings/and attached land.
• appurtenances - dont know. Perhaps sitush can help?

you may also come across Wapentake an old norse word meaning roughly the same as the Anglo Saxon Hundred. Lincolnshire areas were divided into Wapentakes.

here you go Carole this will prove useful

http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/glossary.html - glossary of terms.

Panderoona (talk) 15:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Asgarby is a nearby Village, like Amber Hill, Holland Fen, Langrick. Frithville, Chapel Hill.

There are other places which are tiny but well known to the area and have moved within different parish boundaries at different times which makes them tricky. North Forty Foot Bank, Hedgehog Bridge, Gill Syke, Copping Sykes, Great and Little Beets, Pelhams Lands, Harts Grounds, Toft Tunnel, River Bottom and Ferry Corner Plot, to name a few. Panderoona (talk) 15:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Gilbert De Gant (1126-56) was Earl Of Lincoln and at a later time than Gilbert of Sempringham. (1083-04.02.1190)they are two different people. Panderoona (talk) 15:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I think I just found why you are asking. Robt Carre didnt just own land in Sleaford or just in Brothertoft back in those days people owned land all over the place. Kyme for instance is west of Brothertoft, or rather North Kyme & South Kyme. Web Panderoona (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Appurtenances = accessories, incidentals. In legal terms it might mean, for example, that someone buys some land with all the appurtenances on it, eg: fencing, hedging, beehives, whatever. I don't think Cambridge degrees help here: I didn't do medieval law ! OTOH, Panderoona clearly knows her way around these terms. A modern equivalent in the UK is when, for example, a retail shop/business is sold and the seller says the price is £150,000 + SAV: the "SAV" is "stock at valuation", and it indicates that the stock is not being treated as an appurtenance to the business but as a separate item. Similarly, I've heard daft cases where someone here has sold their house and removed all the light fittings (or even just the bulbs) before leaving: if the contract of sale said that the fittings were appurtenances then they should not be removed by the seller.

Re: Gilbert - there was another Gilbert that had alarm bells ringing for a few minutes until I checked Panderoona's (sound) citation for Sempringham. That particular Gilbert was top dog of the Swineheads Abbey when they were taking money out of Brothertoft. The Victoria County History, which Panderoona used as a source, is a sound as they can be. Any series of history books that has taken more than a century to write and still isn't complete has to be considered in-depth and authoritative! I think that Gilbert must have been the medieval equivalent of Kylie, Chelsea etc today, and perhaps the original had a musical hit playing the lute or something; an up-tempo version of Greensleeves perhaps. - Sitush (talk) 17:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Info so far...

I still wasn't feeling well today, so I looked at the links you too provided and have this summary so far:

• John, prior of Sempringham. v. William Crathorn: Detention of deeds relating to a messuage in Brothertoft leased to defendant by complainant's predecessor, Robert Emesley.: Lincoln. Covering dates 1504-1515 Held by The National Archives, Kew Chancery pleadings addressed to William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury as Lord Chancellor. John, Prior

• In 1535 the yearly value of the Prior of Sempringham was £317. Included lands in Brothertoft and many places in Cambridgeshire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Leicestershire. At that time, John Jordan was the Prior of Sempringham. The last notes priors (Roger) and (Agnes Rudd and Margery Marbury) occur 1538 From: 'Houses of the Gilbertine order: The priory of Sempringham', A History of the County of Lincoln: Volume 2 (1906), pp. 179-187. Date accessed: 18 April 2011. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=3802 1535

• 18 Sep 1538 Robert Holgate, chaplain to Cromell, with Roger the Prior (Prior of 1538) and 16 canons surrendered prior of Sempringham. Although the timing is unclear, in 1538 Agens Rudd and Margery Marbury were prioresses surrender

On page 387 of the book it mentions that peoples of Brothertoft raised geese for their feathers- and treated them with great honor. A man’s qualification for parochial office was based upon the number of geese he owned.

• Soon after (1553) Robert Carre of Sleaford purchased the manor of Asgarby and the smaller one of Boughton connected with it, which last he sold to Sir Edward Dymoke ; but he subsequently became re-possessed of it, and left the whole, together with ap- purtenances in Monkthorpe and Brothertoft to his cousin, Robert Carre Robert Carre

I'm confused by this. If the first Robert Carre became "repossessed of Asgarby" how can it be left to his cousin? In what way would Brothertoft itself be an appurtenance?

• Tellers' bill HILL 23/225 1583 Date: 6 May. Paid by: Robert Carre, esq. For what reason: arrears of manor of Brothertoft. Amount: 5. 0. 0. Clerk: R. Taillor. Robert Carre

Does payment of "arrears of the manor" mean that taxes or other payments were past due?

• Edward Carre to the commissioners of Sewers. Dunsby Spalding Sewers/460/3/16&17 15 June 1614 His Brothertoft tenants have been charged with the diking of part of South Ea as commoners in Holland fen, though this was previously done only by the towns of the Haut Huntre. Referred to six commissioners: sir Charles Egerton, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Bawtree, Mr. Bacon, Mr. Middlecot, Mr. Barfoote, to be done upon Saturday next in the afternoon. These documents are held at Lincolnshire ArchivesEdward Carre

• 'A book of survey of divers lands being parcell of the possessions of the Right Worshipful Sir Robert Carr, bart, and now the jointure of the Hon Lady the Lady Ann Carr. Taken in March and April 1619 by Thomas Goodwin, gent HA 507/3/226 1619 [Lands in manors of Dunsby, Brauncewell, Roxam, Catley Abbey, Walcott, Digby, Monkthorpe, Burrowe-in-the-Marsh, Brothertoft, Boston, East and West Skirbeck, Wiberton, Frampton and Armtree, Whaplode, Holbeach, Fleet, Gedney, Long Sutton, Tidd St Mary] These documents are held at Suffolk Record Office, Bury St Edmunds Branch http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=174-ha507&cid=3-41-3#3-41-3

• Brothertoft previously called Goosetoft with a poem. Surrounded by the Fens of Lincolnshire. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ShAHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA411

I think this all boils down to: Brothertoft was part of the prior of Sempringham until 18 Sep 1538 when it was surrendered as part of the dissolution of the monastaries. By 1553 Robert Carre of Sleaford owned Brothertoft, which was left to his cousin Robert Carre upon his death. A Robert Carre was in possession of Brothertoft in 1583. Edward Carre was the owner in 1614. In 1619 Sir Robert Carr, bart, and Lady Anne Carre were owners of Brothertoft. Is that right?

Seems like a fair amount of synthesis but on the right track. I'll dig through it but most is stuff that I've already seen. NB:

• qualification in geese is not reliable. It is a one-liner from Dickens's popular magazine, the successor to Household Words & seems to be relegated to a footnote in the history.
• the Goosetoft poem is also not reliable due to poetic license (this is explained in one source I read a couple of days back)
• the old problem that the NA catalogues are not suitable as references for significant points, although handy as a bolster to other references. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the synthesis - yes I thought I'd start with the great info already provided in this talk page - and then I'll fill in relationships, etc. like Panderonna showed from there. More to come.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

unsigned comment added by

Yes, Ann, I saw your initial comment. I'm just a little confused by it. Isn't it clear that all we're doing is finding citations for the information that you provided? I'm confused.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

exactly - you dont understand. there IS no more, I wrest my case. Love means nothing at the expense of MATERIAL.not to you guys. Panderoona (talk) 23:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I hope tomorrow, being a new day, you can come look at the article with a fresh perspective. I hadn't said it, but I thought it was a great collaborative effort: your great story, passion and background info -- Sitush's ability to sort through information and develop a reputable, verifiable article -- and me having no UK background but the love of a story jumping in from time to time. If we are going to see things very differently, then so be it, it's what makes life interesting: us all coming from different experiences and perspectives. It sounds as if you're hurt and for whatever I've done to make you feel that way, I apologize.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

By this point with Sitish and Panderoona's info: I think we've provided citations where needed, correlated the activities in the Carre family, etc. So, I will respectively take a break. If either of you, though, find something to tighten up, please leave a message on my talk page.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Im hurt because I have actually given accurate information but I feel its been questioned and argued beyond belief. I spent hours yesterday going over and over all the sources I could find to prove my points and I was really really fed up and worn out at the end of it. You have done a good job on it and thank you both for your time and effort - even if we dont always see eye to eye. I see William Ernie Sharpe and Horace Robinson are gone. I could add their gravestones which cite them as Farmers of Brothertoft Hall. I could also use the British Listed Buildings ref to prove his son Peter is now in the Hall. But I wont. I didnt want to include him as he is alive. My reasoning is = get the info out there before whats in living memory is forgotten. But its not acceptable. And thats where Wiki and me wont ever get on. Anyway, again Thank You. Panderoona (talk) 07:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The only point was that, as it says just below where I'm typing in the edit window "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" not whether what you said was truthful or not. You may be right in that Wikipedia might not be the right place for the type of writing that you'd like to do. You may want to have a webpage or blog where you descibe what you know to be true, like an essay. Or you may want to hook up with a Lincolnshire site that someone hosts and build up information there.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Recent Edit

I have removed erroneous information from Marratt regarding Sampson Gideon/Eardley owning Brothertoft. I have read the Final Concord Agreement between Sir Charles Frederick and The Duke of Newcastle/Katherine Pelham widow of Henry Pelham, there was no Sampson Gideon/Eardley involved in ownership of the manor of Brothertoft. It passes direct from the Pelham-Holles family to the Frederick family. I have found nothing online anywhere to support Marratts claim, Gideon/Eardley did buy up land in the Bedford Level but not further north in Lincolnshire. From my records (and I know this is original research as per wiki rules)but this is fact. Furthermore, records at Surrey History Centre show that Cartwright buys Brothertoft at the back end of 1788 from Thomas Lenox Frederick, son of Sir Charles. I can and will cite Betty Brammers book on Brothertoft Parish HIstory tomorrow, as the book is with my parents at the moment and I will need page numbers. But it will back up this research. Panderoona (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)