John Isham of Coventry
Contents
- 1 Isham: John Isham, "of Coventry"
- 1.1 Biographical Overview
- 1.2 Family
- 1.3 Events
- 1.4 Transcriptions and Translations of Primary Source Documents on AALT
Isham: John Isham, "of Coventry"
Biographical Overview
John Isham, often referred to as "of Coventry," was the son of Robert Isham 1402-1474 and Margarete Allington, placing him firmly within the Isham family of Northamptonshire. He was born circa 1440 in Pytchley, Northamptonshire, England. His life spanned the tumultuous late fifteenth century, and he died around 1502 in Coventry, Warwickshire, England. While details of his early life are limited, his career trajectory reveals a figure connected to the royal court, local administration, and his family's broader land and economic interests extending beyond Coventry into Northamptonshire and Leicestershire.
John Isham's connection to Coventry is central to his identity. He is likely the "John Isham of Coventry" mentioned in a lawsuit from 1486 (reference number C 1/146/14), and legal records demonstrate his active involvement in the city's legal and economic life from at least 1473 onwards. Significantly, his legal engagements were not confined to Coventry; a Chancery case dating from 1486-1493 (C 1/146/14) reveals a dispute with Sir John Longvile over deeds to land in Haverburgh, Farndon, and Oxenden in Northamptonshire and Leicestershire, highlighting the geographical scope of his family's land interests. Court records from Coventry itself further demonstrate Isham's active engagement with the legal system within the city, both pursuing and defending his interests. His association with Coventry is further strengthened by his documented service to the monarchy and residence there.
His royal service began under King Edward IV. On 23 October 1478, Edward IV granted Isham custody of the manor and park of Fulbroke in Warwickshire, located south of Coventry. This grant, issued under the privy seal, positioned Isham as a royal appointee in the Coventry region, responsible for the administration of Fulbroke.
Isham continued to serve the royal family after Edward IV's death. By 4 September 1481, he was a servant of Queen Elizabeth Woodville, Edward IV's widow. A letter from Prince Edward V, dated September 4, 1481, addressed to the Mayor of Coventry, explicitly names "Joh. Isham, seruaunt vnto my moste dere lady & Mader, þe Quene," placing him firmly within the Queen's household. In this role, he acted as a messenger for the young King Edward V, conveying messages to the Coventry city council. The letter itself concerns a reported "gret riot commytted & doon" in Coventry. Prince Edward directs the Mayor to advise with his Council and inform John Isham of the situation, demonstrating Isham's role as a trusted intermediary for royal communications regarding local unrest. A letter from Prince Edward V, dated 19 August 1482, further mentions John Isham in connection to a matter concerning Briscowe in Coventry. These instances demonstrate Isham's trusted position within the Queen's household and his direct involvement in royal communications concerning Coventry.
Beyond his royal affiliations and Coventry connections, John Isham maintained ties to his Northamptonshire family. In 1485, he served as one of the feoffees for his brother William Isham's Northamptonshire lands. This role as feoffee highlights his continued responsibility within the Isham family's property management.
Genealogical records suggest further aspects of John Isham’s career. An "old pedigree at Lamport" describes him as a receiver for the Duchy of Lancaster in Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire during the first year of King Richard III's reign (1483). As receiver for the Duchy, he would have been responsible for managing royal revenues in these regions, indicating ongoing administrative service even during the change of monarchy.
In later life, John Isham’s activities within the Coventry area continued. Around 1486, he is specifically recorded as residing in Coventry. His engagement with Coventry's economic and social fabric is further revealed through a series of legal cases. As early as 1473, he pursued a debt case against a Coventry bailiff (CP 40/847), demonstrating his willingness to seek legal recourse even against local officials. He actively used the courts to recover debts from Coventry residents, including a draper also described as a husbandman (CP 40/871) and a mercer (CP 40/883), indicating his involvement in the city's credit networks. In 1495, John Isham and his wife Alice initiated a forcible entry case (CP 40/931) concerning tenements in Coventry, asserting their property rights against local weavers, a dyer, and husbandmen from nearby Keresley. This case, along with a trespass case for personal assault in Keyseley against a yeoman (CP 40/853), reveals Isham's interactions and potential disputes across different social strata in the Coventry area. Land ownership in Keyseley is further indicated by a land plea from 1498 brought against John and Alice Isham by Richard Braytoft and his wife (CP 40/943). In 1500, John Isham again pursued legal action against Richard Braytoft (CP 40/951), this time a plea of replevin concerning livestock taken at Keresley, highlighting his agricultural interests beyond the city itself. Years after his death, records continue to reflect his Coventry landholdings. A feoffment dated 1518, concerning land transactions near Whitley road and Dilcock's Mill in Coventry, describes a croft as "lately belonging to John Isham and his wife Alice." This indicates that John and Alice Isham were significant landowners in the Coventry area, and their property was still used as a landmark reference point over a decade after John's passing.
In 1500, he was involved in a lawsuit against Richard Braytoft, holder of the manor of Keresley, Warwickshire, further placing him in the local legal and landowning context. By 1504, records indicate John Isham held land in Whitley, Warwickshire, near Coventry, signifying his continued property interests in the region.
John Isham of Coventry married Alice circa 1465 in Coventry. They established a family with at least three known sons: Richard Isham, Edward Isham (gentleman of Coventry), and John Isham (gentleman of Coventry). These sons continued the Isham lineage in the Coventry area for subsequent generations.
In summary, John Isham "of Coventry" built a life marked by royal service, local administrative roles, landholding in Warwickshire and family connections in Northamptonshire. His career, spanning the reigns of Edward IV, Edward V, and Richard III, reflects the dynamic landscape of late fifteenth-century England and the diverse paths individuals could take within gentry and royal circles. He died around 1502 in Coventry, leaving a lasting Isham presence in the region.
Family
Father: Robert Isham 1402-1474
Mother: Margarete Allington
Spouse: Alice (married circa 1465, Coventry, Warwickshire, England, died circa 1505)
Children:
Richard Isham (born circa 1466, died circa 1502)
Edward Isham, Gentleman of Coventry (born circa 1470, date of death unknown)
John Isham, Gentleman of Coventry (born circa 1477, died circa 1530)
Events
circa 1440: Birth in Pytchley, Northamptonshire, England.
circa 1465: Marriage to Alice in Coventry, Warwickshire, England.
23 October 1478: Grant of custody of the manor and park of Fulbroke, Warwickshire, south of Coventry, from King Edward IV.
4 September 1481: Servant of Queen Elizabeth Woodville and messenger of King Edward V, dispatched to Coventry regarding a riot (Source: Letter from Prince Edward V to Mayor of Coventry).
19 August 1482: Mentioned in a letter from Prince Edward V regarding a matter concerning Briscowe in Coventry.
1483: Receiver for the Duchy of Lancaster in Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire (according to Lamport pedigree).
1485: Feoffee for his brother William Isham's Northamptonshire lands.
circa 1486: Residence in Coventry, Warwickshire, England.
1486-1493: Chancery case Longvile v Isham (C 1/146/14) concerning deeds to land in Northamptonshire and Leicestershire.
1495: Legal case of forcible entry in Coventry (CP 40/931) against John Meryngton and others.
1500: Legal case of replevin in Coventry (CP 40/951) against Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth his wife.
1502: Death in Coventry, Warwickshire, England.
1504: Land holding in Whitley, Warwickshire, England.
7 Jun 1518: Land "lately belonging to John Isham and his wife Alice" mentioned in a Coventry feoffment (Reference: BA/B/11/3/2, Coventry Archives).
Transcriptions and Translations of Primary Source Documents on AALT
C 1/146/14 (Chancery Case, 1486-1493)
Court: Court of Chancery Persons: Sir John Longvile, John Isham, John Vavasour Places: Haverburgh, Farndon, Oxenden (Northamptonshire, Leicestershire)
C 1/146/14 (Chancery Case, 1486-1493) Legal Case Summary
This document, C 1/146/14 from the Court of Chancery, dating from 1486 to 1493, records a case of property dispute. The plaintiff is Sir John Longvile, knight, son of Richard, son of Richard, son of George Longvile, esquire.
The defendants are John Isham, of Coventry, and John Vavasour, of Ovyston.
The plea concerns the detention of deeds relating to messuages and land in Haverburgh, Farndon, and Oxenden, located in Northamptonshire and Leicestershire. Sir John Longvile is seeking the return of these deeds from John Isham and John Vavasour, suggesting a dispute over land ownership or inheritance in these locations.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Chancery Case and Land Interests Beyond Coventry: This Chancery case demonstrates John Isham's involvement in legal disputes at the highest level of English law (Chancery) and reveals his family's land interests extended beyond Warwickshire into Northamptonshire and Leicestershire.
Dispute with Sir John Longvile: The case involves a dispute with Sir John Longvile, a knight, suggesting Isham was interacting with individuals of significant social standing in land matters.
Deeds and Land Title: The focus on detention of deeds indicates the central importance of written documents in establishing and defending land title in this period. The case suggests a complex property history and a dispute over rightful ownership evidenced by these deeds.
CP 40/847 (Trinity 1473)
County: Warwickshire Persons: John Isham, Thomas Latymer Places: Coventry
CP 40/847 (Trinity Term 1473) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/847 from Trinity Term 1473, records a plea of debt. The plaintiff is John Isham, acting through his attorney.
The defendant is Thomas Latymer, bailiff of Coventry.
The plea is a plea of debt, where John Isham is suing Thomas Latymer for forty shillings that Latymer allegedly owes and unjustly withholds.
Procedurally, the document notes that Thomas Latymer did not appear in court ("Et ipse non venit"). As Latymer had failed to appear previously, a writ was issued to the sheriff to arrest him. The sheriff reported that Latymer was not found ("non est inventus"). Therefore, the court issued another writ of capias, again ordering the sheriff to arrest Thomas Latymer. The case was adjourned, with Latymer ordered to appear in court fifteen days after Michaelmas (29 September).
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Debt Litigation in Coventry: The case demonstrates John Isham's involvement in debt litigation within Coventry. He is actively using the court system to recover money owed to him.
Defendant a Local Official: The defendant, Thomas Latymer, is identified as a "bailiff of Coventry," indicating a local official. This suggests John Isham was interacting with and, in this instance, pursuing legal action against figures of local authority in Coventry.
Enforcement of Debt: The repeated orders for arrest ("capias") show the court's process for compelling appearance in debt cases and the challenges in enforcing legal proceedings when a defendant is evasive or cannot be found.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | ¶ Joh'es Isham p' attorn' suu' op' se iiij die v'sus Thom' Latymer balliuu' de Coventre de pl'to q'd redd't ei |
| 2 | quadraginta solid' quos ei debet et iniuste detinet etc. Et ip'e non ven' Et sicut prius prec' fuit vic' q'd capet eum |
| 3 | etc. Et vic' modo mand' q'd non est inuentus. Id'o sicut prius cap'iat'. Id'o h'eat hic a die s'ci Mich'is in xv dies etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | ¶ Johannes Isham per attornatum suum optulit se iiij die versus Thomam Latymer ballivum de Coventria de placito quod reddat ei |
| 2 | quadraginta solidos quos ei debet et iniuste detinet etc. Et ipse non venit Et sicut prius preceptum fuit vicecomiti quod caperet eum |
| 3 | etc. Et vicecomes modo mandavit quod non est inventus. Ideo sicut prius capiatur. Ideo habeat hic a die sancti Michaelis in xv dies etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | ¶ John Isham by his attorney presented himself on the fourth day against Thomas Latymer bailiff of Coventry concerning a plea that he render to him |
| 2 | forty shillings which he owes him and unjustly withholds etc. And he did not come And as before it was ordered to the sheriff that he arrest him |
| 3 | etc. And the sheriff now sent word that he is not found. Therefore as before let him be arrested. Therefore let him have [them] here fifteen days from the day of Saint Michael etc." |
CP 40/853 (Hilary 1475)
County: Warwickshire Persons: John Isham, Lawrence or Laurence Walgrave Places: Coventry, Keresley
CP 40/853 (Hilary Term 1475) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/853 from Hilary Term 1475, records a plea of trespass. The plaintiff is John Isham, acting through his attorney.
The defendant is Lawrence Walgrave of Coventry, yeoman.
The plea is a plea of trespass. John Isham accuses Lawrence Walgrave of wrongdoing "in the King's highway at Keyseley." Specifically, it is alleged that Walgrave was "prepared" there and then seized John Isham's person "in manner and form against liberty" and carried him away, causing "grave damage" and violating the King's peace.
Procedurally, the document notes that Lawrence Walgrave did not appear in court ("Et ipse non venit"). The sheriff was ordered to attach him, and the sheriff reported that Walgrave was attached through pledges, John Cleyth' and William Deystr'. Walgrave was placed "in mercy" (likely meaning he was liable to a fine) and ordered to appear in court three weeks after Easter.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Trespass Case in Keyseley: The case reveals John Isham was involved in a trespass case in Keyseley, suggesting his activities and potentially property holdings extended to this location near Coventry.
Personal Assault Allegation: The plea describes a serious personal assault, alleging that Walgrave seized and carried away John Isham in the King's highway. This suggests a potentially violent dispute or personal conflict between Isham and Walgrave.
Defendant a Yeoman: The defendant's status as a "yeoman" indicates that this dispute was with someone of a lower social rank than Isham, who was gentry. This provides insight into the range of social interactions and potential conflicts in which Isham was involved.
Legal Recourse for Personal Harm: The case demonstrates John Isham's willingness to use the legal system to address personal harm and assert his rights when he believed he was wronged.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventr': ¶ Joh'es Isham p' attorn' suu' op' se iiij die v'sus Laur' Walgrave de Coventr' yomman de pl'to |
| 2 | q'd cu' ip'e in regali via apud ip'ius Joh'is apud keyseley parat' fuit et p'sonam modo et forma v'sus |
| 3 | lib'tat' capit' et asportauit et alia enormia ei ad grave dampnu' etc cont' pacem etc. Et ip'e non ven'. |
| 4 | prec' fuit vic' q'd attach' eum etc. Et vic' modo mand' q'd attach' est apud Joh'em Cleyth' et Will'm Deystr', |
| 5 | p'r in m'ia etc. Et prec' q'd sit hic a die Pasche in tres septimanas etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Johannes Isham per attornatum suum optulit se iiij die versus Laurencium Walgrave de Coventria yomman de placito |
| 2 | quod cum ipse in regali via apud ipsius Johannis apud keyseley paratus fuit et personam modo et forma versus |
| 3 | libertatem cepit et asportavit et alia enormia ei ad grave dampnum etc contra pacem etc. Et ipse non venit. |
| 4 | preceptum fuit vicecomiti quod attachiat eum etc. Et vicecomes modo mandavit quod attachiatus est apud Johannem Cleyth' et Willelmum Deystr', |
| 5 | ponitur in misericordia etc. Et preceptum quod sit hic a die Pasche in tres septimanas etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventry: ¶ John Isham by his attorney presented himself on the fourth day against Lawrence Walgrave of Coventry yeoman concerning a plea |
| 2 | that whereas he in the King's highway at [the place] of him John at Keyseley was prepared and [his] person in manner and form against |
| 3 | liberty he took and carried away and other outrages [did] to his grave damage etc against the peace etc. And he did not come. |
| 4 | it was ordered to the sheriff that he attach him etc. And the sheriff now sent word that he is attached by John Cleyth' and William Deystr', |
| 5 | he is placed in mercy etc. And it is ordered that he be here three weeks from Easter day etc." |
CP 40/871 (Trinity 1480)
County: Warwickshire Persons: John Isham, John Wode alias Barbour Places: Coventry
CP 40/871 (Hilary Term 1480) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/871 from Trinity Term 1480, records a plea of debt. The plaintiff is John Isham, acting through his attorney.
The defendant is John Wode, formerly of Coventry, draper, also known as John Wode of Coventry, husbandman.
The plea is a plea of debt, where John Isham is suing John Wode for forty shillings that Wode allegedly owes and unjustly withholds.
Procedurally, the document notes that John Wode did not appear in court ("Et ipse non venit"). The sheriff was ordered to summon him, but the sheriff reported that Wode has nothing ("nichil habet") by which he could be compelled to appear. Therefore, the court issued a writ of capias, ordering the sheriff to arrest John Wode. The case was adjourned, with Wode ordered to appear in court fifteen days after Easter.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Debt Case Against Coventry Resident: This case shows John Isham pursuing debt recovery through the legal system against a resident of Coventry, John Wode, who is described with two occupations: draper and husbandman.
Defendant's Dual Occupation: The description of John Wode as both a "draper" and "husbandman" may indicate diversification of economic activities in Coventry, or perhaps a change in Wode's profession over time.
Enforcement Challenges: The sheriff's report that Wode "has nothing" suggests potential difficulties in recovering the debt, highlighting the practical challenges of debt litigation even when a legal judgment is sought.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Trinitas: ¶ Joh'es Isham p' attorn' suu' op' se iiij die v'sus Joh'em Wode nup' de Coventr' draper alias d'cm |
| 2 | Joh'em Wode de Coventr' husbond' de pl'to q'd reddat ei quadraginta solid' quos ei debet et |
| 3 | iniuste detinet etc. Et ip'e non ven'. Et prec' fuit vic' q'd sum' eum etc. Et vic' modo mand' q'd nichil |
| 4 | h'et etc. Id'o cap'iat'. Id'o sit hic a die Pasche in xv dies etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Trinitas: ¶ Johannes Isham per attornatum suum optulit se iiij die versus Johannem Wode nuper de Coventria draper alias dictum |
| 2 | Johannem Wode de Coventria husbond de placito quod reddat ei quadraginta solidos quos ei debet et |
| 3 | iniuste detinet etc. Et ipse non venit. Et preceptum fuit vicecomiti quod summoneat eum etc. Et vicecomes modo mandavit quod nichil |
| 4 | habet etc. Ideo capiatur. Ideo sit hic a die Pasche in xv dies etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Trinity: ¶ John Isham by his attorney presented himself on the fourth day against John Wode late of Coventry draper otherwise called |
| 2 | John Wode of Coventry husbandman concerning a plea that he render to him forty shillings which he owes him and |
| 3 | unjustly withholds etc. And he did not come. And it was ordered to the sheriff that he summon him etc. And the sheriff now sent word that [he] nothing |
| 4 | has etc. Therefore let him be arrested. Therefore let him be here fifteen days from Easter day etc." |
CP 40/883 (Hilary 1483)
County: Warwickshire Persons: John Isham, Robert Ednam Places: Coventry
CP 40/883 (Hilary Term 1483) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/883 from Hilary Term 1483, records a plea of debt. The plaintiff is John Isham, acting through his attorney.
The defendant is Robert Ednam of Coventry, mercer.
The plea is a plea of debt, where John Isham is suing Robert Ednam for sixty shillings that Ednam allegedly owes and unjustly withholds.
Procedurally, the document notes that Robert Ednam did not appear in court ("Et ipse non venit"). The sheriff was ordered to summon him, but the sheriff reported that Ednam has nothing ("nichil habet") by which he could be compelled to appear. Therefore, the court issued a writ of capias, ordering the sheriff to arrest Robert Ednam. The case was adjourned, with Ednam ordered to appear in court three days after Easter.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Debt Case Against Coventry Mercer: This case shows John Isham engaged in debt litigation against Robert Ednam, a mercer in Coventry, indicating financial interactions with local merchants.
Recovery of Sixty Shillings: John Isham is attempting to recover a debt of sixty shillings, a sum that, while not insignificant, suggests the scale of typical credit and debt relationships within Coventry's economy.
Enforcement Issues: As with other debt cases involving John Isham, the sheriff's inability to find distrainable goods ("nichil habet") points to the challenges of debt enforcement in this period.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Joh'es Isham p' attorn' suu' op' se iiijto die v'sus Rob'tum Ednam de Coventr' mercer de pl'to q'd reddat ei |
| 2 | sexaginta solid' quos ei debet et iniuste detinet etc. Et ip'e non ven'. Et prec' fuit vic' q'd sum' eum etc. Et vic' |
| 3 | modo mand' q'd nich'il h'et etc. Id'o cap'iat'. Id'o sit hic a die Pasche in tres dies etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Johannes Isham per attornatum suum optulit se iiijto die versus Robertum Ednam de Coventria mercer de placito quod reddat ei |
| 2 | sexaginta solidos quos ei debet et iniuste detinet etc. Et ipse non venit. Et preceptum fuit vicecomiti quod summoneat eum etc. Et vicecomes |
| 3 | modo mandavit quod nichil habet etc. Ideo capiatur. Ideo sit hic a die Pasche in tres dies etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventry: ¶ John Isham by his attorney presented himself on the fourth day against Robert Ednam of Coventry mercer concerning a plea that he render to him |
| 2 | sixty shillings which he owes him and unjustly withholds etc. And he did not come. And it was ordered to the sheriff that he summon him etc. And the sheriff |
| 3 | now sent word that [he] nothing has etc. Therefore let him be arrested. Therefore let him be here three days from Easter day etc." |
CP 40/931 (Hilary 1495)
County: Warwickshire Persons: John Isham, Alice Isham, John Meryngton, John Roberti, William Thorp, John Prottour, William Prattour Places: Coventry, Keresley
CP 40/931 (Hilary Term 1495) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/931 from Hilary Term 1495, records a plea of forcible entry. The plaintiffs are John Isham and Alice, his wife, acting through their attorney, John Smyth. They are prosecuting both on behalf of the King and themselves.
The defendants are John Meryngton, late of Coventry, weaver; John Roberti of Coventry, weaver; William Thorp of Coventry, dyer; John Prottour of Keresley in the county of Coventry, husbandman; and William Prattour of Keresley in the county of Coventry, husbandman.
The plea is a plea of forcible entry (quare vi et armis contra formam statuti), indicating an action taken with force and arms against the Statute of Forcible Entry enacted in the reign of Richard II. John Isham and Alice accuse the defendants of unlawfully entering their tenements in Coventry. The plea states that despite the statute prohibiting forcible entry except where entry is granted by law, and even then, not with force or a multitude of people, the defendants, described as malefactors and disturbers of the King's peace, violated this statute.
Procedurally, the document notes that John Isham and Alice appeared via attorney. The sheriff was ordered to attach the defendants. The sheriff's report indicates that John Meryngton was attached through pledges (John Dey and Richard Coke), but the other defendants were not found ("non sunt inventi"). As a result, the court issued a writ of capias to the sheriff, ordering him to arrest the remaining defendants (John Roberti, William Thorp, John Prottour, and William Prattour) and bring them to court fifteen days after Michaelmas (29 September).
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Property Owner in Coventry: The case confirms that John Isham owned tenements (properties) in Coventry, solidifying his connection to the city beyond just service to the crown.
Legal Dispute and Property Rights: It reveals John Isham involved in a legal dispute concerning his property rights. The plea of forcible entry suggests a potentially serious conflict over land or buildings in Coventry, where the defendants allegedly used force to enter his property.
Social Context in Coventry: The defendants' occupations (weavers, dyer, husbandmen from Keresley) offer a glimpse into the social milieu of John Isham's Coventry life. His disputes might have involved individuals from the local artisan and agricultural communities.
Use of Legal System: The case demonstrates John Isham's recourse to the English legal system to protect his property interests. By bringing a plea of forcible entry, he asserted his rights and sought legal redress against those who allegedly violated them.
Family Life: The inclusion of his wife, Alice, as a co-plaintiff suggests that the property in question was likely jointly held or related to their household, offering a glimpse into his family life in Coventry.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Couentr': ¶ Joh'es Isham et Alicia vx' eius q' tam p' d'no Rege q'm p' se ip'os sequ'nt' p' Joh'em Smyth |
| 2 | att'n suu' op' se iiij die u'sus Joh'em Meryngton nup' de Couentr' weu' Joh'em Rob'ti de Coventr' |
| 3 | weu' Will'm Thorp de Coventr' dyer Joh'em Protto'r de Keresleye in com' Couentr' |
| 4 | husbondman et Will'm Pratto'r de Keresleye in com' Couentr' husbondman de pl'ito quare |
| 5 | cu' in statuto in p'liamento d'ni nup' Regis Angl' s'c'di post conqu' apud Westm' anno regni sui quinto |
| 6 | tento edito int' c'ta ordinat' sit q'd null' fac' ingr'm in t'ras seu ten' nisi in casu vbi ingr'us dat' p' legem |
| 7 | ingr'us dat' p' legem et in illo casu non manu forti nec cu' multitud'ne gent' set licito et quieto |
| 8 | modo t'm p'd'ci malef'torib' et pacis d'ni Regis p'turbatorib' ignotis cont' forma' statuti p'd'ci |
| 9 | p'turbat' sit ad voluntatem d'ni Regis p'dictus p'ut in eod'm statuto plenius continet' p'd'i Joh'es |
| 10 | Meryngton Joh'es Rob'ti Will's Joh'es Protto'r et Will's Pratto'r simul cu' aliis malefactorib' et pacis d'ni Regis |
| 11 | p'turbatorib' ignotis cont' forma' statuti p'd'ci vi et armis in ten' ip'or' Joh'is Isham et Alicie in Couentr' |
| 12 | Joh' p' attorn' et Will'm ingr'm non dat' p' legem s'c'm ingr' omis in t'ra d'ni Regis minus conuenient' et |
| 13 | ven'. Et prec' fuit vic' q'd attach' eos. Et vic' modo mand' q'd Joh'es Meryngton attach' est p'", |
| 14 | Joh'em Dey et Ric'm Coke. Et q'd p'd'ci Joh'es Rob'ti Will's Joh'es Protto'r et Will's Pratto'r nich'", |
| 15 | in xv dies etc Et vic' modo mand' q'd non sunt inuenti etc I'o prec' est vic' q'd cap' eos de |
| 16 | etc. Ita q'd h'eat corp'a eor' hic a die s'ci Mich'is in xv dies. Et vnde vic' |
| 17 | hic in Octabis s'ci Joh'is et inde etc" |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Couentria: ¶ Johannes Isham et Alicia uxor eius qui tam pro domino Rege quam pro se ipsos sequuntur per Johannem Smyth |
| 2 | attornatum suum optulit se quarto die versus Johannem Meryngton nuper de Couentria weuer Johannem Roberti de Couentria |
| 3 | weuer Willelmum Thorp de Couentria dyer Johannem Prottour de Keresleye in comitatu Couentrie |
| 4 | husbondman et Willelmum Prattour de Keresleye in comitatu Couentrie husbondman de placito quare |
| 5 | cum in statuto in parliamento domini nuper Regis Anglie secundi post conquestum apud Westmonasterium anno regni sui quinto |
| 6 | tento edito inter cetera ordinatum sit quod nullus faciat ingressum in terras seu tenementa nisi in casu vbi ingressus datur per legem |
| 7 | ingressus datur per legem et in illo casu non manu forti nec cum multitudine gentium set licito et quieto |
| 8 | modo tamen predicti malefactoribus et pacis domini Regis perturbatoribus ignotis contra formam statuti predicti |
| 9 | perturbatur sit ad voluntatem domini Regis predictus prout in eodem statuto plenius continetur predicti Johannes |
| 10 | Meryngton Johannes Roberti Willelmus Johannes Prottour et Willelmus Prattour simul cum aliis malefactoribus et pacis domini Regis |
| 11 | perturbatoribus ignotis contra formam statuti predicti vi et armis in tenementa ipsorum Johannis Isham et Alicie in Couentria |
| 12 | Johannes per attornatum et Willelmum ingressum non datur per legem secundum ingressum omnis in terra domini Regis minus conuenienter et |
| 13 | venerunt. Et preceptum fuit vicecomiti quod attachiat eos. Et vicecomes modo mandauit quod Johannes Meryngton attachiatus est per |
| 14 | Johannem Dey et Ricardum Coke. Et quod predicti Johannes Roberti Willelmus Johannes Prottour et Willelmus Prattour nichil |
| 15 | in quindecim dies etc Et vicecomes modo mandauit quod non sunt inuenti etc Ideo preceptum est vicecomiti quod capiat eos de |
| 16 | etc. Ita quod habeat corpora eorum hic a die sancti Michaelis in quindecim dies. Et vnde vicecomes |
| 17 | hic in Octabis sancti Johannis et inde etc" |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventry: ¶ John Isham and Alice his wife who prosecute as well for the lord King as for themselves by John Smyth |
| 2 | their attorney presented themselves on the fourth day against John Meryngton late of Coventry weaver John Roberti of Coventry |
| 3 | weaver William Thorp of Coventry dyer John Prottour of Keresley in the county of Coventry |
| 4 | husbandman and William Prattour of Keresley in the county of Coventry husbandman concerning a plea wherefore |
| 5 | whereas in the statute in the parliament of the lord lately King of England the second after the conquest at Westminster in the fifth year of his reign |
| 6 | held and issued among other things it is ordained that no one shall make entry into lands or tenements unless in case where entry is given by law |
| 7 | entry is given by law and in that case not with strong hand nor with a multitude of people but in a lawful and peaceful |
| 8 | manner nevertheless the aforesaid malefactors and disturbers of the lord King's peace unknown against the form of the aforesaid statute |
| 9 | disturbed be at the will of the lord King aforesaid as in the same statute more fully is contained the aforesaid John |
| 10 | Meryngton John Roberti William John Prottour and William Prattour together with other malefactors and disturbers of the lord King's peace |
| 11 | unknown against the form of the aforesaid statute with force and arms into the tenements of them John Isham and Alice in Coventry |
| 12 | John by attorney and William entry is not given by law according to the entry of all in the land of the lord King less fittingly and |
| 13 | came. And it was ordered to the sheriff that he attach them. And the sheriff now sent word that John Meryngton is attached by |
| 14 | John Dey and Richard Coke. And that the aforesaid John Roberti William John Prottour and William Prattour nothing |
| 15 | in fifteen days etc And the sheriff now sent word that they are not found etc Therefore it is ordered to the sheriff that he take them of |
| 16 | etc. So that he have their bodies here fifteen days from the day of Saint Michael. And whence the sheriff |
| 17 | here in the Octaves of Saint John and thence etc" |
CP 40/943 (Hilary 1498)
- [Index at AALT | Image at AALT]
County: Warwickshire Persons: Richard Braytofte, Elizabeth Braytofte, John Isham, Alice Isham Places: Coventry, Keyseley
CP 40/943 (Hilary Term 1498) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/943 from Hilary Term 1498, records a land plea. The plaintiffs are Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth, his wife, acting through their attorney, John Ramyth.
The defendants are John Isham and Alice, his wife.
The plea is a plea in the form of praecipe quod reddat concerning ten acres of land with appurtenances in Keyseley. Richard and Elizabeth Braytoft claim that this land is their right in the King's court. The record mentions a petition and a writ of waste, suggesting this action may be related to a feoffment and potential waste committed on the land.
Procedurally, the document notes that John Isham and Alice did not appear in court ("Et ip'i non ven'"). They had been summoned ("Et sum' etc.") but failed to appear. Therefore, the court ordered that the land be taken into the King's hand ("capiatur terra p'd'ca in manu' d'ni Regis capiatur"). John and Alice Isham were ordered to be re-summoned to appear in court fifteen days after Trinity Sunday.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Land Dispute in Keyseley: The case reveals John Isham and his wife Alice were involved in a land dispute concerning ten acres in Keyseley, indicating their land holdings in this area were being challenged in court.
Dispute with Richard Braytoft: The plaintiffs are Richard Braytoft and his wife Elizabeth, further illustrating the ongoing legal interactions between John Isham and the Braytoft family.
Default and Land Seizure: The Ishams' failure to appear in court led to a default judgment, resulting in the temporary seizure of the disputed land by the King. This highlights the importance of court appearances and the potential consequences of default in medieval legal proceedings.
Type of Land Action: The praecipe quod reddat plea, combined with the mention of feoffment and waste, suggests a complex land ownership issue, possibly related to inheritance, grants, or disputes over the management or condition of the land.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Ric'us Braytoft et Elizabeth vx' eius p' Joh'em Ramyth Attorn' suu' op' se iiij die v'sus Joh'em |
| 2 | Isham et Aliciam vx'em eius de pl'to q'd reddant eis decem acras t're cu' p'tin' in keyseley quas |
| 3 | Ric'us et Elizabeth in cur' Regis hic clamant esse ius suu' p'ut p'tet p'ticionem suam et vnde p' h'c |
| 4 | de feffam't p' br'e in'd' wast' de h'c Justic' et aliis etc. Et ip'i non ven'. Et sum' etc., |
| 5 | Id'o cap' t'ra p'd'ca in manu' d'ni Regis capiatur. Et diem etc. Et ip'i sum' q'd sint |
| 6 | hic a die s'ci Trinitatis in xv dies etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Ricardus Braytoft et Elizabeth uxor eius per Johannem Ramyth Attornatum suum optulerunt se iiij die versus Johannem |
| 2 | Isham et Aliciam uxorem eius de placito quod reddant eis decem acras terre cum pertinenciis in keyseley quas |
| 3 | Ricardus et Elizabeth in curia Regis hic clamant esse ius suum prout patet peticionem suam et unde per hoc |
| 4 | de feoffamento per breve inde waste de hoc Justiciariis et aliis etc. Et ipsi non venerunt. Et summoniti etc. |
| 5 | Ideo capiatur terra predicta in manum domini Regis capiatur. Et diem etc. Et ipsi summoneantur quod sint |
| 6 | hic a die sancti Trinitatis in xv dies etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coventry: ¶ Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth his wife by John Ramyth their Attorney presented themselves on the fourth day against John | |||
| 2 | Isham and Alice his wife concerning a plea that they render to them ten acres of land with appurtenances in Keyseley which | |||
| 3 | Richard and Elizabeth in the King's court here claim to be their right as it appears [by] their petition and whereupon concerning this | |||
| 4 | of feoffment by writ thence of waste of this to the Justices and others etc. And they did not come. And summoned etc., | |||
| 5 | Therefore let the aforesaid land be taken into the hand of the lord King be taken. And the day etc. And let them be summoned that they be | - | 6 | here fifteen days from the day of Holy Trinity etc." |
CP 40/951 (Hilary 1500)
- WAALT Index Page
- AALT Image
- County: Warwickshire
Persons: John Isham, Richard Braytoft, Elizabeth Braytoft Places: Coventry, Keresley
CP 40/951 (Trinity Term 1500) Legal Case Summary
This document, CP 40/951 from Trinity Term 1500, records a plea of replevin. The plaintiff is John Isham, acting through his attorney, Robert Soteley.
The defendants are Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth, his wife.
The plea is a plea of replevin (quare cepit animalia), indicating an action concerning the unlawful taking and detention of animals. John Isham accuses Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth of unjustly taking his animals and detaining them against gages and pledges. Specifically, the document states that on June 1, in the 14th year of King Henry VII’s reign (1500), at Keresley, Richard and Elizabeth took John Isham’s animals: one mare in a place called "Faldegost" and one foal called "A fole" in a place called "Longegost". John Isham claims damages of one hundred shillings due to this unlawful taking and detention.
Procedurally, John Isham appears via his attorney. The document records the initial summons (s’m’s e’m’i fuer’nt) for Richard and Elizabeth to respond to John Isham's plea.
The biographical significance of this case for John Isham is as follows:
Land and Animal Ownership in Keresley: The case reveals John Isham’s property interests extended to Keresley, Warwickshire, outside of Coventry itself, as the animals were taken there. It confirms his ownership of livestock, specifically horses (a mare and a foal).
Legal Dispute with Richard Braytoft: It shows John Isham engaged in a legal dispute with Richard Braytoft, a figure also mentioned in the biographical overview in connection to another lawsuit in 1500 concerning the manor of Keresley. This case provides more detail on the nature of their legal interactions, suggesting potentially ongoing property or land-related conflicts between them.
Economic Activities: Owning livestock and pursuing legal action for their recovery indicates John Isham's involvement in agricultural or animal husbandry activities, adding another dimension to his economic life beyond land ownership and royal service.
Use of Replevin: The choice of a plea of replevin demonstrates John Isham’s understanding of specific legal remedies available to recover unlawfully taken goods or animals.
Abbreviated Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventr': ¶ Ric'us Braytoft et Elizabeth vx' eius s'm's e'm'i fuer'nt ad respond' Joh'i Isham de pl'to qua' |
| 2 | ceperunt aialia ip'ius Joh'is et ea iniuste detinuerunt cont' vad' et pleg' etc. Et vnde idem Joh'es p' Rob'm |
| 3 | Soteley Attorn' suu' querit' q'd p'd'i Ric'us et Elizabeth primo die Junij Anno regni d'ni Regis nunc |
| 4 | quartodecimo apud keyseley ceperunt aialia videl't in quodam loco vocat' faldegost' vnam equam |
| 5 | Et in quodam loco vocat' longegost' vnu' pullum vocat' A fole ip'ius Joh'is et ea iniuste detinuer'nt |
| 6 | cont' vad' et pleg' quousq' etc vnde dic' q'd deteriorat' est et dampnu' h'et ad valenc' Centum |
| 7 | solid' Et inde produc' sect' etc." |
Expanded Latin Text
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventria: ¶ Ricardus Braytoft et Elizabeth uxor eius summoniti erant fuerunt ad respondendum Johanni Isham de placito quare |
| 2 | ceperunt animalia ipsius Johannis et ea iniuste detinuerunt contra vadium et plegium etc. Et unde idem Johannes per Robertum |
| 3 | Soteley Attornatum suum queritur quod predicti Ricardus et Elizabeth primo die Junii Anno regni domini Regis nunc |
| 4 | quartodecimo apud keyseley ceperunt animalia videlicet in quodam loco vocato faldegost unam equam |
| 5 | Et in quodam loco vocato longegost unum pullum vocatum A fole ipsius Johannis et ea iniuste detinuerunt |
| 6 | contra vadium et plegium quousque etc unde dicit quod deterioratus est et dampnum habet ad valenciam Centum |
| 7 | solidorum Et inde producit sectam etc." |
English Translation
| Line | Text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Coventry: ¶ Richard Braytoft and Elizabeth his wife were summoned to respond to John Isham concerning a plea wherefore |
| 2 | they took the animals of him John and unjustly detained them against gage and pledge etc. And whereupon the same John by Robert |
| 3 | Soteley his Attorney complains that the aforesaid Richard and Elizabeth on the first day of June in the year of the reign of the lord King now |
| 4 | fourteenth at Keresley took animals namely in a certain place called Faldegost one mare |
| 5 | And in a certain place called Longegost one foal called A fole of him John and unjustly detained them |
| 6 | against gage and pledge until etc wherefore he says that he is injured and has damage to the value of One hundred |
| 7 | shillings And thereof he produces suit etc." |
