Prohibition/Premunire 1300-1319

From Rpalmer
Jump to: navigation, search

This page will be segmented when it gets too long. Add information by clicking on "edit" above. Items should begin with term (if available) and year together with a letter to allow for distinguishing subsequent documents in the same year and term. The designation should be in bold. Thus an entry will appear as H1285 A:. Text thereafter should indicate what the document concerns. The link to the document should be a copied and pasted full web address (http:// . . .) surrounded by single brackets ( [ ] ). Leave a line between entries. The 25-year segments begin with a vertical bar and end with a vertical bar minus. Avoid other more complex codes. If you want to append a translation, provide a completely unique address surrounded by double brackets: ProPre H1275 A Tr. Such an address indicates sector and year, the A indicates it is the first document entered for that year and term, the Tr indicates it is a translation. That will constitute a unique address. DO NOT attempt to re-order documents within a term to achieve a perfect chronology, since it will invalidate other references to re-named documents. A document written in Notepad will copy into the site without any complicating code. Avoid more complicated coding. Check your entry before saving by clicking on "show preview below (return here by using the back arrow); before leaving the document, remember to save the page.


T1302 A: Prohibition. Northamptonshire. Rex v. John de Ferrers. For prosecuting Thomas, earl of Lancaster before the Archbishop of Canterbury et al. at St. Paul's. Presumed knowledge of the law. [1]. Related: [2]

H1303 A: King's council handling of a papal provision to Wolverhampton. [3]

M1303 A: Novel disseisin handling a corrody. Lawrence de Offyn v. Prior of Holy Trinity, York, Brother Gervase le Fraunceys, Brother Ingelram le Fraunceys, & Brother William le Flemyng. [4]

E1304 A: Prohibition with pardon. Nottinghamshire. Rex v. John de Auneslee. [5]

E1304 B: Prohibition. Cornwall. Rex v. William de Bodrygan archdeacon of Cornwall. concerning chapel of St. Berian. [6], [7]

T1304 A: Prohibition. Delivery of a prohibition concerning the presentation of the sacristan of the church of Blessed Mary and All Saints of York. [8], [9]

T1304 B: Prohibition. Undersheriff arrested priest during liturgy. Archbishop excommunicated undersheriff. Judgment in favor of the undersheriff or oder to arrest the archbishop. [10] See also WAALT under Canterbury.

T1304 C: Quare non admisit. Rex v. Archbishop of York. Prebend of Stillington in church of St Peter of York. [11]

M1304 A: Prohibition. Rex v. Archbishop of Canterbury. Presentation to St Oswald, Gloucester. Archbishop had excommunicated the prior and canons of the church. [12]; Related: [13]; [14]; [15]. Prior of St. Oswald v. Robert, archbishop of Canterbury. [16]. Reversal of sentence. [17]

M1304 B: Procedure without prohibition for threatening immunity of chapel of St Martin the Great in London. Rex v. Master John de Sancta Fide. [18]

M1304 C: Prohibition. Abbot of St Augustine, Canterbury v. Geoffrey, abbot of Faversham. taking of tithes in kind from Selling. [19]; [20]

H1305 A: Quare non admisit. Rex v. Master Walter de Thorp, dean of the consistory of the Arches, London & Master Gilbert de Middelton, concerning the advowson of Dodderhill, Worcestershire; the king had recovered that advowson against Robert, archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of Worcester, the Prior of Worcester, and John de Middelton cleric. [21]

H1305 B: Illegal appeals to Rome. Rex v. Gilbert de Segrave, archdeacon of Oxford. Mainperned for parliament. [22]

M1309 A: Complicated presentment to St Leonard's Hospital in Chesterfield. [23]; [24]

H1315 A: Prohibition against creation of a vicarage that would reduce the value of a prior royal appointment to Llanbadarn-Vawr. Rex v. Bishop of St. David. [25]; see [26]

H1315 B: Rex v. Walter bishop of Exeter. Prohibition against violation of the liberty of St Berian chapel, Cornwall. [27]

E1316 A: Protection of prior of Malton in his return from parliament. [28]

T1316 A: Violation of prohibition that protected the immunity of the king's chapel of Bosham, Sussex, seemingly particularly in regard to the choir. [29]