Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 25, 1437-42

JOHN SKELTON SON OF JOHN SKELTON

614 Writ de etate probanda. ‡ ?10 October 1441. [Bate]. Regarding his inheritance as son and heir of John Skelton who held of the king in chief.

CUMBERLAND. Proof of age. Carlisle. ?23 September 1441 [ms worn]. [Curwen].

The jurors swear that John son of John was born at Branthwaite and baptised in the church there on the Sunday before Midsummer 8 ‪Henry V [23 June 1420]. They know for the following reasons that John son of John is aged 21 and more. John Skelton, esquire , 50, knows because Nicholas Horne ’s stable at Branthwaite, near the chapel, collapsed and two of his horses were killed. On the Sunday before Midsummer last, 21 years had elapsed since the stable collapsed. Thomas del More, esquire , 46, was at Branthwaite on the Sunday of the birth. He bought a messuage from John Guype and was delivered of the seisin on the same day. William Louther of Rose, 46, was at Branthwaite on the Thursday following John’s birth. There was a great bear chase and one of the bears broke the right shin of John More , then William’s servant. William Osmonderlawe , 47, was at Branthwaite on the day of the birth, when Joan Baron , William’s stepmother, was espoused to Gilbert de Hoton in the church. William Dykes , 60, was at Branthwaite on the Monday following John’s birth and bought a horse-load (summagium) of hay from Henry Vessy for 20d. He loaded his horse with the hay that day and, in returning to his house at Hutton Roof, the horse suddenly fell from the bridge at the end of the vill of Branthwaite, and drowned. William Coldall , 56, says that John Hyve of Carleton, clerk , rode by Branthwaite on the Friday in the second week after John’s birth. By misfortune, he fell from his horse, broke his neck, and died. Thomas Stanley , 53, then king’s collector, was making his way to London in the day of John’s birth, with £40 in collected moneys to render his account. He was robbed of the money in the wood by Stamford and, in returning to his house at Hutton-in-the-Forest, John son of John was born and baptised at Branthwaite. John Blenerhasset , 49, says that John his first-born son was professed as a canon in the abbey of St Mary , Carlisle, on the Wednesday after the birth. John Moncastre , 48, says that William Moncastre , his father, died at Bolton on the Sunday following the birth of John son and John, and was buried there on the same day. Thomas More , 54, says that Thomas Barnabe was elected prior of the said abbey [St Mary’s, Carlisle] on the Thursday following the birth of John. Thomas Aglionby , 50, was making his way to Canterbury on pilgrimage in the week before John’s birth. In returning to his house by Branthwaite [followed by erasure and gap in writing] there, and John son of John was born and baptised on that Sunday. William Luffe , 60, was impleaded by Richard Hunt in the king’s court at Westminster by a bond for 100s. and, on the octave of John’s birth, was condemned for non-appearance. He says that he was then at Branthwaite and on the same Sunday [followed by erasure and gap in writing], John was born and baptised there.

C 139/107/42 mm. 1–2

Thomas Curwen was escheator 4 November 1440–3 November 1441, and the proof was taken by him. The writ, however, was endorsed by ‘Thomas Curwen, coroner’. The writ records that John Skelton , father, held in chief of ‪ Henry VI , but the proof of age records that he held in chief of Henry V. This suggests that John, father, died during the reign of ‪ Henry V (1413–22) but his date of death was 19 June 1440, as recorded in 407. The regnal year is almost illegible but the date seems to be ‘Saturday before Michaelmas 20 Henry VI’. This translates as 23 September 1441. The entry continues but makes little sense: ‘and on the said Sunday, in the presence of the coroner [followed by gap and erasure of ?one word, not over-written], John son of John was born and baptised there’. The ms continues: ‘and on the same day [ms erased and over-written], John was born and baptised at Branthwaite’. The ms of the proof of age is full of erasures, with at least one per entry. The first couple are over-written, but those later in ms are not. This means that some entries don’t make sense.