Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
A number of manuscripts collected by Dr E.G. Millar of London relating mostly to the parish of Snaith in the West Riding of Yorkshire were acquired by H.L. Bradfer-Lawrence of Ripon and are now held by the Yorkshire Archaeological Society. They are for the most part deeds recording land transactions between men - and occasionally women - who were free enough to conduct business outside the confines of a manorial court. Within a few generations such men would be referred to as yeomen. Amongst these records there is clear evidence of the origins of a Godard family with roots in that parish and in particular in the manor of Cowick.
Some of the documents are precisely dated not just to a year but to a day; others are catalogued no closer than the century. Snaith lies near the confluence of the Don and Aire rivers. Abstracts of the documents are accessible through www.a2a.org.uk; the following notes and document reference numbers are based on these abstracts.
The story starts with two documents (MD335/5/108 and MD335/5/115) dated to the C13th referring to Thomas son of Godard. In one he sells property and in the other (where he is named as Thomas son of Godard de Mora, i.e. of the moor) he is a witness. In this sort of context Godard is a Christian name rather than a surname.
A document (MD335/5/97) dated simply C14th names John son of Thomas Godard [of Couwicke] as a witness. Some of the other witnesses named in it are also found in precisely dated documents ranging from 1296 to 1311. It seems, therefore, that this document is no later than early C14th and it would not be inconsistent with the related documents if it were as early as the 1290s. It is unlikely that Thomas could be other than the Thomas of the earlier documents and that the epithet "son of Godard" has become a surname. It should be stressed that the use of a surname is very unusual so early at this location; the norm is to see epithets giving the abode, occupation or father's name and in some cases the clerk adds the father's occupation or father's name where clarity is needed.
Further documents are more securely dated to the C13th. Two documents dated to 1 Apr 1296 (MD335/5/125) and 5 Apr 1299 (MD335/5/112) list a John Godard de Mora as a witness (these are, in fact, two of the documents which include witnesses also listed in MD335/5/97) and another document dated simply to the C13th (MD335/5/113) also lists a John Godard and this document also lists witnesses who are also listed in documents of 1292 and 1294.
The remaining documents naming John Godard are of the C14th. Most are a number of precisely dated documents naming John Godard as a witness the latest being two documents of 22 May 1327 (MD335/5/55 and MD335/5/56).
My prefered interpretion is that all these references to John were to the same person. The form "John son of Thomas" may well have been the earliest surviving mention of him (although it suggests that MD335/5/97 is a few years older than catalogued)zand thereafter the name "John Godard" was sufficient to identify him. In this case Godard had become not just a surname but an inherited surname by 1296. This gives us three individuals in three generations including the eponymous Godard. This interpretation suggests that Thomas had died by the mid-1290s as there seems no indication in the collection as a whole of an overlap in time between father and son as witnesses.
I can't exclude the possibility that some of the earlier John Godard references might have been to a brother of Thomas and even the possibility that some of the later references to a son of such a brother. Such interpretations give us four individuals in three generations or five individuals in three generations. However the lack of effort by the clerks to make distinctions between multiple contemporaneous Johns argues against such interpretations.
My prefered interpretation is the simplest reconstruction in terms of number of individuals and lines which it supposes. It is the basis of estimates of numbers given below.
In a document (MD335/5/164) of 6 Oct 1328 we find that a John Godard of Cowick [John 1] has died and his widow, Eva is disposing of the messuage she has inherited in dower. After John is named initially there are two explicit references to him as "the said John". However the messuage is described as laid "between the toft of John Godard and William de Houk". It is not clear whether this is another reference to John 1 or whether it introduces another, living John Godard.
In a document (MD335/5/99) dated to c. 1335 one of the witnesses [John 2] is "John son of John Godard".
My interpretation is to identify John 1 as the son of Thomas and the John Godard who is the subject of all the dated references prior to these documents and John 2 as his son. We now have five named individuals (including Eva) in four generations. The John who held the toft could be either the father or the son. MD335/5/99 is the only explicit reference to the son but other documents, including one (MD335/5/163) in which a John Godard is selling land, dated simply to the C14th are ambiguous.
Three documents of 1335 (MD335/5/100), 1337 (MD335/5/137) and 1338(MD335/5/165) are all witnessed by a Thomas Godard. He could be another son of John 1 or possibly a son of John 2. This gives us six named individuals in four or five generations.
Finally there is a document (MD335/5/106) dated to 1351 also witnessed by a Thomas Godard. The family has clearly survived the first onslaught of the Black Death. It's possible that a Godard living at this date could still be the son of John 1 a little over 20 years after his father's death. It's also possible, however, that the gap of 13 years after MD335/5/165 indicates that this is another Thomas of a later generation so that we could now have the seventh individual in five or six generations.
MD335/5/106 is the last document precisely dated document of Godards in Cowick. There are none in Snaith in the West Riding Subsidy Roll of 1379 (www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/Misc/SubsidyRolls/YKS/SubsidyRolls1379Index.html). However roll does not list explicitly list Cowick appears to have been preserved in its entirety so it's not clear whether any remaining Godards there have been overlooked or if, had they existed, they would have been listed elsewhere under Snaith. Nevertheless, for later possible mention of this family we need to look elsewhere.
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/goddard/messages/1732.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|