Talk:Craven in the Domesday Book

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 December 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Craven in the Domesday Book is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A few issues

Hi again User:Kildwyke

I've never seen any credible suggestion that Craven ever extended as far west as this article implies. See: Lonsdale Hundred - Thornton in Lonsdale and Burton in Lonsdale imply that Craven was extended to the west prior to Domesday.
I don't think it is correct to suggest that all waste land was a result of the Harrying of the North.
Roger de Poitou owned several castles across northern England but I've never heard of one at Earby before.
A rather massive chunk of the Ribble valley never went to the Percy family. See: Lordship of Bowland, Blackburnshire and / or Honour of Clitheroe.

--Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC) PS Your maps are very impressive :) PPS On a more general Craven history front you should look into Dunoting, if you haven't already. PPPS Do we know why Domesday used the Hundred of Craven and yet afterwards we seem to be back to the Danelaw Staincliffe Wapentake?[reply]

How far did Craven extend in the West

I've never seen any credible suggestion that Craven ever extended as far west as this article implies.--Trappedinburnley

In his book "Conquest, Anarchy & Lordship: Yorkshire 1066-1154" Dalton^[1] writes "its western boundaries at, before and shortly after 1065 are uncertain. It has been proposed that in 1086 Amounderness, Cartmel, Furness, Kendale, Copeland and Lonsdale were attached for administrative convenience. For a discussion of this problem, see

D. M. Palliser, ' An introduction to the Yorkshire Domesday ' in Yorkshire Domesday, ed G.H. Martin and Ann Williams. London, Alecto Historical Editions, 1922. - pp4-5
F. R. Thorn, 'Hundreds and wapentakes ', in Yorkshire Domesday, (see above) - pp55-60
D. Hey, Yorkshire from AD 1000. London 1986 p4
D. R. Roffe. 'The Yorkshire Summary: a Domesday satellite'. Northern History, A Review of the History of the North of England and the Borders, vol 27 (1991). - p257. "

"What is reasonably certain is that the 'shiring' of Lancashire, Cumberland and Westmorland only took place after 1086. Cumberland may have been shired in 1092, there was a sheriff of Westmorland by 1129, and a sheriff of Lancashire by 1164. When this 'shiring' occurred these boundaries remained relatively stable until 1974." ^[1]

However, and in my opinion, if the Administers of the King's Government wrote in their Domesday Book that those areas were then in Craven then they truly were in Craven. Unlike modern times, in those days, whatever The Man said was right truly was the law. And that is all my page purports to be, a record of what they wrote in the Domesday Book.Kildwyke (talk) 22:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't have access to your sources, are you sure they arn't talking about why those areas where included in Yorkshire rather than Craven? I've seen similar discussions on why the huundreds between the Ribble and Mersey where included with Cheshire. I did find this [1], on p.29 it says that it must of ended with the Gindleton complex (Lordship of Bowland). Possibly Ingleton, Austwick, Heldetone, Clapham, and Bentham counted in Craven in 1086. My gut feeling is that the "boundary unkown" line on the map should broadly follow the pre-1974 Lancs / Yorks border--Trappedinburnley (talk) 23:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Dalton was rferring to articles about why areas such as Amounderness were included in Yorkshire

I will add summary of the above to the articleKildwyke (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The King owned lands in Lonsdale which are definitely marked as being in Craven, Yorkshire on folio 301v. Also Hugh fitzBaldric owned Holker marked on folio 327v as being in Craven; and all the authorities I’ve seen agree that’s the Holker in Cartmel Kildwyke (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion for academics to argue that some areas were only included in Yorkshire for admin convenience is ignoring that fact that county boundaries change. In fact in 1086 there was only one county in the North of England and it was Yorkshire. And that is quite correct, not just a convenince, because a county is attributed to its capital and Danelaw was administered from York, hence, by definition of County, all of Danelaw can be called Yorkshire. To say that Amounderness, Cartmel, Kendal and Lonsdale were not in Yorkshire is no more the truth than saying Bashall and Waddington were never in Yorkshire. It’s like saying Barnoldswick and Gisburn or Earby were never in Yorkshire just because they haven’t been since 1974.Kildwyke (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I wouldn't want to pretend that I know the exact details of the formation of the old county of Lancashire, I too am a little puzzled as to why some authors don't want to accept that it was created from parts of Cheshire and Yorkshire. I hadn't realised that Lonsdale wasn't a hundred at Domesday. Open Domesday attributes just about everything in what would become Lonsdale to Amonderness, with the exception of Holker and Birkby in Cartmell. This certainly seems like a puzzle worthy of further investigation. Also I've noticed another error on your map.--Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gisburn should be practically on the Ribble, it looks like you've confused it with Earby maybe. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct it was the Earby dot I had visible. I have remedied it. You will probably have to refresh the page on your computer to see the update. I have also removed my conjectural boundary lines as it is up to the viewer to decide where they were. Thank you for you help in improving the mapKildwyke (talk) 14:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I promised I have written a section about this debate and added it to the Article Kildwyke (talk) 17:25, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roger de Poitou's castle in Craven

Roger de Poitou owned several castles across northern England but I've never heard of one at Earby before.Trappedinburnley

I remember that saw somewhere online that a castle near Earby could be de Poitou's, but now I cant find it! It was some vestigal archeological remains near Earby. But maybe it was pure conjecture that it was his in the sense of a lodging. I'll search my notes Kildwyke (talk) 23:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I find there isn't a castle near Earby. Was I confusing it with Clitheroe castle? no cant be for that was De Lacy. I will delete any mention of his castles in this articleKildwyke (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to the "castellatu Rogerii pictaviensis" in Clitheroe Castle is interesting. After a brief look, I've not been able to determine which other castle it might refer to. So there might be a castle somewhere in Craven that was his. On the subject of Roger, Bowland certainly seems to be part of Craven hundred. As Manorial was fond of writing on lots of articles "The manors within the Liberty were Slaidburn (Newton-in-Bowland, West Bradford, Grindleton, Knowlmere, Waddington, Easington, Bashall Eaves, Mitton, Withgill (Crook), Leagram, Hammerton and Dunnow (Battersby)" and the mysterious "Bogeuurde". --Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not all Ribble went to Percy

A rather massive chunk of the Ribble valley never went to the Percy family. See: Lordship of Bowland, Blackburnshire and / or Honour of Clitheroe. --Trappedinburnley

Thank you. I have modified the sentence to "and many lands in the Ribble Valley to the House of Percy" Kildwyke (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ ^a ^b Dalton, Paul (2002) [1994]. Conquest, Anarchy & Lordship: Yorkshire 1066-1154 (new ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521524644.

Bad formatting and misplaced intent

The formatting of this page is terrible, and Wikipedia is not intended to present raw data. This page needs severely curtailed. 50.37.121.232 (talk) 23:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rename / Move Page

As Domesday Book doesn't require 'the' before it, I suggest that this page is renamed / moved to 'Craven in Domesday Book'. As a new(ish) editor I didn't want to do this before checking. Random56653 (talk) 13:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Dalton-1] Dalton, Paul (2002) [1994]. Conquest, Anarchy & Lordship: Yorkshire 1066-1154 (new ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521524644.

[1]