Talk:Brothertoft

message: I added the context tag because I am not entirely sure which country the Church is in. I think, either the UK or the Republic of Ireland, but I'm really not sure. Thanks V. Joe 06:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Article clarifies this now. - Sitush (talk) 15:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Context tag

message: Do any of the following relate to Brothertoft? I have a source which suggests that they do but am unwilling to include without some sort of confirmation as it could just be a formatting issue in the book.
*Hall Pits
*Pepper Gowt
*Copping Syke
*Ferry Corner
*Great Beets
Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjoining land 

message: The source provided does not say that Brothertoft passed to Thomas Pelham-Holles on the death of the Duke of Newcastle. It says that much of the Duke's lands passed to Pelham-Holles. I think that we need to remove this ASAP unless someone has better evidence. There is some evidence that in fact it went to Sir Sampson Gideon, not Pelham-Holles. Thoughts? - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I have squared the circle as Pelham-Holles was also a duke of Newcastle. I've left a clarification tag there. This entire area needs work, as you have said. I'm really not happy with the website source for Pelham-Holles inheriting the land because it does not in fact say that directly and it also doesn't say that P-H inherited all of his uncle's lands, so Brothertoft may have been an exception. Hopefully there will be something more concrete somewhere.- Sitush (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

text: Woah. Where did that come from? I'm confused. If you're getting pestered by the signing thing, that is being generated by a robot/automated program - it is not a real person. You'll get the hang of signing and then the msgs will stop. - Sitush (talk) 22:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thomas Pelham-Holles 

message: Wow, you two are smokin' on this article!  I'm not sure how I can help, but anything I can do, please let me know!!!  Being from the states, I'm not as familiar with the sources of information for this article - but happy to do what I can. --CaroleHenson (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need help? 

message: I'm not sure how fine to split hairs here. 
If you do a books.google.com search on: "Thomas Gee" 1856 school Brothertoft (the best criteria it seems), then there are three results.  One said he built and supported the school.  Another said he was a patron (I think to the Sunday School).  
For the moment to get rid of the "needs citation" message, I'm going to remove the "free school" part. But if someone can make sense of the proper way to word this and use the proper notation, that would be great!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You've worked further down the article than I have. Yours is a sensible move. I'll dig into it. "Patron" is a term of multiple purpose in the UK in this sort of context. A founder often was also referred to as patron, to be succeeded by later patrons who act as a figurehead/focal point. But, equally, a patron could be the figurehead at the outset rather than also the founder. It needs some work, so good call. - Sitush (talk) 23:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free School 

message: Well, in some ways I am disappointed that there wasn't at least one. - Sitush (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem not to be using 4 tildes because if you did then it would show (talk) after your user name. Are you using the ~ character, four times with no spaces between them? Or you could use the little pen in the editing menu, fourth from left. - Sitush (talk) 16:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:   def using four tildes. Not sure why this is happening. If it happens this time Ill start using the pen. Panderoona 18:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Tilde is the shift-# on most UK keyboards. I do not understand why this is not working for you. Never come across a problem with it before. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: its very strange isnt it? Im pressing the pencil this time lets see what happens. --Panderoona 19:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: SORTED - went into prefs and saw something was checked against signature so I hit revert to default and now its working. So if you ever come up against it again Sitush youll know what the idiot newbie did wrong lololol :) Panderoona (talk) 19:31, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lunatics 

message: The article currently cites the school as being built in 1856. I do not think that this was the first school because both a daily and a Sunday school are recorded at least as early as 1851.
I am also concerned about Gee's Educational Foundation as nowadays it services the East Riding (specifically Bishop Burton), not Lincs. Furthermore, there is speculation  on ancestry/genealogy sites, none of which are reliable sources. The number of Google hits (general, books, scholar and news) is minimal and I would have expected it to be mentioned in the older histories, as indeed they mention Gee founding a bank in Boston (Gee, Wise & Gee). This could easily be a dud & I think that unless something turns up sharp-ish then it needs to be removed.
Finally, "In 1881 a school with house attached was built, which later closed and was converted into the Parish Hall" is uncited and vague. I presume that there must be a parish council if there is a parish hall, but without any citation it is going to be removed. - Sitush (talk) 03:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The school was built in 1856 by Thomas & the Misses Gee its referenced repeatedly in Kellys Directories. Exactly when it became a sunday school is unclear, as well as when it closed/disappeared. Kellys also cites a school built in 1881 by the Board with house attached which corresponds with the appearance of the village hall - and not with any other local building. Henry Gee, Thomas father, was the man who founded the bank in Boston, although Thomas was a banker too as is referenced in the directories.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs) 07:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is: why is the directory more reliable than the book? We have a discrepancy & when this happens it has to be fixed - we cannot leave something just because it has been there for a week (or a year, or whatever). As for being referenced repeatedly, well, it wasn't actually referenced to Kelly's at all, although it was referenced to White's. This isn't "having a go" at anyone, it's just working out what to do. Something is broken and it needs fixing, simple as. - Sitush (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

text: you mentioned on the main page and elsewhere both Brothertoft and Fishtoft being referred to as "Toft". There is also Toft Next Newton and Toft near Bourne in Lincolnshire. A Toft is a piece of high ground. And I know where in Brothertoft it is but doubt I could prove it. The whole of Brothertoft lies in the fields surrounding the B1192 north of Toft Tunnel and south of Langrick. It extends as far east as Antons Gowt and west towards the North Forty Foot Bank. But the TOFT in Brothertoft stretches approx from the site of the church in a rough elongated S (how it was described to me but I have seen refs to it offline and its a bit like a nazi SS shape but with only one S) stretching north towards the old river bed on the west side of the B1192. Where my grandad lived, and other farmsteads are today - is to the right of the B1192 and flat land, an area which would once have been under water. Panderoona (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  School & the Gee family 

message: I still wasn't feeling well today, so I looked at the links you too provided and have this summary so far:
* John, prior of Sempringham. v. William Crathorn: Detention of deeds relating to a messuage in Brothertoft leased to defendant by complainant's predecessor, Robert Emesley.: Lincoln. Covering dates 1504-1515 Held by The National Archives, Kew Chancery pleadings addressed to William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury as Lord Chancellor. John, Prior
* In 1535 the yearly value of the Prior of Sempringham was £317.  Included lands in Brothertoft and many places in Cambridgeshire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Leicestershire. At that time, John Jordan was the Prior of Sempringham. The last notes priors (Roger) and (Agnes Rudd and Margery Marbury) occur 1538  From: 'Houses of the Gilbertine order: The priory of Sempringham', A History of the County of Lincoln: Volume 2 (1906), pp. 179-187.  Date accessed: 18 April 2011. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=3802 1535
* 18 Sep 1538 Robert Holgate, chaplain to Cromell, with Roger the Prior (Prior of 1538) and 16 canons surrendered prior of Sempringham. Although the timing is unclear, in 1538 Agens Rudd and Margery Marbury were prioresses surrender
:On page 387 of the book it mentions that peoples of Brothertoft raised geese for their feathers- and treated them with great honor. A man’s qualification for parochial office was based upon the number of geese he owned.
* Soon after (1553) Robert Carre of Sleaford purchased the manor of Asgarby and the smaller one of Boughton connected with it, which last he sold to Sir Edward Dymoke ; but he subsequently became re-possessed of it, and left the whole, together with ap- purtenances in Monkthorpe and Brothertoft to his cousin, Robert Carre Robert Carre
:I'm confused by this.  If the first Robert Carre became "repossessed of Asgarby" how can it be left to his cousin?  In what way would Brothertoft itself be an appurtenance?
* Tellers' bill HILL 23/225 1583  Date: 6 May. Paid by: Robert Carre, esq. For what reason: arrears of manor of Brothertoft. Amount: 5. 0. 0. Clerk: R. Taillor. Robert Carre
: Does payment of "arrears of the manor" mean that taxes or other payments were past due?
*Edward Carre to the commissioners of Sewers. Dunsby Spalding Sewers/460/3/16&17 15 June 1614 His Brothertoft tenants have been charged with the diking of part of South Ea as commoners in Holland fen, though this was previously done only by the towns of the Haut Huntre. Referred to six commissioners: sir Charles Egerton, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Bawtree, Mr. Bacon, Mr. Middlecot, Mr. Barfoote, to be done upon Saturday next in the afternoon.  These documents are held at Lincolnshire ArchivesEdward Carre
* 'A book of survey of divers lands being parcell of the possessions of the Right Worshipful Sir Robert Carr, bart, and now the jointure of the Hon Lady the Lady Ann Carr. Taken in March and April 1619 by Thomas Goodwin, gent HA 507/3/226 1619 [Lands in manors of Dunsby, Brauncewell, Roxam, Catley Abbey, Walcott, Digby, Monkthorpe, Burrowe-in-the-Marsh, Brothertoft, Boston, East and West Skirbeck, Wiberton, Frampton and Armtree, Whaplode, Holbeach, Fleet, Gedney, Long Sutton, Tidd St Mary] These documents are held at Suffolk Record Office, Bury St Edmunds Branch http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=174-ha507&cid=3-41-3#3-41-3
* Brothertoft previously called Goosetoft with a poem.  Surrounded by the Fens of Lincolnshire. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ShAHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA411
I think this all boils down to: Brothertoft was part of the prior of Sempringham until 18 Sep 1538 when it was surrendered as part of the dissolution of the monastaries.  By 1553 Robert Carre of Sleaford owned Brothertoft, which was left to his cousin Robert Carre upon his death.  A Robert Carre was in possession of Brothertoft in 1583. Edward Carre was the owner in 1614. In 1619 Sir Robert Carr, bart, and Lady Anne Carre were owners of Brothertoft. Is that right?
:Seems like a fair amount of synthesis but on the right track. I'll dig through it but most is stuff that I've already seen. NB: 
*qualification in geese is not reliable. It is a one-liner from Dickens's popular magazine, the successor to Household Words & seems to be relegated to a footnote in the history. 
*the Goosetoft poem is also not reliable due to poetic license (this is explained in one source I read a couple of days back) 
*the old problem that the NA catalogues are not suitable as references for significant points, although handy as a bolster to other references. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the synthesis - yes I thought I'd start with the great info already provided in this talk page - and then I'll fill in relationships, etc. like Panderonna showed from there.  More to come.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Ann, I saw your initial comment.  I'm just a little confused by it.  Isn't it clear that all we're doing is finding citations for the information that you provided?  I'm confused.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope tomorrow, being a new day, you can come look at the article with a fresh perspective.  I hadn't said it, but I thought it was a great collaborative effort:  your great story, passion and background info -- Sitush's ability to sort through information and develop a reputable, verifiable article -- and me having no UK background but the love of a story jumping in from time to time.  If we are going to see things very differently, then so be it, it's what makes life interesting:  us all coming from different experiences and perspectives.  It sounds as if you're hurt and for whatever I've done to make you feel that way, I apologize.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: By this point with Sitish and Panderoona's info:  I think we've provided citations where needed, correlated the activities in the Carre family, etc.  So, I will respectively take a break.  If either of you, though, find something to tighten up, please leave a message on my talk page.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

text: The only point was that, as it says just below where I'm typing in the edit window "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" not whether what you said was truthful or not.  You may be right in that Wikipedia might not be the right place for the type of writing that you'd like to do.  You may want to have a webpage or blog where you descibe what you know to be true, like an essay. Or you may want to hook up with a Lincolnshire site that someone hosts and build up information there.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info so far... 

message: I have removed erroneous information from Marratt regarding Sampson Gideon/Eardley owning Brothertoft. 
I have read the Final Concord Agreement between Sir Charles Frederick and The Duke of Newcastle/Katherine Pelham widow of Henry Pelham, there was no Sampson Gideon/Eardley involved in ownership of the manor of Brothertoft. It passes direct from the Pelham-Holles family to the Frederick family. I have found nothing online anywhere to support Marratts claim, Gideon/Eardley did buy up land in the Bedford Level but not further north in Lincolnshire. 
From my records (and I know this is original research as per wiki rules)but this is fact. Furthermore, records at Surrey History Centre show that Cartwright buys Brothertoft at the back end of 1788 from Thomas Lenox Frederick, son of Sir Charles. 
I can and will cite Betty Brammers book on Brothertoft Parish HIstory tomorrow, as the book is with my parents at the moment and I will need page numbers. But it will back up this research. Panderoona (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Edit