Talk:John Blyth (bishop)

message: The citation is 'that from the list on Master of the Rolls.' Jackiespeel (talk) 22:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not how citations work on wikipedia though. See how other things are referenced. Also, if that's a primary source, you need a secondary source to confirm that the John Blyth on some list is actually the same John Blyth as the subject of this article. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The chap on the MotR list directs here :)
Could the Sainty reference on that page (note 18) be copied over to this article (which is what I meant). Jackiespeel (talk) 10:53, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Assuming that the Sainty ref makes it clear that this is the same Blyth, yes. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Master of the Rolls

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:John Blythe (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 18:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: "John Blyth (or John Blythe)" on this page is described as Archdeacon of Richmond and Craven from 1485 to 1493 with a citation I can't follow. However, the list at Archdeacon of Huntingdon and Wisbech describes a "13 June 1478 – 1493 (res.): John Blyth" and that same person is on the list Archdeacon of Stow and Lindsey "23 August 1477 – 1478 (res.): John Blithe (became Archdeacon of Huntingdon)". Is the attribution of "Archdeacon of Richmond and Craven" correct or are all these the same person? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've corrected the links - British History Online has played silly buggers with their pages again and switched them around - the new link is here with the full entry being "M. John Blithe D.C.L. 1485-1493. Coll. 28 Sept. 1485 (Reg. Rotherham 11 f. 4b). Adm. by proxy 8 Oct. (A.C. 1427- 1504 f. 185), in person 23 July 1487 (ibid. f. 193). Bp. of Salisbury 1493." which proves that the later Bishop of Salisbury is the same as the archdeacon of Richmond. (If for some reason that link doesn't work - navigate to the Religious section of the BHO site, then choose the Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae 1300-1541: volume 6: Northern province (York, Carlisle and Durham) and look for the archdeacons of Richmond section). The list at Archdeacon of Huntingdon and Wisbech is unsourced for the information that John Blyth the bishop and archdeacon of Richmond was the same as the archdeacon of Huntington and Wisbech, and unfortunately, the Fasti for Ely from 1300-1541 does not give that particular archeaconry - see here at British History Online. For that matter - the entry of him being master of the rolls is not secure - because the source given for that does not connect him to the person who became bishop later - see here where the entry in its entirety is "1492 John Blyth May 14". The Fasti for Salisbury 1300-1541 is no help, because the bishops entries do not list prior offices - see here. It's clear that the Archdeacon of Richmond is the same as the bishop, but nothing else is secure. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks - very clear. I've added a couple of tags to the other articles. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  At least some of the portions of fasti not found on BHO are available over at wikisource, and I've cited them sometimes. DBD 15:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Blyth/John Blithe