Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	edward_n	king_n	richard_n	4,511	5	9.3432	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A36230	Honors pedigree, or, The [se]veral fountaines of gentry [be]ing a treatise of the distinct degrees of the nobilitie of this kingdome, with their rights and priviledges, according to the lawes and customes of England / [by] that juditious lawyer, Sir John Dodoredge ...	Doddridge, John, Sir, 1555-1628.	1652 (1652)	Wing D1793; ESTC R37279	103,037	198

apparant of the King of England and of such a King who is heir unto the said Prince Edward And such a first begotten son and heir apparant to the Crown shall inherit the said Dukedom in the life of the said King his father with manner of limitation of estate was short excellent and curious varying from the ordinary Rules of the Common Law touching the framing of any estate of inheritance in fee-simple or fee-tail And neverthelesse by the authority of Parliament a speciall fee-simple iâ— in that onely case made as by judgment may appear in the Book aforesaid and the case thereof fol. 27. and 21 E. 3. 41. b. And ever since that creation the said Dukedom of Cornwall hath been the peculiar inheritance of the Kings eldest son ad supportandum nomen onus bonoris to support the name and weight of that his honourable estate during the king his fathers life so that he is ever Duxnatus non creatus a Duke born not created and the said Duke the very first day of his nativity is presumed and taken to be of full and perfect age so that he may sue that day for his livery of the said Dukedom and ought of right to obtain the same as well as if he had been full 21 yeers of age And the said Black-Prince was the first Duke in England after the Conquest for though Bracton who made his Book in H. 3. saith Et sunt sub regâ—duces as before appeareth yet that place is to be understood of the ancient kings who were before the conquest for in Mag. Charta which was made in Anno 9 H. 3. we finde not the name of Duke amongst the Peers and Nobles there mentioned For seeing the Norman Kings themselves were Dukes of Normandy for a great while they adorned none with this honour of Duke And the eldest son of every King after this creation was Duke of Cornwall and so allowed As for example Henry of Munmouth eldest son of H. 4. and Henry of Winsoâ— eldest son of H. 5. and Edw. of Westminster the first son of Ed. 4. and Arthur of Winchester first son of H. 7. and Edward of Hampton first son of H. 8. but Richard of Burdeaux who was the first son of the Black-Prince was not Duke of Cornwall by force of the said creation for albeit after the death of his father he was heir apparant to the Crown yet because he was not the first begotten son of a King of England for his father dyed in the life time of king Ed. 3. the said Richard was not within the limitation of the grant and creation by authority of Parliament made in the 11 yeer of king Edward above mentioned And therefore to supply that defect in the 5. yeer of Ed. 3. he was created Duke of Cornwall by a speciall Charter Elizabeth eldest daughter to king Edw. 4. was not Dutches of Cornwal for she was the first begotten daughter of king Edw. 4. but the limitation is to the first begotten son Henry the 8. was not in the life of his father king H. 7. after the death of his eldest Brother Arthur Duke of Cornwall by force of the said creation for albeit he was sole heir apparant to the king yet he was not his eldest begotten son Cooks 8 part 29. b. and 30. a. And the opinion of Stamford a learned Judge hath been that he shall have within his Dukedom of Cornwall the kings Prerogatives because it is not severed from the Crown after the form as it is given for none shall be inheritour thereof but the kings of the Realm For example whereas by the Common Law if a man hold divers Mannors or other lands and toâ—ements of severall Lords all by knights service some part by priority and ancient Feoffment and other lands by posterity and by a latter Feoffment and the Tenant so seized dyeth his son and heir within age In this case the custody of Wardship of the body and his marriage may not be divided among all the Lords but one of them onely shall have right unto it because the body of a man is intire and the Law doth say That the Lord of whom some part of those lands be holden by priority and by the same tenure of Chivalry shall have it except the king be any of the Lords for them though the Tenant did purchase that land last yet after his death the king shall bee preâ—erred before all or any other the Lords of whom the Tenant did hold by priority And so shall the Duke of Cornwall in the same case have the same Prerogative if his Tenant dye holding of him but by posterity of Feoffment for any tenure of his Dutchie of Cornwall although the said Duke is not seized of any particular estate whereof the reversion remaineth in the king for the Prince is seized in fee of his Dukedom as before is said Iohn of Gaunt the fourth son of king Edward 3. did take to wife Blanch who was daughter and heir to Henry Duke of Lancaster who had issue Henry afterwards king of England so that the said Dutchy of Lancaster did come unto the said Henry by discent from the part of his mother and being a subject he was to observe the Common Law of the Land in all things concerning his Dutchie For if he would depart in Fee with any part thereof hee must make livery and seizen or if hee had made a Lease for life reserving rent with a reentery for default of payment and the rent happen to be behind the Duke might not enter unlesse hee doe make a demand or if he had aliened any part thereof whilest he was with age hee might defeat the purchaser for that cause and if hee would grant a reversion of any estate for life or yeares in being there must also be Attornment or else the grant doth not take effect But after that hee had deposed King Richard the second and had assumed upon him the Royall estate and so had conjoyned his naturall bodie in the bodie Politique of the King of this Realme and so was become King Then the possessions of the Duchie of Lancaster were in him as King and not as Duke For the name of Duke being not so great as the name of a King was drowned by the name of King and by the State Royall in him who was Duke for the King cannot bee a Duke within his owne Realme but out of his Realme hee may And likewise the name of the Duchie and all the Franchizes Liberties and Jurisdictions of the same when they were in the hands of him who had the Crowne and Jurisdiction Royall were gone by thâ— Common Law and extinct for the greater doth distinguish the lesse and after those times the possessions of the Dutchie of LANCASTER would not passe from King Henry the fourth but by his Letters Patents under the great Seal of England without livery of seifin and without Attornment and if he make a Lease for life being Duke

King of England as also to our selfe by our Letters Patents doe grant and give licence for us and our heires so much as in us lyeth to the said Edmond to dispose and give all his Manours Lands Tenements and Knights fees with their appurtenances and Advowsons of Churches Abbies and Priories and Hospitalls which he holdeth of us in chiefe to whom he pleaseth To have and to hold to him and his heires for us and our heires by the service thereof for ever By which Grant the said Edmond gave all his Lands and Tenements to one William sonne of John Deyncourt and to his heires of his body comming And the said Edmond dyed the last yeere of Edward the second and the said William in the time of Edward the third was summoned among other Barons to the Parliament by vertue of the same gift untill his death which was Anno 3. E. 3. It appeareth by divers offices in the time of King Edward the third that John Handlow in the right of Maud his wife was seized of the Mannour of Holgate Acton Burnell c. for terme of her life remainder to Nicolas Handlow alias Burnell sonne to the said Maud and John by a fine in the Court levied and that John Lovell was next heire of the said Maud and her first-borne sonne by her first husband and afterwards the said Nicolas was summoned among other Lords to the Parliament by reason of the fine aforesaid and not the said John Lovel who was next heire Edward Burnell Baron of Holgate Philip Burnell Baron of Holgate Maud Burnell heire to her brother John Lovell the first husband John Lord Lovell Iohn Lord Lovell John Handlow second husband Nicolas Handlow Baron of Holgate Hugh Handlow alias Burnell Baron of Holgate Thomas de Beauchamp the elder Earle of Warwick by a fine levied 18. E. 3. entailed the Mannour and Castle of Warwicke with divers other possessions to himselfe for terme of his life the remainder whereof to Guy his eldest sonne and to the heires males of his body issuing for want of such heires the remainder to come to Thomes Beauchamp brother to the foresaid Guy and to his heires males of his body issuing c. And afterwards the said Gâ—y died without heires male of his body leaving two daughters and heires living afterward the said Earle dyed and the said Thomas the sonne entred into the Castle and Mannour aforesaid with other the premisses and was Earle of Warwick by reason of the entaile aforesaid notwithstanding that Katharine daughter of Guy and next heire to the said Thomas the elder was living 30. yeers after his death Thomas Beauchampe Earl of Warwick Guy de Beauchampe first son obiit ante patrem 30. E. 3 Katharine lived in 21. R. 2 Elizabeth Tho. de Beauchampe Earle of Warwicke by reason of the entail obiit anno 1. H. 4 Rich. Beauchamp Earl of Warwick obiit 17. H. 6 William Beauchamp de Beauchamp L. of Aberganey obiit 12. H. 4 Richard de Beauchamp Earl of Warwicke obiit 9. H. 5 Richard Earle of Arundell by a fine 21. E. 3. entailed the Castle Towne and Mannor of Arundell with other Lands to him and to his heires Males begotten of the body of Ellenor his wife By vertue of which entaile John Lord Matrovers Earle of Arundell after the decease of Thomas then Earle which died without heire Male although the sisters of the said Thomas possessed divers Lands and honors of the which the said Thomas died seised in Fee simple was Earle of Arundell Richard Earle of Arundell Richard Earle of Arundell obiit anno 21. R. 2 Thomas Earle of Arundell obiit anno 3. H. 5 Elizabeth married to Tho. Mowbray Duke Norfolk Jane Lady of Abergany Married to Lewthall John Arundell Knight Lord Matrovers John Arund Lord Matrovers obiit 6. H. 4 Io. Arund L. Matrovers obiit 9. H. 5 Io. E of Arun. by reason of the entail Thomas Lord Barkley was seised in his demesne as of fee of the Castle of Barkley and Mannour c. and a fine levied in the Kings Court 23 E. 3. of the aforesaid Castle Mannour c. to him for terme of his life remainder to Morrice his sonne and to the heires males of his body issuing with other remainders as aforesaid the which said Morrice had issue Thomas Lord Barkley and Iames Barkley Knight which Iames dyed in the life of his brother leaving Iames his sonne and heire living After the said Thomas Lord Barkley died Anno 5. H. 5. leaving Elizabeth his daughter and heir married to Richard Earle of Warwick after whose death Iames his Nephew on the brothers side entred into the Lands Castles and rem ' aforesaid by virtue of the entaile and was summoned among the Barons to the Parliament as Baron of Barkley 9. H. 5. which Elizabeth died in 1. H. 6. Tho. Lord Barkley Morrice Lo Barkley Tho. Lord Barkley Eliz. married to Rich. Earle of Warwick Sir Ia. Barkley died before his brother Iames Lo. Barkley by reason of the entaile Thomas Lord De la ware died seised in his demesne as of fee taile to himselfe and to the heires males of his body issuing by reason of a fine levied in the time of his ancestors of the Barony De la ware with divers other lands in other counties and died 5. H. 6. without heires of his body and Reignold West Knight of the halfe blood was next heire by reason of the entaile aforesaid and was summoned to the Parliament by the name of Reignold Lord De la ware Knight although Iohn Griffith was heire generall of the aforesaid Thomas De la ware being of the whole blood as appeareth by the genealogie ensuing Iohn Lord Delaware son of Roger. Iohn Lord Delaware Roger Lord Delaware Elisabeth daughter to Adam L. Wels. Iohn Lord De la ware died without issue Thomas Lord Dela ware died without issue Elisabeth daughter to the Lord Mowbray hâ—s second wife Iohn Griffin heire generall to the Lord Delaware Sir Reignold West Lord De la ware by the entail Katharine married to Nicolas Latimer Katharine married to Griffin Iohan married to Tho West Knight John de Vere Earle of Oxford seised in his demesne as of Fee taile to him and his heires Males of his body issuing of the honour and county of Oxford with divers other Lands Anno 18. H. 8. died without heires of his body and his three sisters were his next heires generall but Iohn de Vere his next heire Male as appeareth was Earle of Oxford by reason of the said entaile and none of the three sisters obtained Dignity Richard de Vere Earle of Oxford died 4. H. 5. Iohn de Vere Earle of Oxford deed 1. E. 4. John de Vere Earle of Oxford died without issue 4. H. 8. George de vere Knight Iohn de Vere Earl of Oxfo died without issue 18. H. 8. Eliz. married to Sir Antho. Wingfield Knight Ursula married to Edm. Knightley Esq Dorothy married to Nevill Sir Robert de Vere

signified unto the late Queene upon the Petition oâ— the sister and heire of Gregory late Lord Dacres deceased may appeare Moreover in the same Pedegree of the said Lord Dacres it is expressed that Thomas sometimes Lord Dacres had issue Thomâ—s his eldest son Ralph his second sonne and Humphrey his third sonne Thomas the eldest dyed in the life time of his Father having Issue Ioan his daughter and heire who was marryed unto Sir Richard Fines Knight And after Thomas Lord Dacres her Grandfather and Father unto the said Sir Ralph and Humphrey dyed After whose death Henry 6. by his Letters Patents bearing date at Westminster 7. Novem. Anno 7. regni reciting the said Peâ—egree and Marriage doth by his Lettâ—rs Pattents accept declare and repute the said Richard Fines to be Lord Dacres and one of the Barons of his Realme But afterward in the timâ— of Edw 4. the said Humphrey Dacres after the attaindor of the said Ralph and himselfe by an Act of Parliament which was in 1. Ed. 4. and after the death of the said Ralph and after the reversall of the same Act by another Act 12. Edw. 4. the said Humphrey made challenge unto the said Barony and to divers Lands of the said Thomas his Father whereupon both parties after their title had been considered in Parliament submitted themselves unto the Arbiâ—rement of King Edw. 4. and entred into Bond each â—o other for the performance thereof Whereupon the said King in his award under his Privie seale bearing date at Westminster 8. April Anno regni 13. did award that the said Rich Fines in the right of Ioan his wife and the Heires of his body lawfully begotten should be reputed had named and called Lord Dacres and that the said Richard Fines and the Heires of his body by the said Ioane begotten should keepe have and use the same state and place in every Parliament as the said Thomas Dacres Knight late Lord Dacres had used kept c. that the heires of the body of the said Thomas acres Knight late Lord Dacres lawfully begotten should have and â—old to them their Heites the Mannor of Holbech And furthermore the said King did award on the other part that the said Humphrey Dacres Knight and the Heires males of the said Thomas late Lord Dacres should be reputed had named and called the L. Dacres of Gillesland And that he and the heires males of the said Thomas then late Lord Dacres should have use and keepe the place in Parliament next adioyning beneath the said place which the said Rich Fines Knight Lord Dacres then had and occupied and that the heires of the body of the said Ioan his wife should have and occupie And that the Heires males of the said Thomas Dacres late L. Dacres should have to them to the heires males of their bodies begotten the Mannor of Jothington c. And so note that the name of the ancient Barony namely Gile sland remained unto the Heire male unto whom the land was entailed Moreover this is specially observed if any Baron by writ doe dy having none other issue then Female and that by some speciall entail or other assurance there be an heire male which doth enioy all or agreat part of the lands possessions and inheritances of such Barons deceased the Kings of this Realme have used to call to the Parliament by writ as Baron such here male omitting the Husband or issuâ— male of such heire female and this also appeareth by a notable controversie in the time of Henry 7. betweene Sir Robert Willoughby Lord Brooke and Richard Lord Latimer for the Barony of Latimer which in effect was The said Lord Brooke did challenge the Barony of Latimer as cosen and Heire to Elizabeth his great grandmother who was sister and heire to Iohn Nevill Lord Latimer who died without issue and hereupon exhibited a Petition to Henry 7. in Parliament whereto Richard then Lord Latimer was called to answer because he then enjoyed the said title and dignity The said Richard Lord Latimer by his answer did shew that it was true that after the death of the said Iohn Nevill Lord Latimer dying without issue the said Elizabeth was the sister and next heire and married unto Sir Thomas Willloughby Knight second son of the Lord VVilloughby but Henry 6. for that the said Iohn Nevill was dead without issue and that the next heire was female did therefore call to the Parliament George Nevill Knight second sonne of Ralph Earle of Westmerland to bee Lord Latimer as Cozen and next heire male of the said Iohn Nevillâ— Lord Latimer which George was grandfather of the said Richard Lord Latimer namely Father of Henry Lord Latimer Father of the said Richard In debate of which cause the question now in hand whether a Barony by writ may descend unto the heires females was advisedly considered of by the said King and his Nobility in Parliament and in the end adjudged with the said Richard Lord Latimer which President doth afford us two Iudgements in this point one in the time of Hen. 6. when the writ was directed to the said Sir George Nevill whereby he was summoned as Lord Latimer to the Parliament and as heire Male and not the said Sir Thomas Willoughby Knight husband of the said Eliz. heirâ— male And the second judgement was given in the time of Henry 7. wherby the Barony was adiudged vnto the said Richard Lord Latimer comming of the speciall heire male against the said Lord Brooke descended of the generall heire male But here the President before remembred of the Barony of Dacres may bee obiected to incounteâ— this confusion For there was an heire female married unto Sir Richard Fines who by the declaration of Hen. 6. was Baron of Dacres in the right of his wife and there was also Ralph and Humphrey the heires males before whom the heire female was preferred by the censure of Henry 6. and Edward 4. This obiection is easily answeared For although Hen. 6. through the Princely favour which he bare unto Sir Richard Fynes had declared him to bee Lord Dacres in the right of his wife yet notwithstanding did Ralph Dacres being heire male unto the then Lord Dacres deceased be are also the name of Lord Dacres by that name was attainted in Parliament Wherefore the reason why the heire male could not bee regarded was the said attainder of the said Ralph and Humfrey his brother and therefore when Humphrey 12. Edw. 4. laboured to have the said attainder reversed he submitted himselfe vnto the Arbitrament of the King who to satisfie both Competitors because both had well deserved of him after he had admitted them to his favour he allowed the one to be Lord Dacres the other to be Lord Dacres of Gillesland thus much concerning the second point whether a Barony by writ may discend unto the heire female or not As concerning the third point admitting such discent to bee to the heire female when there

Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Text snippets containing the quad