Search Results

You searched for:
Label: Sims-Williams 1990

Results: 1-1 of 1

Show all data

  • Metadata

    Sims-Williams 1990. Sims-Williams, P., Religion and Literature in Western England, 600-800, Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1990), 3, pp. xiii, 448p. 95 charters cited.

    • S 20. Comments, on nature of privilege, p. 134
    • S 51. Comments, may have genuine basis., pp. 56-7, 104, 111-13, 120
    • S 52. Comments, perhaps drawn up by Wilfrid or an associate, topography of Ripple estate, pp. 104-5, 375
    • S 53. Comments, authentic, pp. 35 n. 99, 191, 193-4
    • S 54. Comments, spurious, p. 36 n. 101
    • S 55. Comments, forgery, pp. 152-3, 162
    • S 56. Comments, original, pp. 155-6
    • S 57. Comments, cited; discusses a witness, pp. 37, 238-9
    • S 58. Comments, p. 155 n. 61.
    • S 59. Comments, on beneficiary; may be a revised copy, not necessarily forged, of a lost charter of 770, itself an updated version of S 58, pp. 38, 154-5
    • S 62. Comments, agrees with Whitelock; Fladbury discussed; witness discussed, pp. 37-8, 132, 158, 238-9
    • S 64. Comments, citing Whitelock, may originally have been a charter of Cenred of Mercia, p. 35 n. 99, 162
    • S 68. Comments, on certain estates., p. 99
    • S 70. Comments, on beneficiaries, Gloucester, Pershore, pp. 34-5, 89 n. 9, 94-6, 122
    • S 76. Comments, pp. 140-1
    • S 77. Comments, on Aust; doubtful authenticity, pp. 78, 149 n. 32
    • S 83. Comments, forged, p. 150
    • S 84. Comments, on Bægia's minster, pp. 119, 151-2
    • S 85. Comments, suspicious, but formulae and name forms acceptable and may be genuine, Kemble is wrong in stating that witnesses will not fit A.D. date., pp. 150-1
    • S 89. Comments, on beneficiary; on topography, translation in EHD is misleading, Brochyl estate was probably of 4 hides (cf. S 1411), Foard's identification is impossible, pp. 148-9, 192, 376
    • S 92. Comments, treats as authentic, pp. 135-6
    • S 94. Comments, genuine, pp. 35 n. 99, 149-50
    • S 95. Comments, on beneficiary; on Bradley topography, pp. 146, 238-42, 391
    • S 96. Comments, charter is probably of Malmesbury provenance if not origin, discusses witness-list, pp. 225-8
    • S 98. Comments, pp. 146-7, 328
    • S 99. Comments, discusses beneficiary; corrupt, perhaps interpolated, pp. 36, 148, 169 n. 119
    • S 101. Comments, cited, p. 146
    • S 102. Comments, genuine, p. 141 n. 122
    • S 109. Comments, cited, p. 163
    • S 114. Comments, probably authentic although there is a lack of dated MSS for comparison, pp. 150 n., 154-5
    • S 116. Comments, treats as authentic, pp. 153-4, 163
    • S 117. Comments, pp. 153-4 n. 56
    • S 118. Comments, spurious, pp. 163 n. 94, 182 nn. 28 & 30
    • S 120. Comments, on date, background, Eanburh's house may have been at Hampton Lucy, pp. 139 n. 110, 163-4
    • S 137. Comments, cited, p. 146
    • S 139. Comments, on beneficiary, pp. 38-9, 175
    • S 141. Comments, p. 157
    • S 146. Comments, questionable, cf. S 139, pp. 137, 153
    • S 147. Comments, forgery based on S 141, may include some authentic information, p. 153
    • S 148. Comments, on beneficiary, pp. 38-9
    • S 152. Comments, unreliable, p. 166 n. 107
    • S 154. Comments, accepts date and rejects allusion to peace treaty as antiquarian addition, for the beneficiary cf. S 1262 and pp. 356-7, p. 171
    • S 167. Comments, spurious, discusses history of Winchcombe, pp. 41-2, 166
    • S 172. Comments, on background, p. 132
    • S 185. Comments, pp. 132-3
    • S 190. Comments, original, p. 107
    • S 192. Comments, cited, p. 154
    • S 193. Comments, probably refers to Breedon-on-the-Hill, as does S 197, p. 103 n.
    • S 194. Comments, treats as authentic, pp. 151-2
    • S 196. Comments, on place-name, p. 386
    • S 198. Comments, treats as authentic, pp. 136-7, 150, 162
    • S 206. Comments, on Ablington, p. 152
    • S 207. Comments, p. 172
    • S 208. Comments, cited, p. 147
    • S 215. Comments, cited with reference to estate history, p. 152
    • S 218. Comments, may mark the end of a dispute between Berkeley and the see of Worcester, pp. 137, 176
    • S 221. Comments, original, p. 145
    • S 245. Comments, spurious, but witness-list in part from authentic document of 704 x 709; on identification of a witness, pp. 225, 357
    • S 260. Comments, on witnesses, p. 227
    • S 265. Comments, probably belongs to 758, pp. 160-1
    • S 306. Comments, on estate, p. 226 n. 47
    • S 723. Comments, on reference to Wrocensetna, p. 44
    • S 786. Comments, p. 95
    • S 1164. Comments, may have been drafted by Bishop Leuthere or one of his circle, p. 112
    • S 1167. Comments, authentic, dates 680, pp. 88, 112
    • S 1176. Comments, on donor, p. 357
    • S 1177. Comments, genuine, pp. 141 n. 122, 191
    • S 1187. Comments, Stoce is Stoke Bishop, pp. 174-6
    • S 1250. Comments, can be disregarded, pp. 92, 133 n. 84, 141
    • S 1252. Comments, basic authenticity confirmed by S 62; on minster at Stratford, pp. 141, 161-2
    • S 1254. Comments, pp. 89, 152, 379
    • S 1255. Comments, pp. 37 n. 113, 132, 158
    • S 1257. Comments, on background, pp. 159-65
    • S 1258. Comments, p. 160
    • S 1260. Comments, on beneficiary, p. 172 n. 135
    • S 1262. Comments, on beneficiary, pp. 171, 357
    • S 1270. Comments, p. 169
    • S 1273. Comments, on the estate at Sture, p. 162
    • S 1278. Comments, pp. 162, 373
    • S 1279. Comments, p. 152
    • S 1283. Comments, on Prestbury, pp. 157-8, and p. 139 n. 110
    • S 1340. Comments, the payment of church-scot reserved in the lease may have been owed to a church at Daylesford, p. 152
    • S 1411. Comments, confirms identification with Henbury, Gloucs, pp. 149, 162
    • S 1413. Comments, cannot be dated accurately, not clear whether it belongs to Heathored's or Deneberht's episcopate, although unlikely to be late in the latter's since the grantor appears already in 759 (cf. S 56), p. 171 n. 128
    • S 1415. Comments, on estate history, pp. 157-8
    • S 1429. Comments, pp. 130-4
    • S 1430. Comments, on background, pp. 237-9
    • S 1431. Comments, pp. 138-9, 382-3
    • S 1433. Comments, pp. 172, 176
    • S 1442. Comments, pp. 166 n. 107, 167-8, 174
    • S 1446. Comments, pp. 156-7
    • S 1534. Comments, on reference to minster at Leominster, p. 94
    • S 1556. Comments, p. 133
    • S 1430. Translated, in part, pp. 237-8
    • S 1431. Translated, in part, pp. 138-9