In a message dated 04/01/2010 09:20:40 GMT Standard Time, pnjmillington@bigpond.com writes: in Redesdale, many men were 'seized' in certain lands. One of these was "Thomas Elsdon, certain lands in Whiskersheels, Elsden and Raylees". Does anyone know whether this means that Thomas Elsdon had a lease or ownership of these lands from the queen or the queen's representative? To be seized of lands means that one was the owner. Redesdale was occupied by many small yeoman-type land owners, rather than by a few major ones like the rest of Northumberland. This seems to have come down partly for historical purposes connected with its status as a mediaeval Liberty (of the King of Scotland, no less!) and partly through a continuation of the old Celtic system opf land inheritance. If Thomas Elsdon was not a Freeholder, then his lease would have been from the owner of the Liberty, ie possibly the Queen but possibly her representative who, for some time, was the Earl of Carlisle, family name Howard, as explained in Hodgson's History. And Newcastle Indictments relating to Morpeth Deanery. p76 in 1628, there were 28 indictments at the assizes at Newcastle . 24 for felony, out of which . 4 were out of Redesdale, viz.:George Coxon, Gerard Coxon, Michael Elsdon, not found guilty and John Reed. p77 Northumberland 1628 Michael Elsden of the Mote commit from the last sessions without either bail or malpraise, being taken upon a capias awarded from the last sessions upon an indictment for felony, vix. For stealing of cattle. Archaeologia Aeliana, vol 1, p150, 161. Does anyone know whether both of these reference are likely to mean that Michael Elsdon was indicted at the Newcastle Assizes in 1628 and aquitted with no bail? I interpret this as meaning that at the previous sessions a warrant was issued for his arrest for cattle stealing, that he was then arrested, and refused bail, and that when his case came up he was found not guilty. If so, he was lucky, as he could have been hanged for the offence. Even if the Law did not impose the death penalty, his victims might have done so "unofficially". The period you mention was only one generation after the end of the Reiving period - usually taken to last until the Union of the Crowns in 1603, and Redesdale would still be a fairly lawless place, where rough justice was the main form of justice. Note that the Assizes for Northumberland were held in Newcastle, even though Newcastle was a county in its own right and separate from the county of Northumberland. That was because the precincts of the former Royal Castle remained as part of Northumberland and it was there, in the Moot Hall, that Northumberland cases were tried. The Castle precincts only linked up with Newcastle again in 1974 when Tyne and Wear was formed, and they still include the (much later than 1628) Moot Hall which is still officially a court-room, although rarely used for that purpose these days. Geoff Nicholson