Professor Richard Sharpe

Professor Sharpe’s interests are broadly the history of medieval England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. He has a special concern with first-hand work on the primary sources of medieval history, including palaeography, diplomatic and the editorial process, as well as the historical and legal contexts of medieval documents. He is general editor of the Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues and has published recently on medieval books and libraries before 1540 and on the Latin writers of Great Britain and Ireland. Saints’ lives and cults, especially those of the Celtic churches, have long been an interest.


Richard Sharpe

David X Carpenter

David Carpenter has a particular interest in the history of Yorkshire. He has written books on Victorian Ilkley, and on the Middelton family of Stockeld Park in Wharfedale. In recent years his research has been primarily on medieval Yorkshire deeds and cartularies. He has published papers on matters arising from his work on the charters of St Leonard’s hospital in York: his edition of the East and West Riding sections of the hospital’s cartulary was published in 2015.

List of Publications



Former project members:

Hugh Doherty

Mark Hagger

Nicholas Karn


One comment on “People

  1. Ann-marie Simpson says:

    In reply to your email to me today the document I’m querying is listed in the National archives index and West Sussex Record Office as “Cowdray Mss 1(ii). It was suggested by your earlier reply to me that the reference you have for this is Regesta no.348, printed in Dodswprth and Dugdale “Monasticum Anglicanum” iii, 246, no. xiii.
    Before using in my local research on Brundall, I need to know if it seems likely that William II ever made a grant of land/tithes to St Martin’s, Battle including land from the Aylsham manor of Norfolk and it’s ‘bailiwick’ manor of Brundall ie is the Cowdray document that is held at West Sussex purporting to be dated 1310 but referring to William’s grant a forgery in itself, written in 1310 forged or was it a ‘forgery’ in 1310 in the sense the content was totally ‘made up’ in 1310, with people just wanting to justify taking land, or is it a more modern forgery that has no basis on links between Battle and Brundall at all .
    Hopefully you can shed some light on this. It would be a pity if others use this document in research
    mistakenly if indeed it has no truth in it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s