| Comment | of Winstanley. Pat_Role seems very complicated: Thomas Bancks, arm., seems to be the advocate of William Bancks, arm., of Winstanley (q.v.) and his son, also William Bancks, gent. (q.v.) who are assignees of William, early of Derby who is patron pro hac vice 'virtute Commii sive Authoritatis redi in in Xte pcis et Dmi Dmi Gulielmus Cestr Epi tunc extra dioc sin in Regni Comitis celebrandii occupati illi in hac parte in scriptis concessae..' It is further complicated in that the entry refers to William Bancks the elder as 'the aforesaid' on first citation, raises the possiblity that it is a clerical error for Thomas Bancks. |
|---|