It seems that a good case can be made for both theories!
As I said, the 'placename' Eade or Eads doesn't appear very often in the transcripts so making me think that, if it had meant 'ditto' or similar, it would have been used much more. However, as no one with local knowledge had ever heard of it, I did a little exercise.
I took the volume 1598-1652 which has the most Eade/Eads in the index. I made a note of a few, together with the placename mentioned in the entry immediately above. Sorry, I had to leave out the Kay and Hirst references or I would have been here all day!
1. a)baptised Abraham s/o Michael Wilson de Eade (previous line Netherwonge)
b) a later entry: buried Michael Wilson de Netherthwonge.
2. a)Anchor s/o Anchor Stansall buried de Eads (previous entry Farnley Tyas)
b) a later entry: Baptised Elizabeth d/o Anchor Stansall de Wodd
3. a) baptised Matthew s/o Edmund Field de Eads (previous entry Newsom)
b) baptised Grace d/o Edmund Field de Newsome.
Two out of three of this completely arbitrary selection would seem to point to Eade/Eads indeed meaning ditto or the same. If Wodd (or Wood?) is part of or near Farnley Tyas, we have a hat trick!
I'd say someone should tell the transcriber that eade isn't a placename but the books are ancient. I got them because they were being sold off.
I still wouldn't be 100% but I think the case is probably made for it not being a placename.
[Anyone fancy calling their next son Anchor? Brilliant name....]
Jill
