English Lawsuits from William I to Richard I. Volume II: Henry II and Richard I (Nos 347-665)

THE PUBLICATIONS OF THE

7TEpLwrawrg "v

EAcvOcptav

VOLUME CVII

FOR THE YEAR 1991

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [i] 1991

Aefbent

AocietE

FOUNDED 1887 To encourage the Study and advance the Knowledge of the History of English Law

1991 Patron HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE PHILIP, DUKE OF EDINBURGH, K.G. President SIR IRViNE GOULDING

Vice-Presidents THE RT. HON. SIR GARFIELD BARWICK, G.C.M.G. MR. PETER GERRARD THE RT. HON. ANTONIO LAMER, C.J. His HONOUR JUDGE E. F. MONIER-WILLIAMS

Council The Right Hon. Sir Robert Megarry, F.B.A. Professor S. F. C. Milsom, Q.C., F.B.A. Mr. C. G. Prestige Mr. M. J. Prichard Professor G. 0. Sayles, F.B.A. Professor A. W. B. Simpson, F.B.A. Sir Robert Somerville, K.C.V.O. Sir Richard Southern, F.B.A. Mr. S. A. Stamler, Q.C. Professor P. G. Stein, F.B.A. Mr. P. W. E. Taylor, Q.C. The Rt. Hon. Lord Templeman, M.B.E. Professor Samuel E. Thorne, F.B.A. The Hon. Mr. Justice Vinelott Colonel Frederick Bernays Wiener

The Hon. Morris S. Arnold Professor Thomas G. Barnes Dr. Paul Brand Mrs. Marjorie Chibnall, F.B.A. Dr. M. T. Clanchy Professor W. R. Cornish, F.B.A. Professor Charles Donahue Jr. Professor Sir Geoffrey Elton, F.B.A. Sir Matthew Farrer, K.C.V.O. Professor Richard H. Helmholz Mr. E. R. Heward, C.B. Professor Sir James Holt, F.B.A. Professor A. M. Honor&, Q.C., F.B.A. Dr. R. F. Hunnisett Sir Jack Jacob, Q.C. Professor H. R. Loyn, F.B.A. Mr. D. E. C.

Literary Directors PROFESSOR J. H. BAKER, F.B.A.

YALE, F.B.A.

Honorary Treasurer Mr. BRIAN J. PRICHARD (8 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London, WC2A 3QJ)

Secretary Mr. VICTOR TUNKEL

(Faculty of Laws, Queen Mary & Westfield College, Mile End Road, London, El 4NS) Trustees Mr E. R. HEWARD, C.B.

THE RT. HON. SIR ROBERT MEGARRY, F.B.A. Mr. BRIAN J. PRICHARD

Honorary Secretaries and Treasurers Overseas Australia: Mr. G. LINDELL (Faculty of Law, Australian National University, Canberra 2600) Canada: PROFESSOR DELLOYD J. GUTH (Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia, 1822 East Mall, Vancouver, V6T 1Yl) New Zealand: Dr. D. W. MCMORLAND (Faculty of Law, University of Auckland, Private Bag, Auckland 1) United States: PROFESSOR CHARLES DONAHUE Jr. (Treasurer), Ms. DIANA MOSES (Secretary) (Harvard Law School, Langdell Hall, Cambridge, Mass. 02138)

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [ii] 1991

ENGLISH LAWSUITS FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I VOLUME II HENRY II AND RICHARD I (Nos 347-665)

EDITED FOR THE SELDEN SOCIETY BY

R.C. VAN CAENEGEM Professor of Medieval and Legal History in the University of Ghent

LONDON SELDEN SOCIETY 1991

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [iii] 1991

© Selden Society 1991

The Selden Society gratefully acknowledges the financial support provided for this volume by the Francqui Foundation, Brussels; the Frederic William Maitland Memorial Fund, Cambridge University; and the British Academy.

Printedin Great Britain at the Alden Press, Oxford

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [iv] 1991

CONTENTS OF VOLUME II LAWSUITS

(Nos 347-665)

304

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

711

INDEX OF SuBJECT.

772

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [v] 1991

To the memory of T.F.T. Plucknett

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [vi] 1991

LAWSUITS (nos 347-665)

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [vii] 1991

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society [viii] 1991

Writ of King Henry II concerning his demesne lands in Cirencester in favour

of the abbot there.

Henry, king etc. to Abbot [Andrew] of Cirencester, greeting. I order that you shall recover and hold all my demesne lands of Cirencester as they were sworn by the honourable men of Cirencester and namely the service and tenement of William de Cirencester, as it was sworn by the honourable men of Cirencester. Witness: Master Alvered. At Woodstock.

348 Quitclaim by Robert son of Aubrey de Vere and his heir of the manor of Twywell to the abbey of Thorney, first in the abbey church in Thorney and again in the abbot's court at Twywell, in the presence of the men of the hundred. We thought it worth while to register for the memory of present and future people that in the first year of King Henry the younger, Robert' son of Aubrey, who said he ought to hold Twywell in fee farm from the abbot and monks of Thorney, appeared at Stanground of his free will on the Thursday2 before Pentecost and promised Abbot Walter and his monks that he would go to Thorney on the following Wednesday 3 and that he and his heirs would quitclaim forever the right which he said he had in Twywell. On the appointed day both Fulk de Lisours and the said Robert came to Thorney and before the abbot, the convent and Fulk de Lisours he gave up the claim which he had in Twywell and both Robert and his heir Henry bound themselves by oath that neither they nor any of their heirs would ever make any further claim to Twywell. And to avoid all ambiguity and scruple, both the father and his son placed the charter and chirograph on the main altar. The abbot, however, followed the counsel of wise men and promised to give him 20 marks of silver for this, and it was also decreed there by common counsel that they would come together on the following Tuesday4 in the abbot's court at Twywell and that the father and all his heirs would there give up forever the aforesaid claim before the men of the hundred who would meet there. And of the aforesaid 20 marks the abbot on that same day gave the aforesaid Robert and his son Henry 3 marks of silver in such a way that part of the pennies was placed in their hand by 348

'

2

O[This Robert fitz Aubrey is the son of the well-known chamberlain of Henry 1, Aubrey de Vere, who died in 1141. This appears from the rubric in the Red Book of Thorney where he is called RoberiusfiliusAlbrici camerariiregisand is supported by documents showing Aubrey de Vere in possession of Twywell probably in 1109 (Regesta ii, no. 929).1 3 0[18 May 1155.] 4 01[24 May 1155.10 0[12 May 1155.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 304 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Fulk de Lisours, part by Richard the butler, part by Richard the dispenser, part by Ralph de Chesterton, part by Robert the cleric of Yaxley, part by Walter the cleric of Stanground, part by John de Sibson and part by John de Woodstone. Thus on the following Tuesday the abbot came with his monks to Twywell and there Robert son of Aubrey and also Henry his son have admitted before the men of the hundred the agreement which he had made with the abbot, and his other sons, who had not been present at the aforesaid agreement at Thorney with their father because of their tender age, swore before all those who were there that they would never claim Twywell. And there the abbot before the men of the hundred gave 7 marks of silver to the aforesaid Robert and his sons, but the lord Malger, our monk, by the counsel and the command of the said Robert, gave the other 10 marks to Hugh Gubiun and Fulk de Lisours, to whom the aforesaid Robert was in debt. Witnesses of this business: Fulk de Lisours, Roger de Stokes who was the reeve of the hundred, etc.

349 King Henry II confirms Walter, bishop of Coventry, in all his liberties and customs, as they were deraigned in the court of King Henry I.

Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, justices, barons, sheriffs, ministers and all his lieges of England, greeting. I order and grant that Walter bishop of Coventry shall have all his liberties and customs in the wood and in the plain, in meadows and pastures, in waters and mills, inside and outside the borough and in all places, and soke and sake, toll and team, infangthief and his hallmoot in all lands as well, peacefully, freely, fully and quietly as his church best had them in the time of King Edward and Earl Leofric, the builder of the church, and as a charter of the king my grandfather testifies that Bishop Robert has deraigned those liberties in his court at Portsmouth.' Witness: John bishop of Worcester. Witnesses: Robert bishop of Lincoln, Thomas the chancellor, Robert earl of Leicester, Reginald earl of Cornwall, Hugh earl of Norfolk, Richard de Humez the constable, Warin fitz Gerold the chamberlain and Manasser Biset the steward. At Westminster.

349 I '[The charter for bishop Robert Peche of Coventry, 1121 Aug. 1126, is lost. A likely date for this deraignment is 3-10 June 1123, when King Henry I was in Portsmouth on his way to Normandy and granted several charters to churches and individuals. - Regesta ii, no. 1395-1398.]°

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 305 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

350 A man condemned to death for theft and robbery is saved by St. Wilfrid, who sends two men to stand bail for him.

A certain adolescent was accused in this city [probably York] of theft and larceny by the aldermen, put in prison and kept there for a long time in the absence of anyone willing to stand bail for him, until finally he was condemned to death and led to his execution. He had recourse to the common refuge, i.e. St. Wilfrid and the other patrons of this church, with his heart though not with his body, which was impossible, and going to the place where he was being taken, he turned his eyes to the church with the utmost contrition in his soul. As they arrived at the place of execution, a large crowd had gathered to see the spectacle, forming a sad crown all around him and telling the executioner to hurry up. Standing there with his terrible face, strong hand and cruel mind, the latter lifted his sword with both hands, telling the captive to stick out his neck and be ready for one blow. The convict lifted his eyes a little and looked at the church, saying: "Help me now, Wilfrid, for if you refuse to do it now, quite soon you won't be able to". As everyone laughed at the simplicity of those words and many mocked him, the executioner himself dissolved in laughter and postponed the stroke so that, while he briefly dropped his fierceness, this very dissolution retarded the blow. During the delay two young men turn up on very fast horses, pay bail for the adolescent according to the custom of the forefathers, snatch him from death, loosen his bonds and let him go free. 351 Roger, earl of Hereford, notifies King Henry II that in the case between Reginald de St. Val6ry and Abbot Hamelin of Gloucester the hundred (of Upper Whitstone) testifies and is ready to prove that the land of The Ridge (in Standish) is part of the vill of Standish, which belongs to the abbey of Gloucester; it is left for the king to decide in which court (either before the abbot or before a royal justice in the county) this is to be done. To Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, his dearest lord, Roger earl of Hereford, greeting. Know that I and the whole hundred, where the land of The Ridge is situated which Reginald de St. Valery claims against the abbot of Gloucester, testify and are ready to prove, where and when it pleases you and as it will bejust, that this same land is part of the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 306 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

viii of Standish which belongs to the abbey of Gloucester and has of old been treated as part of that viii, as far as the royal customs are concerned. It therefore seems just, if it pleases you, that either the abbot shall have his court thereon or the case shall be conducted before your justice in the county, where the truth of the matter can be examined by the county court. Farewell.

352 Writ of King Henry II ordering that Robert, bishop of Lincoln, shall hold his ferry of Newton on Trent, as it was deraigned in the county court.

Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his justices and sheriff and ministers of Lincolnshire, greeting. I order that Bishop Robert of Lincoln shall hold his ferry of Newton well, peacefully, quietly and justly, as his predecessors best held it in the time of King Henry my grandfather and as it was recognized in the county. Witness: Thomas, the chancellor. At Angers.

353 Judgment given in the county court of Gloucestershire about the freedom from murder fines of Gloucester Abbey's manor of Hinton.

In the year of the Lord 1156 in the time of Abbot Hamelin it was adjudged in the county of Gloucester that St. Peter of Gloucester's manor of Hinton must be quit and free from murder fines, because of old it enjoyed freedom from all plaints.

354 Writ of King Henry II ordering Bishop William of Norwich to let Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme have the advowson of the church of Ranworth, which a sworn recognition has shown to belong to him.

351 ' '[Richardson and Sayles, The Governance, 174.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 307 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the bishop of Norwich, greeting. I order you to see to it that Abbot William of Hulme shall have the advowson of the church of Ranworth fully and completely and justly, as he justly ought to have it and as was recognized by the oath of lawful men. And unless you do it, Archbishop [Theobald] of Canterbury shall have it done, so that he shall not lose his right for lack of right or full justice. Witness: Warin fitz Gerold, the chamberlain. At Saint-Jean d'Ang6li. 355 Writ of King Henry II to William, bishop of Norwich, ordering him to let Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme and Alexander, his knight, have the advowson of the churches of Caister, on the basis of a sworn recognition. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to William, bishop of Norwich, greeting. I order you to see to it that Abbot William of Hulme and Alexander his knight shall have fully, freely and justly the advowson of the churches of Caister as it was recognized by the oath of lawful men that they ought to have it. And see to it that they hold it peacefully, freely and justly. And unless you do it, the archbishop of Canterbury shall see to it that it is done. Witness: Warin fitz Gerold the chamberlain. At Saint-Jean d'Angbli. 356 Robert de Ghent testifies that his brother Earl Gilbert has deraigned Eakring and given it to Rufford Abbey in perpetual alms. Robert de Ghent, to the justice(s) of the lord king and the sheriff and all the king's ministers of Nottinghamshire, greeting. Know that I was present and saw and heard that my brother Earl Gilbert has in his court deraigned from purpresture the whole of his demesne of Eakring, with all its appurtenances in woods and hedges, and has there in that same court given all of the aforesaid demesne in perpetual alms to the abbey of Rufford in honour of St. Mary. I am witness to this donation and prepared to do thereon anything which a legitimate witness ought to do anywhere, and so are many others with me, who were present. Farewell.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 308 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

357 Writ of King Henry II to his sheriff and officials of Kent, who are to see to it that Prior Wibert and the monks of the cathedral church of Canterbury shall hold their land at Hollingbourne as it was deraigned by the oath of the lawful men of Kent. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the sheriff and his ministers of Kent, greeting. I order you to see to it that the prior and monks of Holy Trinity, Canterbury, hold their land on the hills of Hollingbourne well, in peace, honourably and justly, as that land was deraigned for them by the oath of the lawful men of Kent, and unless you do it, my justices will. Witness: Thomas the chancellor. At Valognes.

358 Writ of King Henry II to William de Chesney, sheriff of Norfolk, ordering that the cathedral of Norwich shall hold its common pasture between Framingham and Bixley according to the judgment of the men of the hundred. Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his sheriff of Norfolk, greeting. I order that the church of Holy Trinity of Norwich shall hold well, in peace, justly and freely its common pasture which is between Bixley and Framingham, as it best and most quietly held it at the time of King Henry my grandfather and as it was deraigned by the men of the hundred. And unless you do it, my justice shall have it done. Witness: Thomas the chancellor. At Bury St. Edmunds.

359 Writ of King Henry II ordering Bishop William of Norwich to restore the church of Ranworth to Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme if it can be shown to have been transferred to somebody else's fee without judgment.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 309 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Bishop William of Norwich, greeting. If the abbot of Hulme can judicially establish that the church of Ranworth was in former times built in his fee and transferred without judgment to somebody else's fee after the death of King Henry, then I order that you shall see to it justly and without delay that it is where it used to be. And see to it that the abbot shall lose nothing which he justly ought to have in it. And unless you do it, the archbishop of Canterbury shall. Witness: Thomas the chancellor. At Bury St. Edmunds.

360 The conflict of jurisdiction between Battle Abbey and the bishop of Chichester, which had been settled under King Stephen (see no. 320), breaks out again after the latter's death. In spite of various ecclesiastical measures and after the failure of an attempt by Archbishop Theobald and Chancellor Thomas Becket to bring about a compromise, the case is brought before the court of King Henry II at Colchester. Several charters of the abbey having been read and the king having shown his displeasure at the bishop's appeal to the pope, judgment is given in favour of the abbey. In 1157, in the third year of the reign of King Henry the younger, daughter's son to Henry the great, in the second month after his return from across the sea where he had gone in the preceding year, and in the year during which he led an army into Wales, on the day of Pentecost, which that year fell on the feast of St. Dunstan, that memorable prince wore his royal crown at St. Edmund's, before a great multitude - the archbishop of Canterbury, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, and a crowd of common people - and, as was fitting, spent the day in festival.' Now among the rest, as we have said, the worshipful Hilary, bishop of Chichester, and the worshipful Walter, abbot of Battle, were assigned a day by that splendid prince's peremptory summons for the settlement of their old controversy over the privileges and dignities of their churches. Because he was occupied with other affairs, it was impossible for him to settle their case then, but he arranged for their appearance at Colchester, to which he would be going when he left St. Edmund's. The following Thursday, all of them - and more besides - arrived there. The next day, Friday, the abbot went to the king accompanied by his brother Richard de Lucy. At the king's command he withdrew into the chapter house of the monks serving God there, to wait for him. As soon as he had heard mass, the king came along, commanding that no one should enter unless he called them by name. He 360 ' On 19 May 1157 Henry held a council at Bury St- Edmunds at which probabl the main business was dealing with the instability in the eastern counties. Robert de Torign.. ed. R. Howlett, Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henri'II and RichardI (RS), iv. 192-193. Warren, Henry II pp. 67-68.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 310 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

sent for Thomas the chancellor, Robert, earl of Leicester, the constable Richard du Hommet, Richard de Lucy, Warin fitz Gerold and Nicholas de Sigillo. With them was one skilled in the art of medicine, Ralph by name, and also Henry of Essex, the king's constable, whom the king had sent beforehand to the abbot in the chapter house. 2 The king's younger brother William also came and sat beside him among the others.' When all had been seated there with the lord king, and the abbot and three of his monks were seated with them too, Richard de Lucy began thus: "My lord king, your excellency has deigned to summon here my brother, the abbot of Battle, so that the protracted quarrel between him and the bishop of Chichester over the privileges and exemptions of their churches may be settled before you. The abbot is here with his charters of exemption". Then the king commanded the abbot to show publicly the charters of his church. Thomas the chancellor read the charter of the great King William before them. 4 When he had finished, the king took it in his hand and looked it over thoroughly. He deigned to approve it highly, praising the spirit of the famous king who lavished such affection upon the church built by himself, and who fortified it with such great liberties and privileges. Next the chancellor read another charter of King William's concerning the abbot's private affairs. 5 The king took this too in his hand and examined it, and ordered it to be put back carefully with the others and to be looked after with great care. He even swore that if he were ever inspired by God to found an abbey, he would have for it none but the liberties and privileges of Battle Abbey. He also inspected the charters of other kings: of King William the younger and of King Henry, together with the charter confirmed by his own seal.6 He ordered them to be similarly replaced and kept carefully. Then the chancellor, turning to the abbot, said: "Lord abbot, the bishop of Chichester has brought a powerful argument, as it seems to many, against you, pointing out that you made profession in the church of Chichester. Your worship must therefore answer this" 2 A group of Henry II's important household administrators. Thomas Becket was chancellor after

Jan. 1155. Robert, earl of Leicester (1120-1190) was justiciar, with Richard de Lucy. For his career see West, Justiciar, pp. 35-37. Warin fitz Gerold's activities both in the household and at the exchequer are prominent in the early pipe-rolls. He was the king's chamberlain until his retirement in 1158. J.E.A. Jolliffe, Angevin Kingship (London, 1955), pp. 143, 233. For Henry of Essex see below, p. 190, n. 1. Ralph de Beaumont (d. 1170) was a physician in the royal household, and is regularly mentioned in the pipe-rolls as a holder of royal land in Northamptonshire. Gesta HenriciSecundi (RS), i. 4. Cf. J. Lally, "Court and Household of King Henry II" (Liverpool Ph.D., 1969), pp. 336-337. Nicholas is probably Nicholas de Hampton, keeper of the seal. Regesta, iii, p. xi. The third son of the Empress Matilda and Geoffrey of Anjou, born in August 1136. 4 Almost certainly BL Add. Ch. 70980, forged to answer the objection of the bishop to the earlier forgery, that it had not the attestation of a bishop of Chichester. See above, p. 158, and below, pp. 196-198, where the bishop declared that this was a charter he had never heard of. Searle, EHR, lxxxiii (1968), 458-459. The charter is printed there, pp. 473-474. This cannot be positively identified. BL Add. Ch. 70980 has a personal privilege. But a later, interpolated version, Regesta, i, no. 262, may be what is referred to. 6 BL Harl. Ch. 83 A 12, which Thomas Becket was to have kept in his custody after the inconclusive hearing at Lambeth several years earlier. Above, p. 158.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 311 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

The abbot declared that he had done nothing against the privileges and exemption of his church. The king looked at the chancellor and said: "Profession is not against the privileges of churches. For those who make profession do not promise anything beyond what they ought". Hearing this, Richard de Lucy began again: "Lord, your highness has heard the exemptions and privileges given by the noble King William to his church which he named Battle because there God gave him the victory over his enemies. Up to the very present this church -your chapel and emblem of your royal crown - has preserved these by inviolable right. I say that this church should be elevated to the highest rank by you and by all us Normans. For there the most noble King William, by God's grace, and with the aid of our kin, won that by which you hold the crown of England at this very moment in hereditary right, and by which we all have been enriched with great wealth. We therefore pray your clemency to protect this church and its privileges and exemptions with the hand of your authority and to command that it, with all its possessions, be free, just as always in the times of your predecessors it is known to have been free. If it does not please your authority to do so, I humbly pray that you remove the abbot my brother from office, so that the church may not have the grief of having lost in his time what it is known to have possessed as an inviolable right in the days of his predecessors". At this Robert, earl of Leicester, and others began calling out that the king should preserve that church as if it were his own crown, and as property won by their kinsmen. The king vowed that he would in no way lend himself to anything by which the church might be seen to have lost its exemptions in his time. He would speak with the bishop and settle everything peacefully. With this he rose and strode out to settle other business. On Tuesday after the octave of Pentecost, in the morning, the king entered the monks' chapter house, accompanied by the archbishops, Theobald of Canterbury and Roger of York; the bishops Richard of London, Robert of Exeter, Robert of Lincoln; the abbots Silvester of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, "Geoffrey" of Hulme,7 Thomas, the king's chancellor; the earls Robert of Leicester and Patrick of Salisbury. There were barons as well: Henry of Essex, Reginald de Warenne, Richard de Lucy, Warn fitz Gerold and several others, and a large number of ordinary people besides. Hilary, bishop of Chichester, and Walter, abbot of Battle, were also present. First a case was aired there between the venerable Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury and Silvester, abbot of St. Augustine's church outside the walls of Canterbury, concerning the abbot's profession to Christ Church, Canterbury.! Afterwards, when silence had fallen, Richard de Lucy rose and walked to the centre of the room. Everyone listened intently as he addressed the king thus: "My lord king, in whom fortune matched herself with virtue! The splendid glory of your excellence has set today, in this court, for my worshipful brother Walter, rector of Recte William. See '[Knowles]' Heads, p.68.

Bishop Hilary acted as one of the mediators in the dispute between the archbishop and Abbot Silvester. The charter is dated 11 July 1157. Mayr-Harting, Acta, pp. 88-89.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 312 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

your church of Battle, to appear against Hilary, bishop of Chichester, of holy authority, in a settlement of their long-protracted disagreement over the privileges and liberties of their churches. He comes into your presence obedient to your commands and prepared to make satisfaction in every way to any who would reproach him, saving your honour and the rights of your church, which is entrusted to him. This your church of Battle, built from its foundations by the most noble King William in commemoration of the victory over his enemies given him there by God, was fortified with great privileges and liberties. These are acknowledged to have been held inviolate until today. This church should be famously praised by you, lord king, and by all us Normans, for it was there that the famous King William, by the will of God, and by the aid and counsel of our kinsmen, defeated his enemies who had thought to steal his realm of England and his crown. There he acquired realm and crown for himself and for his successors. By the closeness of your relationship, through right of inheritance, the whole people of this realm rejoice that you now reign from his throne. As for us, it is by virtue of gifts conferred by William, and by succeeding to our kin, that we possess great estates and riches. Wherefore, my lord, most excellent of kings, all this gathering of Norman nobles asks with fervent prayers that your royal severity maintain that abbey, as the emblem of your and our triumph, in its proper privileges and exemptions against all its enemies, and above all against the stratagems of the English! Let there be no breach in its defences! But if this is not in accordance with your will, order my brother its abbot to leave the place and give way to some other who will be a friend. It is better for him to lay down the duty of pastoral care and to pass his life freely as a poor and private monk than to sit in the high seat, oppressed by a wrongful yoke of slavery through the cunning of certain persons. Better that, than that the whole Norman nobility should grieve that he has lost in his time liberties and privileges maintained inviolate until now by his predecessors, through the authority of your predecessors, as the emblem of your royal crown and their enrichment" When he had spoken, he sat down and the abbot rose and made this speech: "My lord, as my brother Richard has shown clearly in his argument, I have come at your bidding. If anyone wishes to raise anything against us or against the privileges and liberties of the church of Battle, we shall answer as you counsel, for that church is your demesne chapel and emblem of your crown. However, it is fitting if you should command it, that the charters of that church, drafted by the noble King William when he founded it, and by his successors, and also confirmed by you, be first of all heard in the presence of yourself and of all assembled here with you" Then the abbot gave the charter of the great King William to the lord king, and at his order one of the clerks read it aloud to all. When he had read it through, Thomas, the king's chancellor, fixing his eye on the bishop, said: "Lord bishop, your charity has heard what has been done here before the king and in everyone's hearing. Now if your prudence would wish

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 313 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

to say anything in rejoinder, it is permitted. Your turn has come, I think". Then the bishop got up and spoke: "My lord king, I have come into these parts of your realm with the others present, not, as is known to be the way of many, from a desire to wander the earth, but out of love and honour for you, all unaware of this kind of antagonism. Therefore if there is a spirit of goodwill here among you and the abbot and this assembly, it should be possible through your mediation to reach an agreement between this abbot and myself, saving the rights of our church of Chichester and of the church of Battle. Indeed I have come here for that purpose. But if I find that this is not your settled intention, I shall have no choice but to compromise for myself and the church of Chichester entrusted to me, neither forewarned nor forearmed as I am against such opposition". There were those who rejected a peace compromise, saying that this quarrel which had gone on so long between them should be brought to a proper finish and not handed on to another generation. The bishop silenced all by raising his voice and proclaiming: "If you are unwilling to let this be settled between us by a peace compromise, then let me explain to the king and to all sitting here exactly what are the rights of my church of Chichester, and what our dispute up to now has been". Having adopted this line, he began as follows: "Jesus Christ, my lord king", and he repeated, "Jesus Christ, our Lord", and then he said it a third time, "Hear, all, and understand! Jesus Christ our Lord has established two abodes and two powers for the governance of this world: one is the spiritual, the other the material. The spiritual is that to which our Lord Jesus Christ referred when He said to our first shepherd, the Apostle Peter, and through him, to all his disciples and successors, 'You are Peter, and upon this rock shall I build my church'.9 Whence, as your charity knows, from those first beginnings of His epoch a custom has grown up in God's church that the shepherds of Holy Church, the vicars of the blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, should worthily superintend the governance of the Holy Church of God. Hence it was to us, the superintendents of the Church of God, that the Lord Jesus Christ spoke when He said to the blessed apostles: 'Who hears you, hears me'.10 As a result the church of Rome, marked out by the apostolate of the Prince of the Apostles, has achieved so great and so marvellous a pre-eminence worldwide, that no bishop, no ecclesiastical person at all, may be deposed from his ecclesiastical seat without its judgment and permission" "Very true", said the king, "a bishop may not be deposed". And he made a gesture of pushing with his hands. "But, see, with a good push he could be ejected." Everyone broke out laughing. But the bishop began again: "As I have said already, so I say again, this has been the constitution of the Church from antiquity. It is impossible for any layman, indeed even for a king, to give ecclesiastical privileges and exemptions to churches. And ecclesiastical authority shows that it is impossible for those arrogated to them by laymen to be valid except by the permission and confirmation of the holy father, by the laws of Rome" The king became 9 Matt. 16: 18.

10Luke 10: 16.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 314 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

angry...: "You are plotting to attack the royal prerogatives given to me by God, with your crafty arguments. So by your fealty and your binding oath to me, I command that you undergo just legal judgment for presumptuous words against my crown and royal prerogative. I ask the archbishops and bishops present to give me justice against you, saving the rights of the royal crown given me by the Highest Majesty. Your actions clearly show that you are trying your best to diminish the royal prerogatives and ancient liberties granted to me by right". This stirred up such a murmur against the bishop that it could hardly be silenced. Then the chancellor said: "It is not at all worthy of you, venerable bishop, to have forgotten ...towards our lord the king, to whom you have, no one doubts, taken an oath of fealty. You should therefore be prudent, your prudence". The bishop saw that since the king was offended, everyone was against him. Finally the noise subsided and he began again: "My lord, if I have been tactless towards your royal majesty, I declare before God in heaven and your royal dignity that I meant no crafty attack upon you or your royal prerogative. I have desired your fatherly care in all things; I have exalted your excellence; I have made much of your privileges; from the bottom of my heart I have always loved you as my dearest lord. I pray your royal highness, do not suspect any evil in me, and do not easily believe anyone who would suggest it. I wish nothing to be taken from your royal power, which I have always cherished and praised with all my heart. I meant everything for the honour and glory of your highness." "May those kinds of honour and glory be far removed from me and mine", said the king. "Let them be warded off by the withdrawal of this profanation. By it, as everyone is aware, your fawning, lying words are meant to destroy the prerogative that by God's grace has been handed down to me from the kings, my ancestors, in hereditary right" "My lord", the bishop answered, "I thought that I could have explained fully all the points I have so carefully brought up in your hearing, with the goodwill of yourself and the court. However, since my beginning displeases you, let me lay that aside and proceed to a brief statement of my main theme. When I was presented to the see of Chichester by the most pious King Stephen, I went to Canterbury to be consecrated by the venerable Archbishop Theobald, as is canonical. There too came the abbot of Battle, for he knew that it was just and canonical to be present at the consecration of his bishop, in whose diocese he was known to reside. He therefore acted as he ought. I returned to my see of Chichester. The abbot came there as well. Ceremonially robed, I was by him amongst others set in my proper place, as is everywhere regarded as customary. That same year he was summoned and came to Chichester. In his ceremonial robes, he took his seat in the synod with the others to hear the decrees and customs of the synod. Not long after, in visiting my diocese as is canonical, I arrived at Battle. There I was received in my

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 315 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

ceremonial robes by the abbot and all the brothers in procession as their own, and only, bishop. I entered the chapter house thus with him. I preached the word of God to the brothers as to sons, and as a father ought I strengthened those sons in the Catholic faith. He led me thence to the guest-house and respectfully supplied all my wants, as was fitting towards his bishop. When I left, he fittingly loaded me with gifts". To this Henry of Essex, the king's constable,"I said: "His good deeds and his goodwill have received an ill reward from you. You now wish to repay him with evil for the good given to you. I hope that from now on anyone who has received such thanks from you will offer you no hospitality". The bishop continued: "Fom that time, my dearest lord, following I know not what advice, he has withdrawn from synod. When summoned he refuses to come, and has sent to the synod the prior of his church with some of his brothers instead. Out of love for him, and seeing nothing malicious in it, I endured it once, twice, thrice, with equanimity. All these things were managed peaceably between us, as you have heard, until the bishop of London died.I 2 After that he became filled with I don't know what - a spirit of envy or pride, and could not look at me straight in the eyes. He feared, I think, that I had by chance harmed him in that affair, although he will not be able to prove it". At this Henry of Essex broke in: "Had your holiness wished to act.., concerning the bishopric of London, everyone very well knows that the abbot, in striving for that honour, was unwilling to do anything at any time simoniacally against God and that holy order. If, like some, he had striven to be preferred to that see by means of money, he before anyone else would have deserved to be enthroned". 3 Richard de Lucy added: "Far be it from him to reach so sacred and glorious a rank by such a mediator. We know no man whom we need to fear in connection with that affair". A number of people were muttering about this, and the bishop, taking heart again, took up his address: "My lord, from that time the issue has been in doubt between us, and neither of us has wished to back off, once it had begun. Then people came to me and intimated that the abbot refused to attend synod for this reason, that, guided by the charters and privileges of his church, he was being exalted by their authority, to the point of saying that he need not show canonical obedience to the church of Chichester. When I heard this, I was unwilling that in my time my church should lose any of its ancient and just privileges. I summoned the abbot, along with another person of my diocese, to Chichester at an appointed time. When he did not come, I interdicted him, with the Henry of Essex, disgraced for alleged cowardice in 1163, was a valued servant of Henry II in the S1150s. See Letters of Gilbert Foliot, p. 215 and refs. there. As well as being constable, he was a baron of the exchequer and sheriff of Bedfordshire, and heard pleas alone and in the company of Becket and the earl of Leicester. W.L. Warren calls him, along with Richard de Lucy, Thomas Becket, Simon fitz Peter, Richard du Hommet and Robert, earl of Leicester, one of the "senior ministers of the Crown". Warren, Henry II, pp. 264, 284-285. See PR 2-3-4 Henr' II, ed. J. Hunter (London, 1844; PR Soc. repr. 1930), index s.v. Essex, Henry of. 12 Robert de Sigillo, bishop of London, d. 29 Sept. 1150. Le Neve, ed. Greenway, i. 2. 13 Richard de Belmeis was elected 1152. Le Neve ed. Greenway i. 2.It was generally known that he had paid King Stephen £500 for the office. Saltman, Theobald, p. 118 and refs. there.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 316 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

stipulation that if he should not come within the limit of forty days to make satisfaction, he would be suspended from office. The other person, humbly seeking forgiveness, obtained it, but the abbot's sentence went into effect. When he heard this he went to King Stephen and complained of it. The king sent one of his clerks, Robert de Cornuvilla, to me with an order to come before him on the octave of St. Andrew in London. The abbot was to come there as well, and, with the counsel of the archbishop of Canterbury and his barons, he would work out a compromise between us. On the day set I came before the king. But neither the abbot nor an advocate in his place appeared against me, as everyone then knew. I therefore returned to my see and the abbot's sentence remained. A year later, in a solemn synod and according to the statutes of the canons, I excommunicated him. When the abbot learned this, he returned to the archbishop, who at his entreaties ordered me by letter to relax the sentence until we could all meet. He would make peace between us. For the honour of the lord archbishop I relaxed the sentence for the time being". Henry of Essex said: "If this is true, it establishes that after King Stephen's death you did something you would never have dared to do had he been living, for it would not have been in your interest. What our lord may do here now is up to his right and his power" The bishop continued: "Since then we have been in dispute, and it is acknowledged that at no time has the abbot come to make amends. After the Lord Jesus Christ placed you upon the throne of this realm - for which above all others I am most grateful - the abbot did not act as he should have to me as his bishop, or to my church of Chichester. On the contrary he has despised me, avoiding me everywhere; he has everywhere maligned me to the best of his ability in the most shameful words. However, it happened that he intended to have the charters of his church confirmed by your seal. I heard that there were things in his charters against the privileges of my church of Chichester and also against those of the church of Canterbury, the mother of all England. This I was at pains to make known to the archbishop, as the superior to whom there is no doubt we have all made profession, and to whom and to the church of Canterbury we owe canonical obedience in all things. The archbishop consulted you about it. And I too, for myself and my church of Chichester, have brought my complaint before you. Your clemency therefore ordered that the abbot and I, together with the lord Thomas, should meet before the archbishop, that the abbot's charter be read there and with the counsel of the archbishop those things that required emendation namely what was against the privileges of the churches of Canterbury and Chichester - should be corrected. Each, then, might rejoice at having gained what is seen to be his by right. We met there. The abbot's charter was read before those assembled and those phrases in it that were against the privileges of Canterbury and Chichester were quite properly ruled to be too drastic. The abbot angrily heaped insults upon me there. And not only then: this very year he came to Chichester and entered our chapter house with arrogance beyond measure, and in the presence of my chapter with innumerable threats and insults he condemned

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 317 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

me. Thus, my dearest lord, there has been a succession of provocations up to the very present. Wherefore I beseech your excellency to command that the ancient and just procedure of the canons be fulfilled between us and that we settle it in the manner of the church" The king answered: "We have heard something of a marvel here, something to be exceedingly wondered at, that charters of the kings my predecessors, confirmed by thejust prerogative of the crown of England and by the witness of great men, have been adjudged too drastic by you, lord bishop. May it not come to this! May the splendour of my reign never see a time when things I decree, as dictated by reason and by the counsel of my archbishops, bishops and barons, are to be judged condemned by you and your ilk" The abbot spoke: "The elders of my abbey have informed me that all these matters were settled in olden times, during the reign of the most noble King William. It was settled before the lord king himself, and with him were Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, and many bishops, among them Stigand, then bishop of Chichester, who had been harassing Gausbert, the first abbot of Battle, by summoning him to synod at Chichester and to pay all the other episcopal dues. I have here at hand the king's own charter about the affair, confirmed by the attestation of Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, and several other bishops, including even Stigand, bishop of Chichester". Saying this he handed a charter to the king and at his nod one of the clerks read it to the whole assembly. These among other things were contained in the charter: that the church of Battle should be wholly free of subjection to the bishop of Chichester. Nor might the abbot be summoned to synod, although he might for some reason go there voluntarily.' 4 When it was read through, the bishop swore that he had never seen nor heard that charter, nor had the abbot seen fit to make it known to him in any form. The abbot had begun to argue when the king ordered him to be quiet. "From now on it is not necessary for your prudence to establish your claim. It is I who must defend it as my own personal and royal business. So be silent a while, my brother, for I shall settle this reasonably and with royal protection as my own. The decision in such a matter therefore is mine." Many things were said on this side and that, but when silence had been imposed, Richard de Luci, rising, prayed the king in humble voice to allow his brother the abbot of Battle to take private counsel with his friends about a reply to the accusations. The king agreed. Richard called Roger, archbishop of York, Thomas, the king's chancellor, John, treasurer of the church of York, Robert, earl of Leicester, Patrick, earl of Salisbury, Henry of Essex, Reginald de Warenne, '

This is the second forgery produced by Abbot Walter. It answers Bishop Hilary's earlier objection. B.L., Add. Ch. 70980. An interpolated version of the early thirteenth century is Regesta i, no. 262. Both are printed by Searle, EHR, lxxxiii (1968), 473-474, and are discussed ibid. 458-459, 465. It is there suggested that Westminster, a centre for forgery, had supplied the charter and its forged seal, for Westminster had made its seal matrix available to several monasteries besides Battle. T.A.M. Bishop and Pierre Chaplais, Facsimiles of English Royal Writs to. A.D. 1100, presented to V.H. Galbraith (Oxford, 1957), pp. xxi. xxii. See also Pierre Chaplais, in Mediev'al Miscellany, PR Soc., N.S. xxxvi (1962 for 1960), 89-99.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 318 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Warin fitz Gerold, several other barons and a whole flock of knights, together with his brother the abbot. All these men were his allies and he went aside with them into a part of the chapter house and began to ask their opinions. In the mean time the king went to the church to hear mass. When it was over he returned and again took his seat. Richard de Lucy, having consulted, returned with the abbot and his party. Thomas the king's chancellor had been chosen to reply. With everyone listening, that hero delivered his oration in his eloquent style: "Reverend father Hilary, we have decided at the behest of certain nobles here to go back over a few points, and in the sure light of justice to unravel the knot of this dispute so long kept up by your prudence. In the first place the venerable Abbot Walter thanks your prudence exceedingly for having so highly praised him in so great and so magnificent a court as this, and in the presence of such great and such noble men, for the kindnesses shown you by him. If in those days he had thought he might be so highly praised for it before so great and so excellent a court, he would certainly, he confesses, have increased his favour. Yet he is grieved that though the feeling which prompted him to do you this service was one of kindly devotion, as is clear to all here, yet you try, with all your powers, to repay his benevolence with malevolence. Now therefore he replies to the charges against him thus. What if he was at Canterbury and present at your consecration, and afterwards, encountering you at Chichester, he ceremonially conducted you to your seat and also sat in your synod along with the others? By the privilege and exemption of his church of Battle, as the charter read here witnesses, it was entirely up to him whether he did either of these things, or did not do them. He is not bound by anything that would force him by ecclesiastical sanctions to render you these services, for he is not subject to your authority. Indeed as his charter attests, he is free from all subjection to you. He also calls to witness our lord archbishop of Canterbury that it was done at his command" "It is true", the archbishop said. "It was at my command that he agreed to do them" The chancellor said: "Now visiting your diocese on circuit as is customary, you arrived at Battle and you were received by the brothers in procession and in the presence of their abbot. Then, entering their chapter house, you preached the word of God to them. In all churches everywhere, here and across the sea, it is known to be the custom that this honour, this symbol of respect and affection, is properly bestowed upon a bishop, be he Irish or even Spanish or whatever. It is gratis and is no precedent for a custom. About the bishopric of London, the abbot hastens to inform your prudence of this: that neither by look nor act nor even gesture did he inflict upon you anything that had a hostile meaning. For he suspected no ill will against himself from you in the settlement of that affair. But as is said somewhere, the conspirator thinks everyone is against him.15 Your conscience was by chance troubling you over something you had 15

See Walther, no. 3122 '[H. Walther, Proverbiasententiaeque latinitatismedii aev'i, I, G6ttingen, 1963, p. 365.10: Dion. Cato 1, 17, 2: "Conscius ipse sibi de se putat omnia dici". Cf. Ovid, Fasti, 1.4.311.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 319 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

done, and you expected that this man, though he goes his way with an open countenance, could never look you straight in the eyes. 6 You tell the story that you summoned him to synod at Chichester and interdicted him when he did not come, that it was for this that King Stephen, through Robert de Cornuvilla his clerk, set a day for settling it before him, that no one came to oppose you on the part of the abbot, and that you therefore left. The abbot on the contrary declares that on the stated day he came before King Stephen in the presence of the bishops of Winchester and Ely and of the abbot of Westminster and several barons, in the king's royal chapel at the Tower of London. And there the charters and written accounts of his abbey were read by the venerable bishop of Winchester. The king added that he would be the protector anywhere of his own chapel, the abbey of Battle, and that you should meet and make peace between you. At his order the abbot returned home. Unless he wishes to go voluntarily to synod, he cannot be forced by any summons, as his charter read here attests, and in accordance with ancient usage observed in his church to the present day.IV Wherefore, to say truly, going to synod or not going is proven to be a matter of his right and of his free will. For, as all can see, he is not subject to your jurisdiction, but is wholly free from any subjection to you. You assert that he was excommunicated by you. This seems very strange to him and all his friends, for it is quite certain that you did not dare to do such a presumptuous thing to him in the time of King Stephen. What you may have done in the time of this our present lord king he knows nothing of. After all, in the first year of his reign, when our lord king was one day hearing mass at St. Peter's church, Westminster, and both of you were present among many others, when the 'Pax Domini' was reached, you received the pax from the priest and took it as is the custom to the king. And afterwards you bestowed the kiss of peace upon the abbot, immediately following you in precedence, not as an excommunicate, but as a Christian and a son of the Church" To this the bishop said: "If I have sinned in this, through absent-mindedness or preoccupation, as often happens, I shall confess my sin to my lord archbishop and will remove my guilt by the penance he will assign me" The chancellor said: "In the charters of his church of Battle, which, as is clear to everyone, is the king's own chapel, no novelty has been inserted contrary to the privileges of Canterbury, or your church of Chichester either. That is abundantly clear to everyone. That church, built by the famous King William, was strengthened by great and outstanding privileges. Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, and other bishops, abbots, several barons, along with the king himself, by the prerogative of the English crown, assured them to the church. These, it is established, it has possessed up to the present by inviolable right. These are what he was trying to preserve, when summoned by the lord king into the presence of our lord archbishop of Canterbury. He is not doing this to do 6 Becket refers to the bishop's words, above, p. 190. 7

The forgery B.L., Add. Ch. 70980 reads, "ad sinodum vero abbas ire non summoneatur neque compellatur nisi propria voluntate pro aliquo negotio ire voluerit"

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 320 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

you any evil, but very reasonably to defend as royal what you in our hearing have judged too drastic. You allege that this year in your absence he entered your chapter house at Chichester haughtily and there demeaned you in many ways. But with plain reason he points out that he did not act haughtily as you assert, but peaceably and under compulsion. For two of your deans, Lewes and Hastings, along with five priests as witnesses, went to Battle at the beginning of Lent. They served upon the abbot a letter procured by you, for this is the truth of the matter, from Pope Adrian, summoning him on the pope's behalf to go to Chichester on the Sunday 'Letare Jerusalem', to hear the commands of the lord pope. Since our lord the king was on the Continent he could not approach him about this but, after consulting our lord the archbishop of Canterbury and various of his friends, he went to Chichester on the day assigned and in the presence of the two deans and the five priests he entered the chapter house to hear the pope's commands. There the two deans testified orally as to what they had served upon the abbot at Battle and what the abbot had replied. There your clerks kept demanding from him things that were against the royal prerogative. The abbot prayed that they give him a delay so that he might go to our lord king and hear his advice and his wishes in the matter. They refused and he was unable to get his delay. Indeed, further, they swore that this was your order to them and that they were not able to act except as you had ordered. This was the position when the abbot left, and he explained everything to the king by messenger. And our lord king set today for you both, I say, on the matter". Then the king's face changed and, looking at the bishop, he said: "This letter that was mentioned: did you ask for it? By your oath of fealty to me, I order you to tell me the truth about this". The bishop said: "By the oath of fealty which I took to you as my lord, may your excellency know that this letter was not asked for by myself, or by anyone to my knowledge. But the abbot lately sent one of his clerks to Rome and he slandered me terribly there at the Roman court. However, I am known to everyone at that court and it is not at all unknown to everyone there what kind of honesty and morality I am made of. So it is impossible for me to be brought into disrepute by him there. Perhaps therefore he may have asked for this letter himself through him" The king said: "Well, it would seem remarkable to me, not to say astonishing, if the abbot wanted to ask like this for something detrimental to himself and his church" At this the chancellor interjected: "If you should wish to prove that these letters were sought in another way than by yourself, as has been suggested, the abbot is present, holding the letter in his hand. Let the letter be read so we can see the drift of its meaning; then we shall get to the truth". The archbishop, hearing the bishop deny before all the letter he had asked for, and knowing the whole story as it was, that the letter had been asked for by him, crossed himself in his great surprise. The chancellor turned to the bishop: "Our lord the king intends to know the truth not only about this letter. He commands that if you know that you have, or anyone in your name has, any other letter that is, or might in the future be, harmful to the abbot or the church of Battle,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 321 1991

FROM "ILLIAM

I TO RICHARD I

you are to admit it in the presence of all". To the amazement of everyone, the bishop swore on his oath that he had not had the present letter nor had he, or any agent, had any others which might be harmful to the abbot or the church of Battle then or in the future. Things having reached this stage before the king, the archbishop of Canterbury said to him: "May your excellency command us to reconsider what should be done about this and settle it by the judicial method of church custom" "No", said the king, "I shall not command it to be settled that way by you. I shall put a proper end to it, in your company and having taken counsel about it". As he spoke he got up and walked out into the monks' cemetery accompanied by everyone except the bishop and the abbot. When he had talked it over, he sent for the bishop. He went and sat down with the others and they talked a long while with him. Finally things were brought to an end. By the king's order Henry of Essex summoned the abbot and his monks. When he was seated with the rest, the king nodded and the bishop made this statement in everyone's hearing: "Oh most excellent king, I, bishop of Chichester do quitclaim and wholly acknowledge as free from all claims and charges upheld by me until today, the church of Battle, as your own demesne chapel in which and over which I neither should nor justly can have any rights. I absolve the abbot as one on whom I placed the bond of anathema unjustly, which I neither could nor should have done in justice. On account of his own high rank and that of his church, I declare that I could not and should not have demanded anything save out of his voluntary charity. Similarly I proclaim him free from today and for all time from all episcopal exactions and customs" The king then said: "Is it correct that you have done and said this not under compulsion, but voluntarily?" The bishop said: "It is true. I have done and said this voluntarily, under compulsion of right reason" The archbishop said: "Lord king, now that the affair has been settled justly, we all, as one, pray your clemency for the bishop. Though he may seem to have said some imprudent and unwarranted things against the prerogative of your highness, may your clemency deign to answer our prayers and offer him your kiss of peace and your forgiveness" The king said: "Moved by your prayers and by love of him, I would give him the kiss of peace not once only, but a hundred times, forgiving him all, if there is anything to forgive". Getting up, he embraced the bishop and kissed him. The archbishop said: "Now let the bishop and the abbot kiss as friends and, keeping the pact of peace between them that you have confirmed, let them stay at peace in the future" Then the bishop and the abbot at the king's command exchanged kisses while the archbishop made the sign of the cross over them. And

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 322 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

thus, joined in a bond of peace and love, they were made friends. 8 The archbishop said: "One thing yet remains. Let the abbot's venerable brother Richard de Lucy be joined to the bishop in this alliance of peace and love". Instantly, at the king's command, Richard, a man remarkable for his correctness of conduct and his prudence, offered the bishop the kiss of peace, all quarrels forgotten. These ceremonies over, everyone congratulated them on the alliance thus confirmed between them, and the king left to finish his other business. With the king's consent the abbot returned home with his entourage, praising the Lord Jesus Christ and His most blessed mother Mary, and St. Martin, Christ's confessor, who never deserts them who trust in him, and exulting with great joy that he had achieved what he had wished. This issue, so long in doubt, was finally settled on 28 May at Colchester in the presence of our lord King Henry II and with these witnesses: Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, Roger, archbishop of York, Richard, bishop of London, Robert, bishop of Lincoln, Robert, bishop of Exeter, Silvester, abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, 'Geoffrey', abbot of Hulme, 19 Thomas the king's chancellor, Robert, earl of Leicester, Patrick, earl of Salisbury, Henry of Essex, the king's constable, Richard de Lucy, Reginald de Warenne, Warin fitz Gerold. Hilary, bishop of Chichester and Abbot Walter were also present, as were 20 many others, both clerks and laymen. 361 Controversy between the monks of Durham and Cecily de Muschamp and her son Thomas concerning the manor of Heatherslaw: although the monks offer proof, Cecily and Thomas resist royal orders to seise them. A. Writ of King Henry II ordering Cecily de Muschamp and her son Thomas to seise the monks of Durham of the manor of Heatherslaw, if the monks are able to deraign it through lawful witnesses. Is Much later, during his own quarrel with the king, Becket referred to this case in very different terms. He was writing to Pope Alexander both to defend himself against the accusation that he himself had helped Henry to enlarge his prerogative claims over the church, and to shock the pope with the extent of Henry's claims. Since he evidently felt he had to bring up the case of Battle Abbey, it must have been an open and long-remembered scandal. Becket's words to the pope do not have the ring of genuinely outraged honesty, when they are compared with the words attributed to him by our author in this work that would be kept private within Battle abbey: "Sed et episcopus Cicestrensis quid profecit adversus abbatem de Bello, qui, privilegiis apostolicis fretus, cum ea nominasset in curia et abbatem denuntiasset excommunicatum, eidem incontinenti coram omnibus communicare compulsus est sine omni absolutione, et eum recipere in osculo pacis? Sic enim placuit regi et curiae quae ei in nullo contradicere audebat; et hoc, sanctissime pater, contigit, tempore vestri decessoris et nostri". Materials,vii. 242-243, no. 643. Becket's outline of the case substantiates that of our author, who would, one may suppose, have been more than surprised at Becket's later tone. 19 See above, p. 181, n. 1.'[=our note 7.]o 20 The charter, with these witnesses, is printed also in Saltman, Theobald, no. 11, p. 243. 0

[Translation taken from BATTLE Chron., 175-209; see Searle, Battle Abbey, 25 35.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 323 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and of the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Cecily de Muschamp and Thomas', her son, greeting. If the monks of Durham will be able to deraign with lawful witnesses that Thomas de Muschamp the elder has given in alms to God and St. Cuthbert the manor of Heatherslaw and has seised the monks thereof with his sword, then I order that you seise them thereof without delay or argument and justly and that you let them hold it in peace and justly. Witness: Reg(inald), earl of Corn(wall). At Bridgnorth.

B. Prior Absalom and a monk of Durham confirm their readiness to testify that they witnessed the grant of Heatherslaw by Thomas de Muschamp the elder to Durham. Absalom, prior of the church of Durham, and A., monk of the same church, to the sheriff of Northumberland and all who will hear this letter, greeting. Know that we were present and have seen that Thomas de Muschamp gave the manor of Heatherslaw with its appurtenances in alms to St. Cuthbert and that he seised that holy saint, Cuthbert [thereof] by his sword, and we are lawful witnesses of it and ready to prove this by all means and to appear on the day appointed by Stephen de Bulmer, unless we are withheld by infirmity. We beg that nobody shall refuse our testimony since we speak the truth and in this are witnesses of the truth. Farewell.

C. Writ by King Henry II who is displeased that Cecily and Thomas de Muschamp have not yet obeyed his orders concerning Heatherslaw and commands them to obey on pain of forfeiture. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and of the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Cecily de Muschamp and Thomas, her son, greeting. I am astonished and greatly displeased that you have not done what I told you in my other writs concerning the manor of Heatherslaw, which the monks of Durham claim. Now however I firmly order you on my forfeiture to execute my command without delay so that I hear no further complaint on this matter for want of full right. Witness: Reg(inald), earl of Corn(wall). At Northampton.' 361A ' °[Robert de Muschamp was succeeded after 111 by his eldest son Thomas, who became a monk of Durham. Ranulf, his brother and heir, died without children in Stephen's reign and was succeeded by his sister Cecily (d. c. 1180), who married Stephen Bulmer (d. 1171-1172) and had a son called Thomas (d. 1190), see Sanders, Baronies, 100.10 361C ' [This controversy started under King Stephen, who already ordered Ranulf de Muschamp and his sister to restore Heatherslaw to the monks of Durham: Regesta iii, no. 257, p. 92 (11361138); Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 241, 244.]"

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 324 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

362 Judgment is given in the court of the prior of Spalding against Hugh and Geoffrey, sons of Thowi, who had claimed land which the prior had bought from their father and their brother Benedict. The plaintiffs had brought a writ of right to the prior's court. Let those present and future know that Prior Herbert of Spalding has bought the land of Thowi fitz Siwat from himself and his son called Benedict, giving him 37 s. for that land. And as free as he bought that land, so free and quit he sold it to Wulfric fitz Godfrey and Alward fitz Rovi, receiving from them for the aforesaid land 5 marks and 40 pence. Afterwards Hugh fitz Thowi and his brother Godfrey claimed the aforesaid land and went to the king's court and brought a writ of right from that same court to Prior Herbert. Seeing this, the prior granted them right judgment in his court and for that reason he sent for the sheriff of Lincoln and before the sheriff of Lincoln and the whole court of the prior they lost by a just judgment the land which they claimed. So, seeing that they had lost that land by a just judgment, they freely and completely gave it up to the prior and the king's writ, which they had brought, they handed over to the said prior before the whole court which was present. Witnesses: Lambert de Moulton, Jordan de Blosseville, sheriff [of Lincolnshire], Henry de Say, Thomas fitz Lambert, Robert fitz Richard, Hugh fitz Alger, Ralph Brito, Walter fitz Peter and his brother Ranulf, Robert fitz Guibert, Jocelin de Leighton, William the cleric of Spalding, Robert the reeve, Alured fitz Nigel, William the monks' steward, Siwat de Fulney, Errichi of Weston, William the reeve of Weston, Gorra fitz Asch', Walter fitz Tengui, Huscal, etc.' 363 Turstin fitz Simon convinces King Stephen that the abbot of Abingdon has unjustly disseised him of the church of Marcham and other possessions and the king orders that he shall be reseised. The abbot summons Turstin to his court, but the latter prefers to go again to the king and complains that the abbot refuses to obey the royal command. The king orders the sheriff, Henry of Oxford, to deal with the abbot on royal authority, whereupon Turstin is seised of the land in question. On the accession of Henry II the monks of Abingdon complain to the new king, who orders the case to be examined in the county court of Berkshire. Turstin avoids appearing for two years and more. Upon renewed complaint by the abbot, the king convenes his own court and decides the case in favour of Abingdon.

362 ' '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 43; Stenton, English Justice, 28.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 325 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the same year when King Stephen and Duke Henry of Normandy were allied, Turstin fitz Simon suggested to the king that the abbot of Abingdon had for some time occupied by unjust and fraudulent invasion some of his hereditary possessions. Having received gifts for this restitution, the king immediately ordered the abbot by his writ to seise Turstin without any delay of everything he claimed. On hearing this, the abbot foresaw serious damage and did not easily comply. Convening his court, he fixed a date on which, after deliberation, he would see what he should answer. The appointed day had already come when the abbot did not yet agree to grant Turstin what he asked and on this as on the previous occasion the abbot delayed the day in order to consult wiser men on this business. However, Turstin seeing his gain postponed, did not appear, but went to the king and untruthfully declared that the abbot refused to obey his orders. He furthermore again enticed the king and his entourage with gifts in order to obtain a quick decision. The king believed Turstin's cause to be just and ordered his sheriff, who at that time was Henry of Oxford, to deal with the case according to royal law and without any delay or scruple. Depraved by love of money, the sheriff despoiled the just possessors and unjustly, as he himself confessed afterwards, introduced Turstin to what was not his, on the pretext of a royal command and the dictate of the law. Thus Turstin was seised of what he wanted, namely the church of Marcham and three hides that belonged to it and one hide in Milton and one in Appleford, and acting against the law of the Church he held it. But the Lord does not suffer an unjust state of affairs to continue as long as a just one, for in the same year' in which he invaded the property of the church, King Stephen died 2 and Henry the young succeeded him on the throne. The brethren of the congregation went to him, showed how perversely this business had been conducted and begged him to lend his ear to their just complaint. Acquiescing to the brethren, whose complaint he found justified, the king twice sent letters ordering the case of the church of Abingdon and Turstin to be examined in the county court of Berkshire and, after examination, to be decided one way or another. Turstin, who was conscious of his misdeed, cleverly evaded the meetings of the county for two years and more, under pretext of the king's service or illness or some other cause. When the abbot understood this, he was aggrieved by this endless and fruitless labour and, accompanied by the brethren, he went to the king, who was then staying at Woodstock, and strenuously begged him to have mercy and to put an end to his pain and to the case. The king immediately agreed, summoned his justices Gregory de London, William fitz John, Nigel de Broc and other wise men of his court, ordered them to deal with the case of the abbot and of Turstin, who then was present, and declared that whatever they would rightly judge was to stand undisturbed. Having found the truth of the matter, they understood that Turstin had unjustly held possessions of the church and that the abbot had justly 363 ' A new chapter here commences in both mss., but in neither is a rubric prefixed. 2 25 Oct. A.D. 1154.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 326 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

complained of this damage, but although this was just, they did not dare to deprive him of what he had occupied until the sentence had been heard from the king's mouth. They said that if it came out of the mouth of royal authority, it would stand all the more firmly and they told the king what had been done concerning the judgment with which they had been entrusted, praying that he himself should let them know his will. He ordered them that not only were the goods which Turstin had unjustly acquired to return to the demesne of the church, but that the damage which the church had suffered in the meantime was to be restored, with the reservation that, if he wanted, Turstin could hold the manor of Tadmarton for £15 a year from the abbot, as his father and he himself had done before. After they had diligently calculated the damage, it was said that it would be little if Turstin paid to the abbot 60 marks for the damage in Tadmarton and 3 marks for the damage in the church of Marcham and the 5 hides which we have mentioned, unless the abbot wanted to spare Turstin. Turstin, however, seeing that what was imposed on him went beyond his power, indicated that he could not hold the manor and pay damages as he was ordered. As the king was informed of this, he ordered that the abbot should receive the manor, the church and the aforesaid land and should henceforth in no way be answerable to Turstin and his heirs. Thus, God willing, all that of which this defrauder had cheated the monastery, was restored to its 3 previous state.

364 Confirmation by King Henry II of the agreement between Furness Abbey and William I de Lancaster, son of Gilbert, touching the partition of Furness Fells, as it was sworn on royal order by thirty men. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and of Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the archbishops etc. and all his men of the whole of England, French and English, greeting. Know that I have granted and by my charter confirmed the agreement which was made before me between the monks of Furness and William fitz Gilbert concerning Furness Fells, as follows. Furness Fells is partitioned from Kendal along the following boundaries according to the oath which was sworn on my order by thirty men: as the water descends from Wrynose Hawse to Langdale and thence to Elterwater and from there along the Brathay to Windermere and so to the Leven and to the sea. The abbot of Furness has partitioned this land along the following boundaries: from Elterwater to Tilberthwaite and so to Church Coniston and thence to the head of Thurston Water and along the bank of that '[See Boussard, Le gourernenentd'Henri H, 554; Van Caenegem, Roy'al Writs, 200-201, 243; Stenton, English Justice, p. 24 n. 5, p. 70; Cronne, The Reign of Stephen, 261-262, 273; Van Caenegem, The Birth of the English Common Law, 35-36.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 327 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

water to the Crake and so to the Leven. William however chose that part which is adjacent to these boundaries on the west side, to be held from the abbey of Furness completely and fully in the wood and in the plain, in the waters and the fisheries and in all things against the yearly payment to the abbey of Furness of twenty shillings, and William's son shall do homage for it to the abbot of the aforesaid place. On the other hand the abbey has that part which is adjacent to those boundaries on the east side, except that William shall be entitled to hunting and hawking there. Therefore I will and firmly order that this agreement shall remain firm and unshaken and that the said abbey shall have and hold its aforesaid part well and in peace and fully in the wood and in the plain, in waters and fisheries and in all places and things. Witnesses: the bishops Robert of Lincoln and Hugh of Durham, Robert the earl of Leicester, Richard de Lucy, William de Vesci, Geoffrey de Valognes, William de Egremont, Aubert de Gresley, John the constable [of Chester], Richard the butler, Henry fitz Suain, Gospatric fitz Orm and Richard fitz Ivo. By the hand of Stephen the chaplain, at Woodstock.1

365 Memorandum of an inquest made by royal command in Derby, where twenty-four recognitors swore that the church of St. Peter in Derby was built on the patrimony of Hugh the dean and his predecessors, to whom the advowson belongs. Memorandum that the following inquisition was held on the church of St. Peter of Derby. Alan the priest of Wilne, Ralph the cleric of Breadsall, Osmer the priest of Derby, Roger the priest of Markeaton, Robert the priest of Mackworth, Ralph the knight of Marchington', Robert the knight of Cottons2 , Richard the knight of Normanton3 , Robert the knight of Osmaston4 , Ralph fitz Geremund, Albert de Horsley, Arnwin de Boulton and the burgesses of Derby, i.e. Hereward de Ponte, Ingemund de Palmer, Eilaf, Colban, Agemund, Steynulf, Levenad, Godwin, Robert son of Ulfet, Alan, Levered and Ordmar. All those asserted under oath before Ranulf the sheriff and Froger the archdeacon of Derby and before Peter de Sandiacre by the command of King Henry the son of Queen Matilda in the house of Hugh at Derby that the church of St. Peter in Derby was founded and

364 1 0[The text also occurs in FURNESS Coucher Book, i, no. 1, pp. 1 2 and in LANCASMRE Charters, series iv, Charter no. ix, pp. 310 313, with extensive commentaries.]' 365 Marchington (co. Staffs.). 2 Cottons Farm in Normanton. 3 Normanton by Derby. 4Osmaston by Derby.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 328 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and that the built on the patrimony of the aforesaid Hugh and his predecessors 5 donation of that church belonged to them and no one else.

366 Writ of King Henry II ordering the sheriff of Norfolk to restore to Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme the land at Ranworth to which Colstan lays claim. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to William, sheriff of Norfolk, greeting. I command that the abbot of Hulme shall hold his land of Ranworth, which Colstan claims, as well and peacefully and justly as he best held it on the day when King Henry, my grandfather, was alive and dead. And see to it that the houses and chattels, which he unjustly carried off, shall be justly taken back to the same land. Unless you do this, my justice shall have it done. Witness: William fitz John. At Lincoln.

This document was printed in 1917 (English HistoricalReview, Vol xxxii, p. 47) by Professor Stenton. The inquest belongs to either 1156 or 1157, for Ranulf did not become sheriff until 1156 and Froger was elevated to the bishopric of S6ez in 1157 (Gains, Series Episcoporurn,p. 625). The circumstances in which the inquest was made are unknown to us, and for this reason it is difficult to determine the place of this somewhat remarkable record in the legal history of the age, in particular to decide whether it foreshadows some future development or falls into line with the usages of the past. It is well recognised that procedure by inquest, though by no means unknown in the Norman period, did not become part of the normal legal machinery until the reign of Henry II. The sworn inquest was used to decide whether land was lay fee or free alms as early as 1164 if not before. Its employment in the king's courts in suits between subject and subject, relating to the ownership of land, was however a later development and the innovation probably belongs to the same date as the institution of the latest of the possessory assizes (in which the verdict was likewise given by sworn recognitors) to be devised, the assize of darrein presentment. The form of the verdict at the Derby inquest shows that ownership and not seisin was the subject of the inquiry, and the inquest cannot therefore be regarded as a forerunner of the assize of darrein presentment. If a dispute between Hugh and some other of the king's subjects, for example a burgess of Derby, was the immediate cause of the inquiry, the employment of sworn recognitors might be regarded as remarkable. It may be suggested however that Hugh had already given or was about to give the church to the canons, and that his right to do so was challenged by an officer of the crown who claimed the advowson as the king's. If this were so, the inquest would be one concerning the king's rights, made before "commissioners" specially appointed to hear the jury's evidence and verdict (the presence of the archdeacon and Peter of Sandiacre alongside the sheriff can hardly have been accidental), and so would fall into line with earlier inquiries, beginning in the time of William I,of the same type. The employment of sworn recognitors would perhaps not then be in itself a matter of unusual significance and greater importance would attach to the composition of the jury ("half of them being burgesses of Derby; the remainder include four knights, as many priests, one clerk, and three men of undefined station", as Professor Stenton pointed out), and the number of the jurors.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 329 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

367 Gift by Roger de Mowbray to Uctred son of Gamel of his assarts in Brimham, which were sworn to be his, and of land in Winsley.

Roger de Mowbray to all his men, French and English, greeting. Let it be known to you all, present and future, that I have given and granted and by this my charter confirmed to Uctred son of Gamel all the assarts which were sworn to be mine in Brimham and all my cultivated demesne land beyond the water, namely within Winsley, except for one carrucate of land, and common pasture and the pannage of his demesne manor, quit except for the yearly payment of half a mark of silver and the aid pertaining to one other carrucate of land. His men will have their just pannage together with their neighbours and I agree that they shall build their mill. Therefore I order and will that Uctred shall hold this foresaid tenure well, in peace, freely and quietly, doing the aforesaid service and holding it, himself and his heirs, in hereditary fee from me and my heirs. Witnesses: Nigel de Mowbray, Roger de Cundy, Richard the clerk of Malzeard, Hamo Beler, Robert de Buscy, Uctred son of Dolfin, Thomas de Walkingham, Samson de Cornwall and Baldwin the clerk, who wrote this charter.

368 Notification by Roger de Mowbray to Roger, archbishop of York, of the settlement in his court of the dispute between the monks of Fountains and the sons of Drogo the forester concerning land in Aldburgh. To Roger, by God's grace archbishop of York, and the chapter of the church of St. Peter in York and all sons of Holy Mother Church, present and future, Roger de Mowbray, greeting. Know that the monks of Fountains and the sons of Drogo the forester have met before me and my sons and men and have been pacified and come to an agreement concerning the claim and controversy which they had on the land of Aldburgh, giving up all claims and quitclaiming on both sides all plaint. Witnesses: Nigel and Robert, my sons, Hugh son of Jernegan and his son Jernegan, Samson d'Aubigny, Richard de Malzeard and Uctred his brother, Ralph de Bellun, Hamo Beler, Turgis son of Malger, Walter de Carlton, Roland de Landelles, Ralph son of Aldelin, Wielard de Seint Annhel, Jocelin Uellekin,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 330 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Robert son of Arnald, Faraman son of Unwin and Geoffrey his brother, Jernegan de Tanfield and Dolfin his brother, William son of Roger the forester and Ketel the reeve of Masham.

369 Writ of King Henry II ordering that the church of Chesterfield shall have all its liberties and tenements as in the time of King Henry I and as they were recognized by the lawful men of the hallmoot and wapentake. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou to his justices and Sheriff [Randulf fitz Engelram] of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, greeting. I order that the church of Chesterfield shall hold and have all its liberties, customs and tenements in meadows, pastures, woods and all things as well, peacefully, freely, quietly, justly, honourably and fully as it best and most freely held them in the time of King Henry my grandfather and as it was recognized by lawful men of the hallmoot and the wapentake. And it shall furthermore hold all the lands and revenues which the parishioners gave to the church after the death of King Henry my grandfather, as the charter of Roger, bishop of Chester, testifies. And I forbid anyone to commit any forfeiture to the detriment of that church or anything pertaining to it. Witness: Nigel de Broc. At Nottingham.

370 Writ of King Henry II ordering William de Neville, sheriff of Norfolk, to restore to the abbot of St. Benet of Hulme the appurtenance of his manor of Heigham of which, as the men of the hundred testified, he was deforced. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to William, sheriff of Norfolk, greeting. I order you justly to see to it that the appurtenance of his manor of Heigham is restored to the abbot of Hulme, of which he was deforced by Ralph Flot and Hugh, as the men of the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 331 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

hundred of Humbleyard testified in the county court that he ought to have it. And unless you do it, my justice shall. Witness: William fitz John. At Worcester.

371 A burgess of Scarborough complains to King Henry II of extortions by a rural dean against an express royal prohibition. The case is heard in the king's court, where the dean fails to exculpate himself. The church claims the right to punish him and the court agrees in spite of the protestations of Richard de Lucy, royal justiciar, who points out that the dean has transgressed a royal edict. Moreover, a long time ago, namely in the days of Archbishop Theobald, the king had thought out various things against the clergy of England in general, provoked by the insolence of some clerics. He stayed for some time at York, where a burgess of his from Scarborough came to him and complained that some dean had taken from him 22 s. by vexing his wife in several chapters and charging her with adultery without another accuser, a custom against which the king had issued a law of prohibition. The dean in question was summoned at the king's command and appeared before the king in the presence of his archbishop and Bishop [Robert] of Lincoln, Bishop [Hugh] of Durham and John [de Canterbury], the then treasurer of York who afterwards was bishop of Poitiers; being informed [of the complaint], he replied that that woman had been accused by some deacon and by another person, a layman. He also said that judgment had been given that, as she denied, she was to purge herself and that her husband gave 20 s. to his archdeacon and 2 to him in order to obtain a milder treatment. As the dean was not able to give proof of this before the king through the pronouncement of the witnesses who were present there, the king demanded judgment against him, declaring that the archdeacons and deans extorted more money each year in this way from the inhabitants of his kingdom than he received himself. His barons came together with the said clergy to give judgment and finally John the treasurer said that it seemed to him that the burgess should receive his money back and that the dean should be subjected to the mercy of his archbishop concerning his office. To this Richard de Lucy said: "And what judgment will you give as far as the lord king is concerned, against whose constitution this man has acted?" "Nothing", said John, "since he is a cleric". "Then", said Richard, "I shall not be party to this sentence",

370 ' '[There is another writ of Henry II concerning the manor of Heigham and all its appurtenances in favour of Abbot William, loc. cit., no. 17, p. 14.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 332 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and leaving them he returned to the king with the other barons. Afterwards the clergy returned with that sentence which was pronounced by the said John who had formed it. The king turned to Archbishop Theobald whom, indicating a day, he summoned, declaring very angrily that the sentence was false. But before that day came he was told of the death of his brother Geoffrey, went overseas, and did not follow up the appeal.1

372 King Henry II orders that Osney Abbey shall hold the land of Holcombe, which was adjudicated to it as royal alms by the hallmoot of Benson and the hundred court (of Ewelme). Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Geoffrey de Ivoi, greeting. I order that the abbot of Osney and the canons who serve God there shall hold the land of Holcombe which was delivered to them by the men of the hallmoot of Benson and by the honest men of the hundred as my alms of Benson, which they used to have in money of the old alms of the kings of England. And I forbid anyone to take anything or to meddle with my alms, for I will and firmly command that they shall hold well, in peace, justly and honourably, so that I hear no more complaint of it. Witness: Thomas the chancellor. At Westminster.

373 Writ of King Henry II ordering that master Ralph, canon of Lincoln, shall hold the land which his tenants of Hareby and Bolingbroke sold or quitclaimed to him in his court. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Robert, bishop of Lincoln, and his justices, sheriff, ministers and lieges of Lincolnshire, greeting. I order that master Ralph, canon of St. Mary of Lincoln, shall hold peacefully, freely, justly and honourably all the lands and tenures which

371 ' '[The displeasure of King Henry II caused by the extortions committed by the archdeacons was strongly expressed at the council of Westminster in October 1163, where the king also complained about the lack of effective prosecution of criminous clerks (MATERIALS BECKET iv.

201-202).]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 333 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the men of Hareby and Bolingbroke, who held from him under the prebend of Asgarby have sold or quitclaimed to him or have abjured in his court. And I forbid anyone to cause him any injury or contumely for this. Witness: Henry of Essex, the constable. At Westminster.

374 Confirmation by King Henry II to Gerbert de Percy of the manor of Chardstock, which he has deraigned in the court of the bishop of Salisbury.

Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Bishop [Jocelin] of Salisbury and to his justice, barons, sheriff, ministers and lieges of Dorset, greeting. Know that we have granted to Gerbert de Percy and his heirs the manor of Chardstock,' with all its appurtenances, as he reasonably deraigned it in the court of the bishop of Salisbury. 2 And I will and firmly order that he and his heirs shall have and hold that manor in peace, quietly and honourably, with all its liberties and customs in the wood and in the plain, in the meadows and pastures, in waters and mills and in all things and in all places, as he deraigned it in the court of the bishop of Salisbury and as a charter of the bishop of Salisbury testifies. Witnesses: Richard de Humez the constable, Manasser Biset the 3 steward and Warin fitz Gerold the chamberlain. At Westminster.

375 Consequent to a writ of King Henry II, the county court of Kent recognizes the right of the nuns of Malling in their land at Thorne, as against the heirs of Nicholas of Thorne. A. King Henry II orders his justice and the sheriff of Kent to see to it that the nuns of Mailing shall hold their land of Thorne, if they can show that they bought it with the consent of the heirs who now lay claim to it.

374 1 The subsequent gift of the church of Chardstock to the cathedral by Gerbert (=Gilbert) de Perci is recorded in the confirmation charter of Henry II. Osm. Reg., i. 203. Jones. o[ SALISBURY °

0Vetus Registrum.]

[This refers to the restitution c. 1155 of Chardstock by Robert de Percy to Gerbert de Percy in the court of Bishop Jocelin of Salisbury, SALISBURY Charters,no. xx, pp. 18-19.]o 3 See our case no. 397. 2

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 334 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his justice and the sheriff of Kent, greeting. If the nuns of Malling can justly show by the testimony of lawful men that they bought the land of Thorne in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, reasonably and according to the custom of the shire with the consent of the heirs who now claim it, then I order that they shall hold it well, in peace, honourably and justly as they held it on the day when King Henry, my grandfather, was alive and dead, and let them not unjustly have to defend themselves against those heirs who received money for having given their consent, since the said nuns have held it in peace from the days of King Henry, my grandfather, until my own time, so that I hear no further complaint thereon for lack of full right. Witness: Earl Roger [of Clare]. At Dover.

B. King Henry II orders that the nuns of Malling shall peacefully hold their land of Thorne, as it was recognized in the county court of Kent that the abbess bought it in the time of King Henry I. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and of the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the justice, the sheriff and his ministers and bailiffs of Kent, greeting. I order that the nuns of Malling shall have and hold well and in peace, freely and quietly and justly their land of Thorne, as they best and most quietly held it in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, and as was recognized by lawful men of the county that Avicia, the abbess, bought it from N.' of Thorne and his sons, who received the money thereof. And I forbid that they be further unjustly vexed or impleaded concerning this matter because of the plaint of the 2 sons of the said N. Witness: Warin fitz Gerold, chamberlain. At Winchester.

376 In the time of King Henry I Arnulf fitz Peter, by judgment of the king's court, lost the land of Huntingdon, probably to one of the earls of Chester, who granted it to the nunnery of Stixwould, whose founders and benefactors they were. Arnulf fitz Peter tries to reclaim the land under King Henry II, who orders that the nuns shall keep it, if it can be shown that Arnulf lost it in King Henry I's court. William I de Roumare, earl of Lincoln, writes to the justice and the sheriff of Lincolnshire to confirm that he was present when Arnulf lost the said land in the said court.

375B 1 This name is rendered as Nicol in one place and as Nig' in another in this same writ. 0 2 [Translation taken from Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, no. 195, p. 514.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 335 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

A. Writ of King Henry II to Hugh, earl of Chester and his mother Countess Matilda, ordering them to see to it that the nuns of Stixwould Priory hold their land of Huntingdon, if they can show that Arnulf fitz Peter has lost it in the court of Henry I. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and of Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Hugh, earl of Chester, and Matilda, countess, greeting. If the nuns of Stixwould can show that Arnulf' fitz Peter has lost the land of Huntingdon by judgment in the court of King Henry, my grandfather, then I order that they hold that land well and peacefully, freely and justly, as the charter of Countess Lucy and Earl Ran[ulf de Gernons] testifies. And I forbid that they be unjustly impleaded against this [order] because of the plaint of the said Arnulf or his heirs. And unless you do it, my sheriff or my justice shall have it done. Witness: W(illiam) fitz John. 2 At Clarendon.

B. Writ of King Henry II to Hugh, earl of Chester and his mother Countess Matilda, ordering them to organize a recognition by the barons of Lincolnshire to establish whether Arnulf fitz Peter lost the land of Huntingdon by judgment of the court of King Henry I. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Earl Hugh of Chester and Countess Matilda, greeting. I order you to cause it be recognized without delay and justly by your barons of Lincolnshire whether Arnulf fitz Peter lost the land of Huntingdon by judgment in the court of King Henry, my grandfather, and whether Countess Lucy and Earl Ranulf of Chester gave that land in alms to the nuns of Stixwould. If it is thus recognized let them hold well, in peace and justly; and unless you do it, my justice shall. Witness: Manasser Biset, my steward. At Gloucester.

C. Letter of William de Roumare, earl of Lincoln, to the justice, the sheriff and all royal officials in Lincolnshire, testifying that he was present when Arnulf fitz Peter lost the land of Huntingdon by judgment of the court of King Henry I. To the justice, Sheriff [Walter de Amundevilla] and all the king's ministers of Lincolnshire, Earl William de Roumare,I greeting. Know that I was there where Arnulf fitz Peter lost by judgment in the court of King Henry, the grandfather of This same name isentered in one place in this writ as Arnaldus and in another as Arnu/fus. Since another writ of Henry II on the same page and about the same matter talks of Arnufusfilius Petri, the name is probably Arnulf. 2 0[Translation taken from Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 504.1 376C ' o[William I de Roumare, created earl of Lincoln c. 1141, d. c. 1159 1161, was the son of Roger fitz Gerold de Roumare, d. c. 1097 and of Lucy de Bolingbroke, d. 1138.10 376A

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 336 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

our king, the land of Huntingdon which he claims against the nuns of Stixwould and I am ready to demonstrate this, as the county of Lincoln might decree, and 2 many others who are still alive were there who have seen and heard this. 377 In the time of King Henry I Abbot Ralph of Battle buys land in Bamhorne from a man of Withelard de Balliol and the latter adds some land of his own, but afterwards Gilbert de Balliol, the lord of the land, takes it away. The abbey tries in vain to obtain right from King Henry I and King Stephen until Abbot Walter de Lucy complains to King Henry II. The king takes certain measures, but Gilbert de Balliol evades litigation until the abbot obtains the transfer of the case to the king's court. The case is heard before the king at Clarendon and after a discussion on the importance of sealed charters, judgment is given that everything shall be restored to the abbey and it is ordered that the land shall be perambulated by twelve sworn men from the venue. A. The narrative in the chronicle. Back in the days of the famous King Henry son of the noble King William, conqueror of the English throne and founder of the church of St. Martin of Battle, Abbot Ralph, of happy memory, had charge of the abbey. For a price he purchased three wists in Barnhorne from Ingelran, called "beacon-rider", the vassal of Withelard de Balliol, with Withelard's consent, as we have noted above.' Indeed Withelard added gratis, from his own land, part of the marsh adjoining the three wists, and made over to Battle Abbey both the land bought from his vassal Ingelran and his own gift. And so that the land might remain the church's, free from all service and from the claims of all men in perpetuity, it was confirmed by the noble King Henry and by Henry count of Eu, Withelard's lord. 2 Much labour and expense were then put into land reclamation and building, improving the holding greatly. An excellent mill was built in the marsh, and it was expected to be very profitable, since it lay only five miles from the abbey.' After Abbot Ralph died and Warner succeeded, the lord of the estate came to him often, demanding many

2 '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 216, n. 4] 377A 1 See p. 118. Barnhorne is on the coast near Bexhill. The manor's lands extended later into the marsh, but at this period reclamation was just beginning. The edge of the marsh slopes sharply upward to Ingelran's land, an ideal holding for a radcnecht. Such a man can be found performing his service in the Carmen, 11.149-167. '[C. Morton and H. Muntz (eds.), The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio of Guy bishop of Amiens, Oxford, 1972 (Oxford Medieval Texts).]" 2 The count's charter is extant: HBA charter, vol. 42/1132. '[Henry E. Huntington Library. San Marino, California.]" Henry I's confirmation is Regesta, ii, no. 1061. 3 The monks of the early twelfth century had little arable land within carting distance. Barnhorne was throughout the Middle Ages a chief supplier of corn. Searle, Lordship, p. 455. HBA Accounts: Barnhorne. At such an early date (1107-1124) the mill, built in the sea-marsh rather than on the windy coastal upland, would presumably have been a tidal mill.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 337 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

things as payment for the fief. The abbot wearied of his demands, thinking to himself that evil consequences might perhaps grow out of the affair; and already the lord of the fief was by now demanding more than the yield of the land. Then the abbot retreated, saying that he did not wish to subject himself to constant harassment and demands of this sort. The exactor, seeing that he was unable to get just what he was demanding, withdrew the entire property from the church of Battle, as if bringing it back under his legal control, and gave it in gage for money to Siward of Hastings, called "Sigar's son" By this violence was the church despoiled not only of the land, but of its investment and of everything found on the land at that time. This was most disagreeable to the abbot and his administrators, and they raised many and various complaints. But across the Channel King Henry had died, and they were unable to get any restoration of their rights. King Stephen succeeded, and in his time justice seldom prevailed. He who was strongest prevailed. So for some time one yielded to anyone as his right what in fact he had stolen. The church of St. Martin of Battle was unable to recover not only the Barnhorne tenement, but many other of its rightful possessions that had been violently taken, no matter how frequently complaints were made. After King Stephen's death the famous King Henry succeeded, grandson of the earlier Henry. He brought back the times of his grandfather. By then Abbot Warner had resigned and had been succeeded by the venerable Abbot Walter. This abbot managed to become a friend of the king and thus he took before him a complaint about Barnhorne. At the abbot's request the king sent a writ to John, count of Eu, ordering him to do full right to the abbot concerning the tenement, and warning that if he did not, the sheriff of Sussex would do so, in order that the king might hear no more complaint about the matter.4 Gilbert de Balliol, at that time titular lord of the estate, was addressed in many ways about this, and summoned by the earl, the sheriff, the abbot, and his men. 5 But for long he did nothing and made all sorts of excuses to avoid the suit. Such proceedings wasted a great deal of time in fruitless effort, but the abbot would not give up. He kept petitioning the king, both personally and through his friends, and at length got the case transferred to the royal court. But the king would now be crossing to Normandy and now returning to England on his own affairs. Therefore, although the case was over a long period brought before the justices who presided over his court in the king's place and, 4 This seems to be the only record of this writ. It is a writ of right or a writ precipe, ordering the count of Eu to convene his honorial court of Hastings rape, and threatening the count with a shire-count in the matter if he cannot settle the case. For the writs, and for this case in particular, see Van Caenegem, Writs, pp. 206-212, 220 221, 234-235. For a similar writ of King Henry II see Facsimiles of Early Charters from Northamptonshire Collections, ed. F.M. Stenton, Northamptonshire Record Soc. (London, 1930), no. xx, p. 58. The case is discussed by Warren, Henry II, pp. 325 327. Warren supposes that de Balliol had mortgaged the land,

but the description can equally apply to a rif-gage lease. No payments by the abbey for writs appear on the pipe-rolls of Henry II. 5 In the return of John, count of Eu, in 1166, Gilbert is shown as holding -'of the old enfeoffment" a fief owing the service of three knights. Red Book, i. -03.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 338 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

although the king, now by notifications, now by commands very frequently ordered justice to be done to the abbot, never could the issue be satisfactorily settled. Finally the king settled for some time at Clarendon. After many subterfuges by the opposing party, after many dissimulations, after much plaguing of the abbot and his men, both parties were notified on royal authority that on a fixed day they were to appear before the royal court there without any excuses. Since there was no essoining, both parties were present, the king presiding over the court. One of the abbot's monks, Osmund, and a knight, Peter de Criol,6 stood up before everybody and explained the whole matter to the king and his justices from the very beginning: how the land at Barnhorne had been acquired by the church of St. Martin of Battle, partly by gift, partly by purchase; how it had afterwards been taken away, and how far progress had been made on the case in the long period since the beginning of the dispute. They also added a complaint about the long and costly delaying of the business and the frequent, vain importunings by the abbot and his men. Since there could be no reasonable contradiction of this description, and since the royal court bore witness to everything, by the king's permission the chirographs of purchase and gift were read before everyone, as were charters of confirmation. The opposing party had little it could say to these, but Gilbert de Balliol, lest he seem to be making no objection, argued that he had heard chirographs of his predecessors read, but that he did not see the evidence of their seals appended to them. That august and prudent man, Richard de Lucy, the abbot's brother, and at that time the lord king's chief justiciar, looking him over, inquired whether he had a seal. He answered that he had a seal. The great man smiled. "It was not the custom in the past", he said, "for every petty knight to have a seal. They are appropriate for kings and great men only.7 Nor in old times did malice make men pettifoggers and cavillers, as is true nowadays." Then Gilbert tried to challenge the confirmation of King Henry I, arguing that the abbot and monks were attempting to persuade the lord king not out of a sense of justice, but to have their own way. The lord king took the charter and the seal of his grandfather, King Henry, into his own hands and, turning to Gilbert. replied: "By God's eyes, if you could prove this charter false, you would make me a profit of a thousand pounds in England" Getting little or no answer to this, the king added this memorable statement: "If by a like charter and confirmation the monks could show this sort of right to this very Clarendon which I dearly love, there would be no way justly for me to deny that it should be given up to them completely" Turning to the abbot and his entourage, the king said: "Go, take counsel, and consider together whether there is anything on which you would rather rely than 6 De Criol held the adjacent manor of Ashburnham and a house in Battle. The family was one of

a network of intermarried Kentish-Sussex minor gentry. Searle, Lordship. esp. p. 165. Du Boulay, CanterburY, s.n.

No one knew better than de Lucy the problems of land-transfer. The statement is evidence that the lord's confirmation, not the authentication of the donor's wish, was warranty in a landtransfer of the early twelfth century. See Milsom, Legal Framework, ch. 1.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 339 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

on this charter. But for the present I do not think you will look for other proof" The abbot and his friends went out to consult. They realized from the king's final words, "for the present I do not think you will look for other proof", that their charter was quite sufficient proof, and after their consultation they returned into the presence of the king and his justices to say that they did not place their reliance in anything else besides the charter, that they demanded neither more nor less than what was in the charter, and that they awaited the judgment of the royal court on the matter. Their adversary had nothing to say; he neither dared nor could impugn the genuineness of the charter, because he could prove nothing. Therefore the whole royal court decided unanimously that everything demanded upon the evidence of their charter should be restored to the abbot and church of St. Martin of Battle. Gilbert de Balliol, realizing that the tenement of Barnhorne had been taken away from him, implored in everyone's hearing that the chattels of his knight who had held the tenement from him be resigned to himself, and removed from there. To this petition the king replied: -You could not confess more plainly that you have no right in the land than by asking that". And the king ordered that the chattels be given to the monks.8 At the king's order letters were drafted, sealed by the royal seal, and quickly sent to the four knights who at that time, by his command, governed the county of Sussex.9 Without delay they were to restore to the church of St. Martin of Battle the land to which the abbot of Battle had established title before the king in his court, namely three wists of land in Barnhorne with the whole marsh, and the tithe of Buckholt, to be held as wholly and fully, as free and quit as they had held them in the time of his grandfather King Henry, witness his own charter.'" But first the land was to be defined and its Presumably Henry is saying that in making the request, Gilbert is admitting that he will not at a later stage be able to establish his better right to the land, and is trying to get at least something, namely his tenant's chattels, out of it. For this and from the king's earlier advice "For the present, I do not think you will look for other proof", and from the wording of the consensus, the proceeding sounds more like novel disseisin than a final trial of right: the monks are being put back into possession, but the king does not exclude the possibility of Gilbert suing on the issue of right later. The right of a twelfth-century lord to the chattels of his tenant, villein or not, is indirectly recognized in the Dialogue of the Exchequer: when the lord fails to pay full scutage, not only his chattels, but those of his knights and villeins are to be sold. Dialogus, pp. 111, 112. For local justiciars see H.A. Cronne, "The office of local justiciar in England under the Norman kings", Uni'. of Birmingham Historical Jnl. vi (1957). 18 38, and D.M. Stenton, English Justicebetween the Norman Conquest and the GreatCharter.1066 1215 (Philadelphia, 1964), pp. 65-68. Evidently local justiciars were acting in place of a sheriff in the county. See D.M. Stenton, in CambridgeMedieval Histort', v (Cambridge. 1926), p. 584 for references to such justiciars at the time. 0 The singular implied subject, ecclesia, combined with the plural verb shoN\s the chronicler incorporating a writ here. It survives in a long quotation in the Curia Regis Rolls (HMSO, London) ii. 178-179. In 1203 John of Northeye claimed the tenement as the son of Reinger who had held it from Gilbert de Balliol at the time of this suit, and the descendant of Ingelran (Engerann) who had held it from a de Balliol in the time of Henry I. Reinger, his son claimed, had been a minor at the time of the suit and should not have been sued, nor should de Balliol, for he had no demesne there, being only its capitalis dominus. No decision is recorded, but the abbey kept the land.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 340 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

boundaries walked by twelve faithful men of the locality who would know its boundaries and would tell the truth on oath.1' Richard de Kaines,"2 one of the four knights then in charge of Sussex, carried it out for the others. He went to the manor and took the oath both of the men of the manor and of the neighbourhood. They agreed on the boundaries and he then invested the abbot and church of St. Martin of Battle with the land. 3

B. Writ of King Henry II to the county of Sussex confirming the peaceful possession of the land of Barnhorne to the abbot and monks of Battle as they deraigned it in his court at Clarendon. Henry etc. to the sheriff of Sussex and John count of Eu and all of Sussex. I will and firmly order that the abbot and the monks of Battle shall have their land of Barnhorne, which they had deraigned at Clarendon before me and my barons, as freely and quietly and peacefully as the charter of my grandfather, King Henry, which they have, testifies. And I forbid anyone to interfere with the aforesaid land except with the consent of the abbot and his monks, and I order this on forfeiture of ten pounds. Witnesses: Jocelin of Salisbury, Richard de Lucy. At Clarendon.

C. Notification by King Henry II confirming Barnhorne to Battle Abbey, as it was deraigned in his court at Clarendon. Henry etc. to the justices, sheriffs, and all lieges throughout England. Know that I have granted and confirmed by the present charter to God and St. Martin and the monks of Battle three virgates of land in Barnhorne with its appurtenances, which they deraigned before me and my barons at Clarendon against Gilbert de Balliol and Reinger, his man, by a charter of King Henry, my grandfather, which they have. I will therefore and firmly command that the aforesaid abbot and monks shall forever hold and possess the aforesaid land with all the marsh which the church of St. Martin has in Barnhorne, freely and quietly and without any service or land-custom and I forbid anyone to molest them about this on forfeiture of 10 pounds. Witnesses: Henry, bishop of Winchester, Jocelin of Salisbury, Richard de Lucy, John, count of Eu. At Westminster.1 1 An example of the perambulation by neighbours on oath. For their place in twelfth-century land-law see Van Caenegem, Writs, pp. 77-79, 84-97. 12 Richard was a tenant of the honour of Mortain, in Sussex. PR 23 HenrYI, p. 191. 13 '[Translation from BATTLE Chron, 211 219.10 377C ' °[W.L. Warren, 'Royal Justice in England in the twelfth century', History, 52 (1967), 105-109; Searle, Battle Abbey, 42-43.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 341 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

378 After the death of his father, Robert fitz Roger holds with force halfa hide of land in Boars' Hill which Abbot Vincent of Abingdon had given to his father for life. Abbot Ingulf summons Robert to his court and obtains a quitclaim. Afterwards Robert's wife claims the land as her dower and obtains a writ from King Henry II, ordering Abbot Ingulf to examine the case. It is established that she has no right in the land. After his father's death, this same Robert, supported by the help of some of his friends, held by force half a hide of land in Boars' Hill, which Abbot Vincent had given or granted to hold to his father Roger for his lifetime and not otherwise. Abbot Ingulf, however, did not bear lightly the loss of this land, summoned Robert to his court and not without trouble obtained that he, together with his heir, quitclaimed that half hide completely and gave it back hand in hand. Having thus recovered the land, the abbot gave it to Richard the sacrist, who kissed his hand. In order to avoid Robert taking it badly or making some perverse move, Richard gave him 20 shillings on top of the other 50 which he had previously lent to him on the land in the hope of recovering it. And thus it happened that Robert in the presence of the whole convent confirmed that half hide on the main altar without any further claim. Afterwards, however, Robert's wife maintained that the land had been given her in dower. She brought before Abbot Ingulf a writ of the young King Henry, who reigned after Stephen, to the effect that the right of the abbot and the woman in connection with this claim be examined. After the writ was read in the presence of the woman, it was shown by the common consideration of numerous wise men, who had been called, that nothing in that land belonged to her, whereupon she returned home and the case was concluded.

379 As an inhabitant of the manor of Marcham, called Scalegrai, plans to bequeath his houses to Abingdon Abbey, two of his relatives claim an hereditary right to them. It is established in the hallmoot that their claim is unfounded and Scalegrai proceeds with his bequest. Still at the suggestion of Richard' a certain Scalegrai, as he was called in the

379 ' '[Richard, the sacrist of Abingdon Abbey.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 342 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

vernacular, planned to make the church heir to his houses. When two of his relations, Robert de Lockinge and another Robert, heard this, they claimed an hereditary right to those houses. After the case was heard in the common hallmoot, both plaintiffs, who had no right at all, saw their hope justly dashed and withdrew. And so the aforesaid Scalegrai freely gave his houses to this church, and since he had travelled a long way, our sacrist gladly gave him one mark as travelling-money and thus concluded this case by receiving the houses.

380 As Beliardis, widow of Sturnell, plans to give her houses to Abingdon Abbey, some persons claim some right in them. The wise men who examine the case reject their claims and the lady proceeds with her donation. Under the influence of the zeal of Richard,' a certain woman called Beliardis, wife of one Sturnell, decided, after her husband's death, to grant her houses to the altar of St. Mary, but certain claimants objected to her plan, considering that they had some right in them. After an investigation of the truth was carried out by the wise men who dealt with the case of the two parties, which revealed their claim to be unjust, they were dismissed, as was right. The woman, now free, using her power, granted in good heart her houses to the altar of St. Mary; for this grant Richard placed 14 shillings in her hand and thus received the houses which were given by the woman. It should not be left unmentioned that a canon from overseas, a son of the aforesaid Sturnell, arrived to make a claim, but when he understood that he could get nowhere, he returned to whence he came and never came back to make his claim.

381 In a dispute between Abbot Ingulf of Abingdon and the keeper of the granary of Winchester concerning a pasture, the abbot's champion is victorious.

380 1 '[Richard, the sacrist of Abingdon Abbey.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 343 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the time of Abbot Ingulf a dispute arose between the keeper of the granary of Winchester and the abbot concerning a pasture between Uffington and Woolstone called Sumerlese. After long discussions, the question of the aforesaid pasture was settled by judicial combat, and by the victory of the abbot's champion it was adjudged to this house according to the custom of the realm.

382 Writ of Queen Eleanor ordering the tenants of Malmesbury abbey to render such service as was recognized before the king and his justices.

[Eleanor], queen of England and duchess of Aquitaine and Normandy and countess of Anjou, to the knights who hold from the fee of the church of Malmesbury, greeting. I order you to render to the abbot of Malmesbury completely and fully such service for your fees as was recognized before the king and the justices at Worcester. Witness: Robert, earl of Leicester. At Westminster. And as you have done him homage. Witness: the same.'

383 The abbot of St. Benet's Hulme deraigns the church of Repps in the court of Bishop William of Norwich, who is ordered by King Henry II to execute the judgment, particularly as far as the advowson there is concerned. A. Writ of King Henry II ordering William, bishop of Norwich, to do right to Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme concerning the church of Repps, which he deraigned in the bishop's court. Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians, count of the Angevins, to William bishop of Norwich, greeting. I order you without delay to do full right to the abbot of Hulme concerning the church of Repps, which he claims, since he deraigned it in your court. And unless you do it, Archbishop [Theobald] of Canterbury shall, so that I hear no further complaint thereof for lack of right. Witness: Simon fitz Peter. At Winchester.

382

i

'[A writ of Henry II of uncertain date given at Tewkesbury orders the tenants of Malmesbury to do service to that abbot; unless they do, the king's justices will force them (MALMESBURY Reg., i, c. Iv,pp. 334-335; cfr. Eyton, op. cit., p. 36, n. 5 and 6, who suggests a date c. 20 April 1158),10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 344 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

B. Writ of King Henry II ordering William, bishop of Norwich, to let Abbot William of St. Benet's Hulme have the advowson of the church of Repps, which he has deraigned in the bishop's court. Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the bishop of Norwich, greeting. I order you without delay and justly to let the abbot of Hulme have that advowson in the church of Repps which he deraigned in your court. And unless you do it, Archbishop [Theobald] of Canterbury shall. Witness: Thomas the chancellor. At Caen.

384 Notification by Torphin de Allerston and Geoffrey his nephew of a sworn recognition of the boundaries of the king's waste between the Allerston Beck and the Tackriveling. To all those who will see or hear this letter, Torphin de Allerston and his nephew Geoffrey, greeting. Know that the following men have recognized under oath that the king's own waste stretches from the Allerston Beck to the Tackriveling, namely Reginald the forester, Hugh Boie and Alfwin Hert, who were the three guardians of that waste, and after them oaths were sworn by Turold de Neville, Gilbert de Ayton, Ralph Lovel of Gristhorpe, William son of Norman de Ebberston, Ansketell Malecake, Gamel de Rudston, Theobald de Marton, Gamel de Roaldesbi and his brother Cospatric, Richard the son of Roger de Thornton, Engenald de Wilton, Thierry de Staxtondale, Theobald son of Pain de Wykeham, Thor son of Acca de Snainton, Roger son of Ucca de Rowlston, Hugh son of Waltheofde Rowlston, Stephen Mainevilain, Walter Bardulf, Liulfde Kingthorpe, Richard fitz Angot, Richard de Ganton, William fitz Ketel, Richard Rollevilain, Stephen son of Gamel de Pickering, Robert de Bonefeld, Walter son of Arnald de Aislaby, William fitz Rostune, Luke de Newton and Geoffrey de Newton. All those, as we said, have sworn and we with them that the king's proper waste stretches from the Allerston Beck to the Tackriveling as follows: as the Midsyke flows from the Allerston Beck to the boundaries between Theokmare and Thornton Dale and thence along those boundaries between Theokmare and Thornton Dale to the Midsyke, so that the whole territory of Theokmare is included in the waste and thence along the Midsyke as far as the Kiptoftsyke and

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 345 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

then along the Kiptoftsyke as far as the Costa Beck and on the other side of the Costa Beck up to the Tackriveling. Within the aforesaid boundaries Eustace fitz John had half a carrucate of land and a meadow namely in Edymarsh and he was allowed to take the hay from that meadow every year, against a yearly payment of 4 s. to the king's sokage of Pickering and in the waste he had nothing more, neither meadow nor turbary. This we have sworn and to this we are prepared to testify.

385 Notification by Abbot Walter of Ramsey of a concord in the king's court between him and Oliver le Moigne, who had moved a claim to Brandish Wood by royal writ. Walter, by God's grace abbot of Ramsey, and the whole convent of that place, to all present and future whom this charter will reach, greeting. Know you all that after the lord Oliver le Moigne had moved a claim against us to Brandish Wood by royal writ, the following concord was made between us and him and his heirs. We have granted to him and his heirs Sawtry with its appurtenances in perpetual farm for 40 shillings payable to us every year, 20 at Easter and 20 at Michaelmas and also one half of all the profits and easements produced by two houses which he has at St. Ives. Oliver himself and William the heir and Hervey his other son have given up to us and our monastery all claim and all right if they had any in Brandish Wood and pledging their faith promised to keep this covenant and concord loyally and without deceit and that if anyone should in the future want to vex our monastery thereon, they shall oppose him and defend that tenement as best they can against all men. This concord was first made at London in the court of the lord king and afterwards confirmed in our chapter by him and by his heirs, who pledged their faith. Witnesses: Lambert the prior, Reginald the precentor, Randulf the cellarer and Alexander the chamberlain, monks; master Herbert and the lord Robert, clerics; Walter the steward and his son William and William le Moigne of Ireland, knights.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 346 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

386 Letter of Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury to the abbess of Amesbury ordering her, in accordance with a mandate from the queen, to restore to Jordan the treasurer the church of Froyle, from which he was ejected. The authority of the king compels us to punish a wrong done to the Holy Roman Church and an affront to the king's majesty, not to say to ourselves. That we might not be forced to do this, we admonished you with fatherly mildness to restore to our beloved son Jordan, the treasurer,' his possession of the church of Froyle, which is known to have been confirmed to him by the Roman Church during the papacy of the blessed Adrian, and from which you, after the edict of our lord the king and in contempt of the Roman Church, ejected him with violence and without any process of law, as his repeated complaint makes clear. Since you still persist in your contumacy, we instruct and command you that, in accordance with the mandate of our lady the queen which you have received, you should suffer Jordan to hold the church, as he held it by apostolic authority at the time when the king went overseas. 2 Otherwise we shall not be able to pass over with impunity the contempt which you show for the Roman Church, when you appear before us on the octave of the Assumption. And if our lady the queen corrects your breach of the king's edict by condign punishment, we shall ratify it, since on the authority of the canons, when law is treated with such contempt military force must be called in for the repression of malice.' Further by the authority of the Roman Church and of ourselves we forbid you to disperse the tithes and goods of the church until the matter has been investigated in a court of law.4 387 Notification by Ranulf de Belmeis that he has recognized in the county court of Shropshire that he held Betton Abbots unjustly and has surrendered it to Shrewsbury Abbey. Ranulf de Belmeis, to all his heirs, kinsmen, friends and men, greeting. Know 386

'[Jordan occurs as treasurer of Salisbury expressis verbis in JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 114, i, pp. 187-188.]" 2 Henry II crossed to Normandy in August 1158M late in 1158 and between 31 December 1159 and September 1160 Queen Eleanor was in England acting as a regent (Eyton, Itinerary,pp. 40-43. 3

49-51). It was doubtless in this capacity that the queen issued her mandate. Cf. Gratian, Decretum, C. 23, q. 5,c. 20, etc. - the texts are collected by A. Stickler in Apollinaris, xxi (1948), 106, n. 57. '4[That the letter was addressed

to the abbess of Amesbury is shown in JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 114, i, p. 187 n. 1; we follow almost invariably the translation inJOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 115, p. 189.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 347 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that I went to the county court of Shropshire and have there, before the barons and men of the province, recognized that I unjustly held the vill called Betton, since it belonged to the right of the monks. And since my ancestors had held it unjustly and I had no right to retain it, I restored it to God and St. Peter and the monks of Shrewsbury and claimed it free and quit of me and my heirs and all my kinsmen forever. And afterwards I placed it on the altar of St. Peter before many people and before the abbot and the monks of that place, who therefore received me in their society and, as far as it was in their power, they forgave my ancestors for having held it unjustly. And there I have forsworn it, calling God's curse and my own upon all those who shall henceforth molest the monks thereon or make a claim against them. Witnesses thereof are the barons and the whole county of Shropshire.1

388 Geoffrey Ridel enfeoffs Gervase fitz Richard with land at Duckmanton: it was recognized in his court that W. fitz Richard had made his brother Gervase his heir and had therefore handed back the land to his lord.

Geoffrey Ridel, to all his men, clerics and laymen, French and English, greeting. Know that I have given back to Gervase fitz Richard his inheritance, namely Duckmanton, free and quit for him and his heirs, to hold from me and my heirs, by the service of one knight for Duckmanton and for the land of Colston, which he holds from my brother, for it was recognized in my court that his brother W. fitz Richard has by his own free power made his brother Gervase his heir thereof and has restored this same Duckmanton to me and quitclaimed it completely for himself and his people so that I should grant it in inheritance to Gervase. Therefore I have given back the same land to him and have received his homage for it, and I will and firmly order that he shall hold it freely, quietly and honourably as his ancestors best and most freely held it from my ancestors. Witnesses: Ralph prior of Launde, Ralph Basset, William Basset, Thomas de Say, Boso, G. de Sutton, Helias the cleric, Humphrey Pulcin, Robert de Weldon, W. de Colston, W. fitz Hugh, Robert son of Lewinc and many others.

387 ' '[Litigation was already going on in the time of Henry I (see our document no. 273; see also R.W. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, London, 1855, ii, p. 207, vi, p. 183.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 348 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

389 Notification by Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury that the court of Mailing has awarded to the abbey of Mailing seisin of two "oakdenes" and a hithe, which were wrongly occupied by Richard and William. Theobald, by the grace of God archbishop of Canterbury and primate of England, to all the faithful of Holy Church, greeting. Let those present and future know that Abbess Ermelina of Mailing and the nuns have deraigned by judgment in the court of Mailing before Pain of Otford and Dinisius the clerk and many others against the two brothers, Richard and William, seisin of the two "oakdenes" with the hithe where ships enter and which -oakdenes" the aforesaid brothers had occupied without our consent and without warrant. And what they have deraigned there we confirm to them, forbidding on pain of anathema that they should in future be disturbed concerning that which was adjudged to them. Farewell.

390 Abbot Ingulf of Abingdon used to pay the sheriff of Berkshire a hundred shillings a year to obtain favourable treatment in the courts, but his successor Walkelin discontinues this custom. On complaint by the sheriff, King Henry II orders an inquiry into the state of affairs in the time of King Henry I: the county court finds that no payment was due. Since Abbot Ingulf, the predecessor of this Walkelin, was getting old and could not attend the meetings of the county courts, he had long been accustomed to give a hundred shillings a year to the sheriff of Berkshire, so that he would treat the men of the abbey more leniently and help them in the pleas and the hundreds, if there was any need. After some time this turned into a custom and the sheriff received the hundred shillings from the abbey as if they belonged to his revenue, whereas those for whom they were paid profited in no way. When Abbot Walkelin heard of this, he was aggrieved because of this damage to the church and after the first year of his abbacy he stopped paying the shillings and upon being asked why he had not paid those hundred shillings, he answered that it was in order to prevent a bad usage from growing up, since in earlier times this state of affairs had in no way existed. On the king's command the truth of the matter was inquired into, whether

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 349 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that had been the situation in the time of King Henry, his grandfather, and after it was established under oath in the county court that it was not so, the king forbade the shillings to be paid or to be demanded by anyone in the future. Thus Abbot Walkelin retrieved the hundred shillings which had wrongly been lost every year and gave them a destination that was more useful to the church.

391 Confirmation by Hugh de Bolbec of the agreement made and recognized before his court between John Morel and the abbey of Missenden concerning land at Addingrove. Hugh de Bolbec to all his men, Norman and English, greeting. Know that I grant and confirm the agreement which John Morel has made with the canons of Missenden concerning his land of Addingrove and that I firmly order that this land shall be held as that agreement was recognized before me and my court at Whitchurch and as the chirograph which was there made between them in my presence testifies. I also grant and confirm as perpetual alms by the attestation of the present writing and my seal, the alms which John gave to the same canons of the same land, namely one virgate and one acre. I therefore order that no one shall in any way cause the canons any injury or vexation concerning that agreement and alms, but the canons shall observe the agreement as it was drawn up in the chirograph and they shall possess forever well, in peace and freely their alms as is testified by the charter which John gave the canons concerning the alms. Witnesses: William Pipard, Hamo Brito, Robert de Tinchebrai, Ravening de Missenden and his son Robert, Richard de Kimble and others.'

392 List of the witnesses who were present when Robert Newton surrendered the meadow of Ledsham, which he had claimed, to the priory of Pontefract.

The following witnesses were present where Robert Newton surrendered forever to God and St. John of Pontefract, by his rod on the altar of St. Peter, the

391 ' o[V.C.H. Buckinghamshire, iii, p. 443, n. 14.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 350 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

meadow of Ledsham which he and his people have claimed, to be free and quit from him and all his heirs and all his people. Canon Gerard fitz Osbert, Canon Paulin and Canon Serlo fitz Serlo. The following priests: Ralph the subchanter, Ralph de Percy, Ralph Abbey, William de Lincoln, Robert Morel, Norman, Alexander, Herlewin, Walter Greave, Serlo fitz Gamel, Robert de Hospitali, John de Silli and Heldan. The following clerics: Robert Trenchebise, Peter and Ralph de Hospitali, John fitz Holdebert, Swain, Peter and Philip, deacons. The following laymen: Robert de Grindale, Hedwin, Fulk de Bootham and Ernald.

393 Notification by Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury of the award given in his court, at the command of King Henry II, in a dispute between Peter and the canons of St. Paul's, London, concerning the seisin of land pertaining to the manor of Wimbledon and Barnes. The court decided that Peter should stop claiming seisin, saving the question of right.

Theobald, by God's grace archbishop of Canterbury, primate of the English and legate of the apostolic see, to all the faithful of Holy Mother Church whom this letter will reach, greeting. Know you all that the controversy which arose between the canons of St. Paul in London and Peter concerning the possession of the land which belongs to our manor of Wimbledon and Barnes was settled at the command of our lord King Henry by the judgment of our court in the following way. When the said Peter demanded the seisin of the aforementioned land because his father, as he said, had possessed it on the day on which King Henry I died and thereafter his mother had had the same possession until she was violently ejected, no mention, however, being made of inheritance or of fee, and when the canons tried to undo his paternal and maternal possession from which succession would be due to him or another, Peter neither indeed produced instruments or witnesses nor had any other proof at all nor would promise any in the future, and so the court judged that he ought not further to seek seisin. And because Peter had troubled them already for three years and had always failed in proof, the canons are absolved from the claim of seisin which he would have had, had he had proofs, saving, however, the question of right if Peter believed it should be raised. Witnesses etc.I

393

[We follow to a large extent the translation of R.C. Palmer, "The Feudal Framework of English Law", Michigan Law Review, lxxix (1981), p. 1148, n. 33.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 351 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

394 Confirmation by Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, of the possessions of Malling Abbey, notably a carrucate of land called Thorna which the nuns won by a judgment of the county court. T(heobald), by the grace of God archbishop of Canterbury, primate of the English and legate of the apostolic see, to all the faithful of Holy Mother Church, greeting. As we must extend our most assiduous care to all those who are subjected to our jurisdiction and maintain their rights inviolate, and since we are compelled with the diligence of religion especially to protect the poor of Christ of both sexes, who have adopted in the monasteries the rule of a more severe life, and must keenly favour them, and avoid their being unjustly disturbed by the intrusion of evil people or the vexation of any secular powers and their being deprived of the possessions which were mercifully given them justly and canonically for their livelihood by the largesse of kings or the donation of princes and powerful men, it is fitting that we should provide for them with zealous circumspection and guard them as far as possible by our authority. Led by this consideration and to ensure that the nuns of Malling, who serve God in the church of the most Holy Virgin Mary, shall be provided for in the future, we have decided to confirm the donations made to them by kings, princes and other illustrious men and faithful of God, in land and in tithes and all other useful things and we have deemed it fitting to confirm with a muniment of our authority whatever has been granted to the monastery and the servants of Christ who live there, unchallenged and unmutilated forever. What we have confirmed to them we have decided to express by the proper names: Malling Parva with its appurtenances and the market of the said vill, the church of St. Leonard with what is adjacent to it, also the church of St. Mary in Malling, also the whole tithe of the vineyard of Halling, the tithe of Cuxton of the lands which Bishop Gundulf [of Rochester] added to the manor of Cuxton, also the tithe of Ranulf de Bromley, all the tithe of Borstal in fruits, twothirds of the tithe of the land of Ralph de Borstal, one-third of the tithe of Ralph de Wouldham in fruits from the demesne, two-thirds of the [tithe] of Robert de Wouldham, the whole tithe of Wouldham Parva, Malling which is situated close to the monastery and which the holy Archbishop Anselm granted them, the whole tithe of the land of Reginald de Luddesdown which he holds from the fee of Talbot, Cornard with its appurtenances, one hide of land and one half of the tithe of the demesne of Wimbish, the tithe of the demesne of Shoreham in all the things for which people are wont to give tithes and 1 acre called Leighton with its appurtenances and also 1 carrucate of land called Thorna, which the nuns obtained by the judgment of the county court. All these forementioned possessions, which were confirmed to the monastery and the nuns of Malling in charters of the illustrious kings of the English, William, Henry I, Stephen and Henry II and also

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 352 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

confirmed and granted in charters of the venerable archbishops of Canterbury, Anselm, Ralph and William, as also in charters of our brethren the bishops of Rochester, Gundulf, Ralph, Ernulf, John, Ascelin and Walter, we have, following their footsteps, confirmed by the present written document and the attestation of our seal, as the donors' charters, which we have seen and heard, testify that they have been given to them. We also order to be confirmed and corroborated by God's will whatever else the same nuns possess according to their charters.

395 In a case concerning the advowson of the church of Hinton, the incumbent, Ernald de Devizes, complains to Archbishop Theobald that he was unlawfully despoiled by Earl Reginald and his clerk Osbert. Under pressure from the archbishop Earl Reginald restitutes possession, but also starts a proprietary action before the archbishop's court, bringing a royal writ and claiming that Ernald's possession was unlawful. After Ernald appeals to the papal court, Osbert gives up his case. Ernald de Devizes has time and again laid before us his complaint against the noble Earl Reginald' and Osbert, his clerk, saying that the church of Hinton had been taken from him by the earl, by violence and against all respect for the law, in order to thrust in Osbert, his favourite. Of this church he asserted that he had long held canonical possession by the authority of our venerable brother, Jocelin, bishop of Salisbury, whose charter conferring the church upon him he produced. And in order that he might show that his possession had full legal justification, he asserted that he obtained the church from the bishop by the grant of a certain knight, who claimed to hold the advowson, and for this reason he demanded the restitution of the church and of all else that had been taken from him. At length after frequent citations and threats we wrung from the earl, who denied all these things, his consent to make restitution of the church as Ernald demanded, on condition that the earl and Osbert might be given permission to bring a suit to determine the question of right without any obstructive delays or the intervention of fresh difficulties. When a day had been appointed for the parties to this end, Osbert and the earl's proctors at once instituted a proprietary suit against Ernald, saying that his occupation of the church was unlawful and that without the assent of the earl and of the patrons and in defiance of the custom of the whole Church and realm of the English and contrary to royal ordinance and the ancient privilege 395 t Reginald de Dunstanville, illegitimate son of Henry I by Sibyl Corbet, earl of Cornwall from c. April 1141 to his death in 1175 (Complete Peerage,revised edition, iii, 429; xi, Appendix D, pp. 107 108). It is not possible to be certain which of the numerous Hintons in the diocese of Salisbury was here in question, but the "'ruffian" who deprived the earl of the fee was probably Alan III, earl of Richmond, "juvenis . . crudelissimus et praedo", who held the county of Cornwall in 1140-1141 (on him see Early Yorkshire Charters,iv, ed. C.T. Clay, pp. 89 ff.).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 353 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

2 of nobles, he had entered the church by force and with the violent aid of a ruffian who had for long deprived the earl of the whole of the fee on which the church was situated. A writ from the king was likewise produced, instructing us to give the earl justice in respect of the advowson of his church or to restore to Osbert the church of which he had been deprived since the king's departure 3 and against his edict. To this Ernald replied that he held lawful possession of the church by the authority of the bishop and with the assent of the patron. But the patron, so he said, and other of his friends were so terrified by the power and by the threats of the earl, that none of them dared to appear against him in this court, or any in the kingdom, more especially since the earl and his Osbert were bringing to bear all the weight not only of their own power, but of the king's as well, to overwhelm a poor man, whom they had shut out from his church for many years; and for this reason he has appealed to your court, appointing as day the First Sunday in Advent. But Osbert said that neither his case nor the church were worth the expense, and withdrew both from the suit and the appeal.4

396 On the death of Peter de Valognes, Abbot Robert of St. Albans takes the wood of Northaw, which had been in the hands of the Valognes family for a long time, into his demesne, since it had only been a tenure for life. However, Peter's brother and heir Robert demands possession for himself, pretending that the wood of Northaw is a heritable tenure and obtains a royal writ ordering the abbot to give him justicia dictante, what his ancestors had possessed. On the basis of this writ litigation starts in the abbot's court and, as Robert obtains no right there, he asks Earl Robert of Leicester, the justiciar, to do him right. The earl of Leicester charges the sheriff of Hertfordshire to summon Abbot Robert to appear in Northampton, but the abbot stays away and judgment is given by the king's court in favour of Robert de Valognes. The abbot obtains a papal letter in his favour addressed to Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury and Hilary, bishop of Chichester, but this remains ineffective. The abbot goes overseas to the king and obtains an order for the final hearing of the case. After several summonses and postponements the wood is finally adjudged to the abbot by the king's court, Robert de Valognes being contumacious.

2

cf. n.I.

3'[Postdicessum regismust apply to the departure of Henry II for Normandy in January 1156 or August 1158 (Eyton, Court Henri' II, 16, 40).l0 1 '[We follow almost invariably the translation in JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 102, i, pp. 162163.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 354 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

The wood of Northaw had come into the demesne of St. Albans thanks to Abbot Robert, as mentioned before, and it had been very difficult. Abbot Paul had ceded it to Peter de Valognes, sr. in usufruct for his lifetime; after Abbot Paul's death Abbot Geoffrey had done the same for Peter de Valognes' son Roger, on the same condition, and Abbot Ralph had done the same for Peter de Valognes' grandson, Peterjr. And as the son had succeeded to the father and the grandson to the father and the grandfather in the same possession and with the agreement of the abbots of St. Albans, some people who were ignorant of the truth had the impression that they had obtained a heritable right and that it was a case of prescription; otherwise it seemed that the custom of the realm was pressed too sharply, for according to the custom of the realm the son enters into the same possession as his deceased father has had. While all this was going on, Robert de Valognes after the death of the aforesaid Peter, his brother, obtained possession of Northaw by the king's mandate which almost drove Abbot Robert to despair: how this happened we shall expound more in detail. Peter de Valognes junior, having possessed the wood of Northaw during many years in usufruct, fell ill and had to stay in bed suffering from a grave infirmity. As soon as Abbot Robert heard this he sent two of his brethren to him without delay and admonished him forcefully to restore the wood of Northaw to the monastery of St. Albans according to their agreement before paying his debt to nature; so they went to see him as quickly as possible and reported to the aforesaid illustrious man what they had been told to. Having listened to them he admitted that he and his ancestors had possessed the aforesaid wood not heritably but merely through the liberality of the convent of St. Albans and he was about to give up the wood to them the following day in the presence of his knights. That same night, however, before he was able to fulfil what he had promised, he went the way of all flesh. After his death, Abbot Robert sent messengers to the aforesaid wood and possessed it. Robert de Valognes, the brother and heir of the aforesaid Peter, who was childless, greatly deplored being deprived of such a plot of land and repeatedly pressed Abbot Robert through some magnates, who were close to him, that he would let him possess the wood of Northaw, but he in no way gave in to him and refused to be influenced. Therefore Robert de Valognes, being frustrated in his hope, went to see the king who was then in the kingdom of the French and begged him with numerous prayers that he should take pity upon him and order the aforesaid wood to be granted to him. At that time the king was getting ready for the siege of the city of Toulouse' and as he wanted to gain the sympathy of his magnates to come to his aid, he granted what he asked, in writings which were brought to England by Robert himself. He

396 1 '[After the siege of Toulouse King Henry II was in Normandy at the end of 1159, where he stayed until the autumn of 1160 and where he returned in the beginning of 1161, staying there till May of that year.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 355 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

forbade that it should be permitted to anyone to deprive Robert unjustly of anything which his ancestors had according to the dictates of justice possessed heritably. As soon as he had received those letters, he at once returned to England and handed them over to Abbot Robert, who ordered them to be read in the audience of the court. After they were read, Robert de Valognes insisted that restitution of the aforesaid wood should be made to him according to the king's command, since by right of inheritance he ought to hold it from the church of St. Albans. Without following his request in any way, Abbot Robert said: "You should not have brought us these letters at all, since it is known that neither you nor your ancestors have possessed even one portion of the land heritably" Angered by this, Robert left and went to see Earl Robert of Leicester who was then heading justice in England and handed these same letters over to him, for they contained the phrase "and unless you do it, Earl Robert of Leicester shall, so that he ought not to be vexed any more in this matter for lack of right" No time was lost: the said Robert succeeded, with grace, in obtaining letters of summons directed to the sheriff of Hertfordshire, ordering him to summon Abbot Robert to appear at Northampton ready to answer to the objections which he could expect concerning the aforesaid wood. Although summoned, he did not go there since he refused to undergo the earl's judgment, but sent one of the brethren, Hugh, a discreet and cautious man, in his stead. As Earl Robert took the abbot's absence seriously, the said abbot was summoned a second time and as he again stayed away he was condemned and the aforesaid wood was adjudicated to Robert de Valognes in a judgment of the king's court, and the sheriff of Hertfordshire ordered by royal authority to put him in possession: this, obeying the earl's commands, he carried out as quickly as possible. Hence Robert, strengthened by the possession of the said wood and convinced that he would have the usufruct for a short while, since he possessed it unjustly, wasted the said wood, having the trees cut beyond measure; this according to the text of the charters his ancestors were not allowed to do at all. As the abbot heard of this, he at once sent messengers to inquire and it was found that irreparable harm had been done, so the abbot having changed his mind hastened to see Earl Robert and obtained not without effort letters, ordering Robert de Valognes to refrain from his injurious undertaking. But refusing to obey Earl Robert's commands, he doubled the damage, upon which the abbot went to see Queen Eleanor, who was then staying in England and obtained letters from her ordering Robert de Valognes to repair his bold and injurious deeds. Robert temporarily obeyed her admonishments, but soon afterwards heaped damage upon damage, so that Abbot Robert again complained of this wrongdoing, sending messengers to the lord Pope Alexander, and obtained a rescript from him

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 356 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

addressed to Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury and Bishop Hilary of Chichester as follows. Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to the venerable Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury and Hilary, bishop of Chichester, greeting and apostolic blessing. Our beloved sons and brethren of the monastery of St. Albans have complained to us that Robert de Valognes holds and occupies unjustly the wood of Northaw, which as the said brethren maintain, belongs to their right. Therefore we send a written apostolic mandate to your fraternity that you shall attempt with all diligence to put pressure on the aforesaid Robert within 30 days after receiving this letter to restore the said wood to the said brethren without any difficulty or to do them full justice in your presence. If he were to disdain to do this, you shall pronounce a sentence of excommunication against him. If either of you were unable to attend to this matter, the other shall nevertheless execute it. Given at Anagni on 27 February. Having inspected this letter, the bishops were full of trepidation and feared to pronounce a sentence of excommunication against the aforesaid Robert, because King Henry II had forbidden all the bishops in his kingdom to pronounce sentence of excommunication against any of his magnates. In the meantime the abbot, after taking counsel, sent one of the brethren to the king who was staying with the army near Toulouse and, trying to influence him with many prayers and the gift and promise of numerous donations, begged him to send a letter to Earl Robert ordering him to let the abbot and Robert de Valognes undergo the judgment of his court according to the content of the charters which the monastery of St. Albans possessed. The king, however, rejected his requests and did not comply but, under the influence of the abbot's importunate prayers, he wrote to the said earl forbidding him in any way to allow Robert de Valognes from then onwards to cut, give or sell anything from the said wood until his return to England. As soon as he received this order from the earl, the aforesaid Robert obediently, though unwillingly, complied. Nevertheless Abbot Robert, who found it hard to accept that he and his church were being unjustly deprived of the said wood, took counsel with the brethren and readily travelled to the king who had returned from the siege of Toulouse and was staying in Normandy and, having promised 100 pounds, obtained a rescript addressed to Earl Robert ordering him to summon both parties to his presence, to listen to the arguments from both sides and to decide the case by a definitive sentence concerning the right of ownership, according to the charter of Archbishop Lanfranc of Canterbury and the other charters. Having settled this to his satisfaction, he returned home with the king's permission and took the king's rescript to Earl Robert. Robert de Valognes was summoned by the said Earl Robert and granted a delay of 40 days while the abbot in the meantime went to the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 357 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

cell of Tynemouth in order to visit the brethren. In the meantime the day on which Abbot Robert and Robert de Valognes were to contend before Earl Robert of Leicester arrived and Simon, the prior of the church of St. Albans, appeared in London according to his mandate, but Robert de Valognes was in no way present. The earl, who was not very pleased at the abbot's absence, admonished the aforesaid Prior Simon to send a quick messenger to his abbot so that he would avoid being absent on the second summons at Leicester. But Abbot Robert having stayed less than a fortnight at Tynemouth, travelled on to Scotland and having crossed the sea arrived at the abbey of Dunfermline where having washed his hands he had already decided to take a rest, when some young man came to him all in a hurry and out of breath and gave him a letter from the aforesaid Prior Simon. Having read it he lost no time but refused a meal and went on horseback, ordering his people to follow him as soon as possible. His orders were obeyed and on the same day when he had arrived, he [again] crossed the sea and without having had a meal accepted lodgings [there]. However, at daybreak he travelled on to Leicester as quickly as he could, although he did not manage to arrive there on the appointed day because of the distance and the overflowing rivers. Having arrived at some locality near Leicester where he spent the night, he humbly excused himself with the earl. On the appointed day, however, Prior Simon went to Leicester at the abbot's command, but Robert de Valognes refused to appear before the judge so that judgment was delayed again: we have inserted all this into our narrative to make obvious to everyone how diligent the venerable abbot was. Thus Robert de Valognes was summoned a third time by the earl at the same place and again he was given a delay of 40 days and on the appointed day, Abbot Robert being present and Robert de Valognes being absent, the earl confiscated the wood, had the said Robert summoned a fourth time and granted him a six weeks delay. When the day arrived the aforesaid abbot appeared at Leicester, whereas Robert de Valognes did not appear and did not send anyone to answer for him or plead an exception, and the wood of Northaw was by the judgment of the court adjudged to the abbot, who was afterwards put in possession through a rod, whereas Robert de Valognes was forcefully condemned to pay, as soon as the opportunity should present itself, considerable reparation for the damages and injuries which he had 2

caused.

397 Notification by Jocelin, bishop of Salisbury, that he was ordered by royal writ to summon to his court William de Percy, who claimed the manor of Chardstock and Gerbert de Percy, who held it: William has deraigned the land and was seised of it. 2 o[V.C.H. Hertfordshire,iv. 376; Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, pp. 168,211,221,318,323; W.L.

Warren, "Royal Justice in England in the twelfth century", HistorY, 52 (1967), 159 164.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 358 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Jocelin, by the grace of God bishop of Salisbury, to all whom the present charter will reach, French as well as English, greeting. Let the present age as well as the coming posterity know that at the command of our lord King Henry we have called before us William de Percy, who claimed his inheritance of Chardstock, and Gerbert de Percy' who held it. 2 After the allegations of both parties on William's accusation and Gerbert's defence were heard, judgment was reached and according to justice and by the dictate of the judgment William deraigned his land and was seised of that land, and by the judgment of our court we received his homage for it. This took place in our presence at Salisbury in the hearing and the sight of the following: Robert dean of Salisbury, Jordan treasurer [of Salisbury], Adelelm [archdeacon of Dorset], Roger [archdeacon] of Ramsbury, Robert de Berkshire, Henry archdeacon [of Berkshire], William sub-dean [of Salisbury], Osbert de Inglesham, Fulk, Robert de St. Pancras and Richard sheriff of Wiltshire, 3 canons, Duncan and William of Chichester, chaplains, Earl Patrick [of Salisbury], Robert de Dromar, master Richard de Gloucester, Ebrard de la Herst and his son Roger, Philip Butler, Robert de Wanborough, William de St. Martin, William de Cotes, Gilbert de Sonning, Peter de Potterne, John de Melplash, Walter de Weseford, Robert fitz Acelin, Ebrard de Calne, Robert de Cerisi, William de Percy, Ranulfde Wilmington, Walter Talvaz, Richard fitz Hildebrand, William de St. Clair, William de Tracy Bastard, Roger de Caundle, Edward Infans Regis, Peverel de Lillington, Richard de Churston and Roger de Folia, who rendered the aforesaid judgment in our presence and that of the others aforesaid without anyone contradicting. Further: Ralph fitz Saveric, Thomas de Arden, Manasser Aguillon, William de Dunstanville, William de Chivelstone, Hubert fitz Anketil, Gilbert de Arden, Seldewin and Geoffrey le Brun. 398 Notification by King Henry II that Abbot [William] and the monks of Peterborough have deraigned their land in Northorpe in the county court and are to hold it against payment of the established rent.

Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his sheriff and ministers of Lincolnshire, greeting. I order that the abbot and monks of Peterborough shall hold their land of Northorpe as well, peacefully, freely, quietly and justly as they best and most freely held it at the time 397

5'[See on Gerbert

072.]

de Percy, who occurs sometimes as Gilbert de Percy, Sanders, English baronies,

°

2 [This Gerbert de Percy had obtained Chardstock only a few years before from Robert de Percy,

see about this no. 374 [1155-1158].]

3 "Ricardus, clericus", was sheriff of Wilts, 7, 8, Hen. II.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 359 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

of King Henry, my grandfather, and with the same liberties and free customs and by that same warnoth, and as the church of Peterborough deraigned it in the full county court and as the charter of King Henry, my grandfather, and my own testify for them. And if anything has been taken above that warnoth, let it be restored to them without delay, and unless you do it my justice shall. Witness: William fitz Hamo. At F&camp.'

399 Writ of King Henry II ordering the justices and sheriffs of Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire to hold a sworn recognition concerning the rights ofjustice of the predecessors of Bishop Robert of Lincoln over those who hunted in their warren. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to thejustices and sheriffs of Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, greeting. I order you to cause a recognition to be held by the oath of lawful men to find out what justice the bishops, predecessors of Bishop Robert of Lincoln, have had in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, over those who without their licence hunted or caught rabbits in their warren, and see to it that the said Bishop Robert of Lincoln shall have this justice completely and fully, as it will be recognized. Witness: Rotrou, bishop of Evreux. At Rouen.

400 Writ of King Henry II ordering the hundred court to hold a sworn recognition on the number of swine the abbey of Abingdon used to have free of pannage in the forest of Kingsfrith in the time of King Henry I. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Richard de Lucy and the foresters of Windsor, greeting. I order that you cause without delay to be recognized by the oaths of lawful men of the hundred how many swine the abbot of Abingdon used to have free of pannage in my forest which is called Kingsfrith in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, and as it will be recognized so you shall cause Abbot Walkelin of Abingdon and the monks who

398 ' '[See also charters of Henry I of 1114 and 1100-1133 (Regesta ii. nos 1038 and 1858) and a writ of Henry 11 of 1154-1158 in Mellows, op. cit., no. 36, p. 99.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 360 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

serve God there justly to have. Witness Manasser Biset, the steward. At Rouen... Consequently it was recognized under oath by the lawful men of the hundred, according to the king's command,I that the abbot of Abingdon used to have of old three hundred swine without pannage in the forest of Kingsfrith and has had them in the time of King Henry and thus it was granted and confirmed to Abbot Walkelin and his successors by the king's command.

401 Thomas Becket as chancellor brings about a reconciliation between King Henry II and Nicholas, archdeacon of London, whose house was confiscated. Nicholas, archdeacon of London, incurred the king's disfavour so that by the king's command his house, from which his family had been expelled, was padlocked and confiscated to the king's profit. The good chancellor had no rest until the day when he reconciled the archdeacon with the king and obtained his being restored to his possession.

402 King Henry II orders the prior and canons of St. Sepulchre's, Warwick, to execute the judgment given against them by papal judges delegate on complaint by the canons of St. Mary's, Warwick, concerning parochial rights and a pension of 30 d. A. Pope Alexander III appoints Bishop Gilbert Foliot of Hereford and Godfrey, archdeacon of Worcester, as judges delegate.

Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his venerable brother Gilbert, bishop of Hereford, and his beloved son G(odfrey), archdeacon of Worcester, greeting and apostolic blessing. We commit to your discretion to hear and determine canonically the case which is pending between the canons of St. Mary and All Saints on the one hand and Prior Ralph and the canons of St. Sepulchre on the other concerning the parochial right and the annual pension of

400 ' praeceptum.] See the writ at p. 215. °[ =this is a mistake for p. 221.] 0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 361 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

30 d. of which the aforesaid canons of St. Mary and All Saints complain that they were violently deprived by the said prior and canons of St. Sepulchre. Thereon we instruct your experience by apostolic writing to convoke each party before your presence and having heard the reasons on both sides, to settle the case according to justice and without any obstacle of appeal. Given at Anagni on 3 August.

B. Judgment given by the papal judges delegate in favour of the canons of St. Mary's on the strength of oaths sworn by priests and laymen.

Brother Gilbert, minister of the church of Hereford, [wishes] to all sons of Holy Mother Church beloved to him in the Lord that they may receive from the King whom they serve the gift of glory. We are minded to make generally known what we have determined by apostolic authority so that with God's help we have completely settled, by the testimony of the present writing, a controversy that has dragged on for a long time, that it shall not again lead to litigation. Indeed, having received a mandate from the lord pope that I and the lord Godfrey, archdeacon of Worcester, were to decide, without appeal, the case which was pending between the canons of the church of St. Mary and All Saints on the one hand and Prior Ralph and the canons of St. Sepulchre of Warwick on the other, we have on an appointed day convened [them] on this, and the forementioned case was settled before us in the following way. The canons of St. Mary and All Saints have complained that a large part of their parish was violently taken away from them by the aforesaid prior and brethren of St. Sepulchre and an annual pension of 30 d., which the church of St. Sepulchre had owed them for a long time, was unjustly withheld from them for some time and that when they put forward those two points and offered to produce manifest proof for both of them by written documents and witnesses, the prior pretended to have some dilatory exceptions and wanted to postpone the case which had started a long time before, but failed to put forward any reason to show that part of that parish belonged by right to his church or that he withheld the aforesaid 30 d. justly. Thus we, who were urged by apostolic authority to decide that case, considered that by law it is for the plaintiff to prove his case and that it is fitting that he should have reasons showing that what he claims is true, and have given judgment that the canons of St. Mary should produce proof of what they claimed. Consequently it was proved by the oath of six priests and six laymen that the part of the parish which the aforesaid canons claimed belonged to their church, and it was also proved by the oath of four priests and three laymen that the aforesaid 30 d. were owed to their church on the ground of an old agreement and were paid by the hands of the priors of the church of St.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 362 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Sepulchre, Ailmar, Anthony and Ralph, at the solemn feast of All Saints and a charter to which the seal of the lord Simon, late bishop of Worcester, is attached easily added even greater authority to their oath: this charter testifies that this parish belongs to the church of St. Mary and All Saints and commemorates that this agreement about the yearly payment of the aforesaid pension of 30 d. was concluded between the aforesaid churches and confirmed. Therefore, moved by those reasons, we have by apostolic authority adjudged to the aforesaid canons of St. Mary and All Saints the parish which they vindicated and the aforesaid pension which they claimed, and I and the lord Godfrey of Worcester have invested them by the text of the gospel, on which the swearing had taken place, of those things which they had proved to belong to them. And we have decreed and ordered by apostolic authority that the aforesaid 30 d. shall be paid to them in the future and that their parochial rights shall be fully paid to them by all those whom the church of St. Sepulchre had, as is now apparent, usurped unjustly, saving however the apostolic privilege, by which the church of St. Sepulchre was granted the burial of its brethren, lay brothers and their kin. In order to ensure that because of those words the rights of the aforesaid churches should not again be disturbed, this apostolic writing was benignly interpreted in our presence and both parties agreed on the interpretation that as true brothers the canons of St. Sepulchre, as if they were lay brothers who have fled the world and have stopped having their own possessions and committed themselves to their mastership, shall be understood to belong to one family of the same table and without another dwelling. We wish you well in the Lord.

C. Writ by King Henry II ordering the prior and canons of St. Sepulchre, Warwick, to abide by the judgment given by the papal judges delegate and to repair all damages, which the other party has suffered. Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Prior Ralph and the canons of St. Sepulchre of Warwick. greeting. I order you to let the canons of the church of St. Mary and All Saints of Warwick have their parish and annual pension of 30 d. well, peacefully, justly and fully, as they deraigned them before Bishop Gilbert of Hereford and Archdeacon G(odfrey) of Worcester and as the charter of the bishop himself testifies in their favour and you shall justly, fully and without delay restore all their damages to them. And unless you do it, Bishop Gilbert of Hereford and Archdeacon G(odfrey) of Worcester shall. Witness: Manasser Biset, the steward. At Rouen.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 363 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

D. Pope Alexander III confirms the judgment given by his papal judges delegate and instructs them to see to it that it is duly carried out. Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his venerable brother Bishop Gilbert of Hereford and his beloved son Archdeacon God(frey) of Worcester, greeting and apostolic blessing. We remember having committed to your discretion to be heard and determined canonically and without hindrance of appeal the case which was pending between the church of St. Mary and All Saints and the canons of St. Sepulchre of Warwick concerning part of a parish and an annual pension of 30 d. You have therefore, according to our mandate, convoked in your presence both parties and proceeded in their business with due diligence and, having diligently heard and taken cognizance of the reasons on both sides, you adjudged to the church of St. Mary and All Saints the said part of a parish and the pension of 30 d., as we have understood from the authentic written text of your sentence. We therefore hold that sentence which you have promulgated canonically in the said case to be valid and firm and we confirm it by apostolic authority, ordering your discretion by apostolic writing to see to it that it is observed and executed, in such a way however that the canons of St. Sepulchre shall not because of this be compelled to pay unduly more than the appointed sum. Given at Clermont, 23 August.

403 Judicial combat fought by Aethelwold, a reeve of the bishop of Durham; prophetic role played by St. Godric.

Under compulsion of necessity a countryman of his was forced by the ministers of the bishop of Durham to purge himself of a crime of which he was accused. A meeting was held where a judgment was pronounced imposing a judicial duel' on him, so that his innocence could be proved by this combat. This he did not refuse, since his conscience had nothing to fear from this criminal accusation. The appointed day for the combat was drawing near and that man prepared himself 403 ' Duelli.]There are frequent instances of the adoption of this mode of deciding litigated questions.

Thus, fines were paid for the privilege of having duels, 28, 30, 31 Hen. II., Madox's Excheq. pp. 66, 71; and in the same work is a notice of the recovery of land decided by this process, p. 294. See also Dugdale, Monast. iii. 306. A large collection of instances in which law-suits, after having been before the courts, were so terminated, may be seen in the Index to the Abbreviatio Placitorum,p. 539. o[ = Placitorumin domo capitulari Westmonasterii asservatorum abbreviatio.

RichardI Edward II, London, 1811 (Record Commission).]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 364 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

actively for battle. He had been the reeve of some manor of the bishop of Durham and had in that capacity been maligned before his lord and accused of dissipating the latter's possessions. Because of the uncertainty which often appears in this sort 6f judgment, he took fright and began to seek the help of the servants of God. On the day before [the combat] he came to the man of God who was in the neighbourhood, recommended himself to his prayers and gave him some small donation. Upon his return to Durham, judgment was given that the innocence of that man was to be shown by judicial combat. The parties met and after a short while the question was solved by violent blows: the aforesaid man fell finally and the multitude of his wounds forced his spirit out of his panting chest. As soon as the man of God lay down in his cell alone, he rang the bell, ordering his servants to be present and after they had entered he said: "I implore you, pray for the soul of our Aethelwold who yesterday was still with us here, for a short while ago he died at Durham on the field of combat and gave up the ghost". The man of God wept copiously, sighed gravely, prayed ardently and commended [Aethelwold's] end to the Lord. His servants, however, did not take this seriously at all and did not dare believe or admit this. Thereupon he told them: "I have not left my senses, as you seem to think, but I again confirm that what I told you is true". In that same hour some cleric arrived from Durham on some errand for the man of God, who again heard from him what he had previously said to his servants and with impudent speed, clerics being liable to be excitable, he said to him: "How could you, who were lying hidden and alone here in this room, have known this?" Thereupon he said: "The servant of God is not alone and I was able to see this because I looked up to the Lord with the eyes of a pure heart". Not long afterwards the death of the aforesaid man became generally known: news spreads quickly amongst the ordinary people. And his servants obtained clear proof that his death had taken place in that very hour when they had heard from the mouth of the man of God that he gave up the ghost. Afterwards some close friend asked the man of God to explain to him very clearly what had happened, and obtained the following explanation: "In that very hour the brethren of the church of Durham had taken place around the table in the refectory and in the hour when he died they had almost reached the end of the meal. Because of tiredness I wanted to give my eyes a rest and, closing my eye-lids, I enjoyed some sleep. Having heard the news of his downfall, a minister of your church told the servants, who were surprised and intimated all this by signs and nods to the brethren and you also, sitting to the south of the table have declared all this, which I similarly saw, with gestures to Brother Benedict, who was eating with you. At that moment his ghost appeared

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 365 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

before me crying, and, repeatedly opening his mouth, said in a plaintive and lamenting way: 'Hach, hach, hach', as if he were asking for help. Suddenly I again heard the horrible shouts and tumult of malignant spirits, whom I have often heard before. Frightened by them, I immediately sat up clearly awake thanks to the protection of the Lord and looked up and there I saw Aethelwold, about whom you questioned me, in the square of Durham where judicial combat is usually fought, paying the debt of death and giving up his last living breath. The malignant spirits rushed forward towards him and claimed that the soul of the dying man was vowed to perdition. But behold, looking up towards the sky I seemed to see a priest wearing a shining stole who, standing before the tribunal of Christ, recommended that man's soul to the Lord with his prayers. After a discussion, the blessed spirits prevailed and the malignant ones withdrew in confusion. Soon that soul will be purified by the fire of purgatory punishments and, as soon as God's clemency will decide, he will be freed from his suffering; and he is not subjected to the vengeful punishment for the crime of which he was accused with you, for he was not guilty of the misdeed of which he was accused, but he underwent the shame of this death because of the hostility of the envious and not because he committed a crime". 2

404 Robert de Icklesham complains to royal justices that the sworn perambulators of the land at Barnhorne, which was adjudicated to Battle Abbey by the king's court, have wrongly included some of his land (see no. 377). After interrogation of the perambulators by royal justices at Winchester, he is convicted of false complaint and amerced.

A reeve of the bishop of Durham, called Aethelwold, was unjustly accused before him of dissipating his possessions. Condemned to judicial combat because of this criminal accusation, he commends himself to Godric's prayers. The following day he undergoes the duel and is killed, although he was innocent of that crime. In that same hour the man of God who was alone in his cell rang the bell and summoned his servants and after they had entered, said to them: "Pray for the soul of Aethelwold, who was yesterday with us and who has now been vanquished at Durham and has died". Thereupon he commended his end to the Lord weeping copiously and sighing gravely. Soon afterwards a cleric arrived [from Durham] and confirmed the truth of what he had said. Afterwards Godric told the story to a friend who had asked for it, as follows: "At the very hour of Aethelwold's death the brethren of the church of Durham had reached the end of their refection and to give my eyes some rest I had allowed my eyelids to have some sleep. I heard a sudden tumult of devils and woke up to see Aethelwold giving up the ghost at Durham. There arose a dispute between bad and good spirits as to which party was entitled to his soul. Looking up towards heaven I seemed to see a priest in shining dress standing before the tribunal of Christ and recommending the soul of the dead man to the Lord. Thereupon the angels of God prevailed and the malignant spirits fled and now the fire of purgatory temporarily burns his soul, but for other sins, for he was not guilty of the misdeed of which he was accused and he was led to the infamy of an ignominious death by envy.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 366 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In this way the land was recovered after much labour and difficulty. It was thought that all was finally quiet and all claims settled. There seemed nothing to worry about in the future, when suddenly Robert of Icklesham and his mother Matilda seized a meadow that lay within the boundary of the manor. They attempted to carry off the hay by force, but the abbot had been warned and, gathering a number of men, met force with force. He put his adversaries to flight and recovered the hay.1 Therefore Robert went to the king's court and, since the king was absent, he complained to his justices that the men whose duty it had been to mark the boundaries of Barnhorne had taken in more than was just. Thus, although he had not been sued, his land had been taken away from him. As a result of his complaint, the abbot was summoned to court, along with the men who had perambulated the land, to answer for what Robert swore was an injustice. The abbot, strong in mind though weak in body, appeared with no delay before the justices at Winchester on the appointed day, bringing with him the men who had perambulated the Barnhorne tenement and had determined its boundaries. Robert of Icklesham stood up and made his complaint about his land taken from him, as he asserted, by guile. But the twelve men were firm. They denied this to his face, and so that they might not seem untrue to their oath, they were prepared to go further and take an oath again, that they had not included in their boundary more, but less, than was just! So Robert, shown to be guilty of a false plea, was given over to the king's mercy by a unanimous judgment. When he heard this, he took flight secretly, not forgetting his spurs nor sparing his horse, nor pausing till he reached home, all a-tremble. The abbot with his entourage returned home rejoicing, and as long as he lived he held the tenement peacefully, quit of all claims.2 This is all that needs saying about the affair, and we shall pass on to other examples of his solicitude.3

404

The taking of its harvest is the vital act in establishing seisin of land. Van Caenegem, Writs, pp. 306-307, and ibid., n. 1. 2 Despite the contemptuous description of him, Robert was evidently escaping before he could be forced in to a formal quitclaim without compensation before the justices. The motive is clearly described by Van Caenegem, Writs, pp. 43 44. As it turned out, Battle Abbey only secured Robert's quitclaim after paying eight marks plus a continuing half-mark per annum. The chronicler's evidently disingenuous quoadvixitimplies that it was Walter's successor who settled with Robert, and the extant chirograph of Abbot Odo (1175-1200) proves it. HBA charter, vol. 42/709. 0[ Henry E. Huntington Library, San Marino, California.]' '[Translation taken from BATTLE Chron. 219-221.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 367 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

405 On the death of Pope Adrian IV, in 1159, the bishop of Lincoln starts complaining to King Henry IIthat the abbey of St. Albans unjustly rejects his jurisdiction. In 1163 the justiciar, Earl Robert of Leicester, on the basis of a royal writ, summons the parties, who appear at Winchester, where the case is postponed for further scrutiny of the documents. The king, having returned from France, decides to give judgment himself, but the abbot of St. Albans is summoned to appear before papal judges delegate on the strength of a bull obtained by the bishop of Lincoln in the previous year. The king objects, as it would be against his honour if an action decided in his court were subjected to judgment in the papal curia, and hears the case himself. Particularly impressed by royal charters produced by the abbot of St. Albans and by the admission of the bishop of Lincoln that he has no written documents, the king arranges an agreement by which the bishop gives up his claim and receives the manor of Fingest in compensation. A. The narrative in the Gesta of St. Albans.

Bishop Robert of Lincoln rejoiced in the death of the lord Pope Adrian and went to King Henry, who was then staying in the kingdom of the French, and gravely excited him against the church of St. Albans, publicly complaining about us and voicing a serious grievance against us. And upon his return, armed with the king's authority and the support of numerous bishops, he ordered us as our bishop to organize a solemn procession and to prepare hospitality for him when he would travel around the diocese. This Abbot Robert refused, angering the bishop who took the letter which he had received from the king to Earl Robert of Leicester who was then the judge in England. The earl, who was his friend and an inhabitant of his diocese and who was faced with a written request from the king, readily executed it and summoned Robert, abbot of St. Albans, and his convent by the following letter signed by his seal. Robert, earl of Leicester, to Abbot Robert, the prior and the convent of St. Albans. I have received the following mandate of the lord king: "Henry, king of England, etc. to Earl Robert of Leicester, greeting. I order that you shall without delay make the bishop of Lincoln and the abbot of St. Albans appear before you and order the bishop of Chichester, the bishop of Chester, the bishop of Norwich and the abbot of Westminster to be with you on that day and diligently to hear with you the plaint that is pending between the bishop of Lincoln and the aforesaid

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 368 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

abbot what jurisdiction his see and his predecessors had over the church of St. Albans and the aforesaid abbot in the time of King Henry my grandfather, and to enquire what exemption the abbot of St. Albans maintains Jhis abbey to have enjoyed in the time of King Henry, my grandfather. And let me know in writing how you shall be able through their witnesses to establish what the situation was at the time of [King] Henry, my grandfather and tell the bishops and the abbot of Westminster to write to me. Witness: the chancellor.1 At Falaise". I therefore order you on the king's part to appear at Northampton on the Friday before the Purification of the Virgin Mary2 without any excuse or delay, so well prepared in all things that I can completely fulfil the command of the lord king and that the case will not remain unsolved through your fault and know for certain that the command of the lord king will not brook further delay. And therefore I gave you so much time to make your preparations. And I order you to bring this letter with you when you come to see me at Northampton. Farewell. But while everything was ready at the appointed place at Northampton and no change of date had been given, the case was dealt with in the castle of Winchester, because of some circumstances that had suddenly arisen, and where the aforesaid bishop of Lincoln, surrounded by a large number of clerics, was present together with Bishop Gilbert of Hereford whose kinsman he was. Abbot Robert also accompanied the venerable man Abbot Gregory of Malmesbury and Prior Theobald of the church of St. Edmunds and a few monks and clerics from that region. Those who had been appointed by the king, i.e. the Bishops Hilary of Chichester, Richard of Chester and William of Norwich and Abbot Laurence of Westminster, took their seats ready to listen with the utmost diligence to the allegations of both parties and to report them in writing to the lord king. The bishop of Hereford started ag follows, speaking for the bishop of Lincoln: "When it first pleased the Lord to free the people of the English from the darkness of heathendom and let the light shine upon them, the dioceses of the bishoprics were distinguished as they are conserved until this day according to the teaching of the Holy Ghost and the saying of the Prophet 'distribute his houses'. From the very start of the Church, the church of St. Albans was subjected to the church of Lincoln in so far as all the abbots of St. Albans received their consecration from the lord of Lincoln and made their profession. This profession is the bond by which the daughter is bound to the mother, wherefore at the beginning of the profession a cross is subscribed, true and stable obedience is promised and the profession after having been read is placed upon the altar. We have in our hand the profession of Abbot Richard and he who wrote the profession of Abbot Geoffrey is at hand. The profession of the lord Robert who is now abbot we also have in our hand and he personally wrote it. Therefore the church of St. Albans owes 405A 1 *[Henry was at Falaise c. May 1162; Thomas Becket was still chancellor (Eyton, Court Henry

11, 56).1 2

0[l February 1163.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 369 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

subjection and obedience like the others of that diocese so that the lord of Lincoln is entitled to solemn processions there when the time has come and due refections when he travels around in his diocese, so that he shall reap a carnal harvest from them for whom he has sown a spiritual seed.3 And thus it has been done until this day without protest, but now a new spirit is let loose, a recalcitrant spirit against one's vow, one's faith, one's profession: obedience is denied to the lord of Lincoln. It therefore has pleased the lord king to enquire diligently through prudent men what right to subjection the lord of Lincoln had in the church of St. Albans and what is the latter's exemption; and this inquisition concerns the days of King Henry, his grandfather, when the various churches enjoyed their right". Profession: "I Robert abbot elect of St. Albans promise due obedience to you Robert bishop of Lincoln and your canonically enthroned successors". To this the abbot replied: "What will be said on our behalf, either by me or somebody else, will be said by way of reply but not at law, for we have not come hither for that. I hear the lord of Hereford say certain things that concern my person; I will not confirm them by my silence, but having taken counsel I shall reply". So, having taken counsel, he answered through a spokesman: "Not all the abbots of St. Albans were blessed by the lord of Lincoln: Abbot Paul and all his predecessors received their blessing from somebody else. This lord Robert also declined out of veneration for the church of Lincoln to receive the blessing which was offered to him by one who had power. This was undeservedly considered a transgression by the lord of Hereford for although he had been abbot for ten years, he had never disobeyed an order of the bishop of Lincoln and concerning his profession the lord of Hereford would have done better to keep silent, for, as he said himself, the lord king wanted to concentrate and concentrates this inquiry on the days of King Henry, his grandfather; and expatiating on this he replies that he has not written the letter which is produced, nor did he order it to be written, nor did he place the cross which is drawn there with his own hand. He reads it because of the honour of the church of Lincoln, adding what was lacking because of the liberty of his church, for he has added the words 'saving the dignities of my church' to a document where they were lacking; and the end of his peroration should be noticed most carefully, for the last words of a speech are better than its beginning. This profession, however, if it should be called a profession, was made by him not because of some obligation, but out of reverence to the church of Lincoln. Indeed, the dignities of the church of St. Albans are considerable and manifest; it is not only free, but born free and its beginnings were written by King Offa in letters of gold. His successors, the illustrious kings of the English, have corroborated its freedom and the Roman pontiffs have confirmed it by their privileges, nor can the lord of Lincoln pretend not to know them, since his clerics have come, examined 1I. Cor. ix. 11.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 370 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

our freedom and truthfully reported what they had seen and heard. He therefore who attempts to disturb that freedom does not sin lightly". Having spoken these words, master John de Tilbury sat down. And while they were discussing this matter for a long while, something memorable happened at this meeting, for some adversary of our party who was very learned in the law got up in order to combat what our people had said, but when he opened his mouth he spoke in such an unlearned and incoherent way that all the adversaries signalled him to keep silent. Thereupon Abbot Robert spoke up openly as follows: "As the king's letter makes clear, you, my lord earl, and you, my lords bishops and you, abbot of Westminster are ordered diligently to enquire what [right to] subjection the bishop of Lincoln has in the church of St. Albans or what liberty that same church had in the days of King Henry. This inquisition can be carried out by nobody better than clerics of Lincoln and monks of St. Albans. But our monks are dispersed throughout the kingdom, some in the diocese of Lincoln which is very large, some in the dioceses of London, Norwich and Durham, whence the old and wise ones should be called to study and certify our case in law and in fact: we who are younger have no perfect knowledge yet of the rights of our church and we ought to be granted a fitting delay of three months. We moreover request this delay because it would be dangerous to precipitate a decision in a matter of such magnitude as is before us, for what is at stake is not quantities of goods, lands or manors, but our liberty which is more precious than gold or topaz" Having heard the allegations from both sides and discussed them, the aforesaid four men together with Robert, the earl of Leicester, postponed the whole controversy to mid-Lent, appointing a peremptory day to each party. Upon his return the lord abbot, who had obtained the said delay, got out the privileges of the Roman pontiffs Calixtus [II], Celestine [II], Eugenius [III], Adrian [IV] and Alexander [III]: these arms would come in good stead in this fight, namely when the principal question should arise. The privilege of Pope Calixtus seemed to be the most useful of all to gain the king's favour in this case, where the said pope grants what is requested as a favour to King Henry, who desired in this matter to follow in the footsteps of his ancestors, as appears from his document. As the appointed day was imminent and no more than six or seven days away, the earl of Leicester wrote to both parties on the basis of a royal mandate that was suddenly brought from overseas, telling them that the discussion on the case pending was being reserved to be heard by the king. This gave the abbot great pleasure, for he had always maintained before the aforesaid judges that if the king were absent, he would either have to fight for the freedom of his church or come to some unfavourable settlement, since the king was their special founder and patron: and this he had accepted on the counsel of people learned in the law and not being able to do

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 371 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

otherwise. A few days before the return of the lord king an apostolic document addressed to the lord Abbot Robert and which had been kept dark for too long for some unknown reason was at long last produced by those of Lincoln, who were trying to strengthen their case before both judges, ecclesiastical as well as lay. Its text is as follows. Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his beloved son Abbot Robert and the whole chapter of St. Albans, greeting and apostolic blessing. When last year your messenger appeared in the presence of our apostolate, we received him benignly and according to your petition ordered the confirmation of the privilege which our predecessor of good memory Pope Adrian granted to your church. Afterwards, however, our venerable brother the bishop of Lincoln sent us a notification indicating that the said church pertains especially to his right and disposition and is answerable to him as its bishop. Therefore, although it is our wish to love you and your church and to conserve the rights of your church in their entirety, nevertheless since saving our conscience we could not deny to the aforesaid bishop his justice or fail him as far as his right is concerned, we have given you a mandate to agree on suitable judges so that the case can be discussed in their presence and brought before us to be settled by us when the truth has been established and as justice demands. Since this has not yet been accomplished and the said bishop does not stop appealing to us to obtain justice, we have decided to entrust the case to our venerable brethren the bishops of Chichester and Norwich. Hence we order you in successive writings to appear in their presence when they will summon you and to produce witnesses and to allege documents and arguments when complaint is made against you, and you shall not refuse to show them the privileges sealed with bulls, old and new, in your cloister. And after everything has been shown to the said judges you shall make copies of all of them for the aforesaid bishop so that he can inspect them carefully and decide whether he should give up the case or proceed. We have also ordered the same judges to transmit to our presence under seal the depositions of the witnesses, the allegations and also the arguments and the transcript of the privileges of both parties in order to allow us to discover the truth and bring the case to due conclusion. Given at Genoa on 16 March.4 So the abbot was summoned to appear in London on the day when Letare Jerusalem5 is sung, well prepared for the bishop of Lincoln on the question of the status. But behold, the king arriving in England and hearing of this, thought that this had been arranged by the abbot himself and conceived great indignation against him. But the abbot, ignorant of the king's wrath, sent his monk lord Geoffrey to pay him a visit with civility and a multitude of gifts, but the king sharply reproached him with the abbot's negligence, which the lord Geoffrey firmly denied. The king, however, immediately sent Richard, the archdeacon of 0

[Jaff6-L6wenfeld, Regesta, no. 10703 (16 March 1162).]o The Introit for the Fourth Sunday in Lent [= 3 March 1163.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 372 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Poitiers, to Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury ordering him to come and see the king at Winchester where this took place and ordering the case between the bishop of Lincoln and the abbot of St. Albans to be examined in his own presence at Westminster, in the council which he intended to hold there at mid-Lent. In the meantime friends of both parties advanced several proposals of peace, but all displeased one party or both. Having been informed by lord Geoffrey of the king's wrath, the abbot sent to him lord S(imon), the prior of his church and A(dam) 6 the cellarer, who were to establish carefully the abbot's innocence as far as obtaining the [papal] rescript was concerned and to examine whether they could in any way obtain the king's assistance in the imminent completion of the case. Upon meeting the king they elegantly defended the innocence of the abbot, since it is not customary for the defendant to invite the plaintiff to start pleading against him and also since the appointed judges were suspect in the abbot's eyes, as we have explained, as being on good terms with the bishop and having a similar case against the monastery of St. Edmunds and -one of them - against the monastery of St. Martins of Battle. The king accepted their arguments and was appeased. Having noticed this, our messengers added that if the lord king gave his efficacious support to free us utterly from subjection to Lincoln, [the monks] would do for him during his lifetime and after his death the same as for the founder of our church, the illustrious King Offa. This the king accepted gratefully and gladly, telling them that the abbot was to meet him at London and bring along all the privileges new and old so that he could inspect them. And thus the messengers went home and reporting to the abbot and the convent, gave them a good deal of fright for they were afraid, if they displeased the king in any way, he would cancel [their privileges]. Having taken counsel with the wiser part of the brethren, the abbot went to London with only two brethren and without the privileges, leaving the outcome of the matter to God. And as soon as he met the king and was questioned on this point, abuse was hurled at him and he sadly withdrew. However, thanks to the intercession of the noble man R(obert) de Humez who was closely related to the abbot and thanks to the 100 pounds which the abbot had offered the king through him for the said emancipation, the king calmed down and having called the abbot said: "We shall do our best for peace and what you desire" Upon hearing these words the abbot regained his equanimity and upon being asked whether he still had his privileges with him, replied that he would have them at hand the following day and he sent for them immediately and also summoned the wiser part of the convent together with numerous trustworthy laymen. Thus Prior S(imon) went to London with 30 monks and a large crowd of witnesses and the charters of the Roman pontiffs and the kings, well prepared to enter litigation before the king and the aforesaid judges. The aforesaid witnesses were qualified by their age and morals to prove under oath if it were necessary that the church of St. Albans in no way belonged to the right and the disposition of the bishop of 6 Meaning "Adam", already mentioned, no doubt.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 373 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Lincoln, nor ought it to be answerable to him as its bishop, for it was held for well known by numerous people that the aforesaid church of the blessed martyr was not subjected to the bishop of Lincoln in the old days before the time of Abbot Richard, who was the first to make a profession to Bishop Robert of Lincoln surnamed Bloet, whose blood relation he was. Moreover, they all maintained without any doubt that the ordinations of monks and clerics of the church of St. Albans, the dedication of altars and churches and other episcopal sacraments had of old been received by the aforesaid monastery from any bishop. To avoid any doubt on these points in the future we transmit to the memory of posterity a few examples extracted from numerous documents and confirmed by the truthful declaration of the said witnesses concerning the ordinations of monks and clerics, the consecrations of altars and churches and the other sacraments. 7 ... The king, however, sat in the chapel of St. Catherine at Westminster with the assembly of archbishops, bishops and other magnates of the realm and ordered Abbot Robert of St. Albans to stand up in front of him in the presence of them all; the bishop of Lincoln with his people was sitting on one side and Abbot Laurence [of Westminster] on the other. Thereupon the abbot of Westminster spoke in Latin about the ancient dignity of the church of St. Albans, the religion of the place and the evil perturbation by which the peace of the monks is disturbed, explaining that singular privileges were granted to the religious places in order to provide for the peace of the cloistered. To this Abbot Robert, who wanted the business to proceed but was afraid of being forced by the samejudges to continue this case by apostolic authority, added while standing before the king: "My lord king, I am here present before you at your command to plead on the liberty of the church that is committed to me and I also am here because I was summoned by judges delegate of the supreme pontiff to plead before them. I am therefore ready and well prepared to obey both your summons and the command of the judges delegate, but one thing I ask, that if I declare and vindicate the freedom of my church in your audience, the judges delegate shall not oblige me to plead a second time on the vindicated liberty". Thereupon the king who, together with his magnates, admired his prudence, turned towards Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury - for the king sat between the said Archbishop Thomas and Roger de Pont l'Ev~que, archbishop of York -and said: "What the abbot says stands to reason, or would it be honourable for our majesty if a case that is decided in our palace were to lead to another sentence in the consistory of the lord pope". Shortly afterwards the king got up, took with him the earl of Leicester and Richard de Humez, the leader of his knights, and Richard, who at that time was archdeacon of Poitiers and afterwards became bishop of Winchester, and ordered all the others to wait for his return. Outside he ordered Abbot Robert through Archdeacon Richard to appear before him with two brethren carrying the privileges and creating the opportunity of 7

0

[There follow two and a half pages with lists of dedications of churches and chapels belonging to St. Albans, performed by a multitude of various bishops.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 374 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

inspecting the privileges old and new. They inspected the written documents of the English kings, Offa and others, in which according to the old custom golden crosses painted by the king's hands were placed at the beginning instead of them having hanging seals in the modern style, and therefore they seemed to some envious people to be of no value because they were not sealed. They also came across a charter by King Henry, the king's grandfather, in which was confirmed whatever had been granted by the English kings to St. Alban in lands as well as in liberties, whereupon the king said: "What are those of Lincoln muttering about, saying that unsealed privileges are of no value? Look, the seal of my grandfather is the seal of all the original charters whose confirmation is contained in this one" These words in such a young king were deemed to be a sign of no less wisdom than thejudgment of Solomon 8 given between the quarrelling whores, for the abbot and all those who were with him found no way of countering those who pretended that privileges without seals were of no value. Also it was discovered in certain monasteries that the statement that there were no seals of the kings of the English9 was false, for at Westminster a seal of King Edward was found. As they reached the privileges of the Roman pontiffs and the king heard that it was on his grandfather's petition that the privilege of Calixtus was granted which confirmed everything that had been granted by the English kings to St. Alban in manors and in liberties, he again said: "Whatever has been done in the reign of my grandfather at his request has such a validity that it cannot be dissolved for any reason". But when the privilege of Pope Celestine was heard and particularly the article mentioning the yearly payment to the supreme pontiff of an ounce of gold by way of recognition, the king was upset and declared: "This article, my lord abbot, goes against our dignity: you were never allowed to make my church tributary to the Roman see without my consent, nor should the Roman pontiff have done this". To which the abbot replied: "This was not done in my time, ° it was done at the time of our third predecessor". And the king said: "Whoever has done this, it was done against the right order, and now produce the privileges which you have obtained and particularly those which are odious to those of Lincoln and are called ,mitred' -they called them mitred because of the figure of a mitre and the pontifical ornaments. And as the inspection started the king said to the abbot: "See to it that you tell us the full truth, for we enjoy being clement so that we easily forgive him who confesses the truth even if it is unpleasant to us". So the abbot keeping this testimony in mind said confidently: "My lord, what we have at hand are the so-called mitred privileges. But in truth I witness that they were not obtained by me or through me, indeed they were sent without my knowledge to the church of St. Albans by your countryman Pope Adrian, who as we certainly know was himself born in its district". Hearing this, the archdeacon of Poitiers said: "My vicar in the church of St. Hilaire wears a mitre at all the main feasts of the year, nor 'I. Kings, iii. 27. 9 In the sense of Anglo-Saxon. 10 Coelestinus II. was pope in A.D. 1143-1144; Geoffrey being then (16th) abbot.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 375 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

does the mitre constitute a derogation of episcopal dignity", and the king replied: "With a little persuasion we would readily accept seeing all the abbots of our kingdom wearing mitres, but the liberties which St. Albans appears to enjoy towards the episcopal function came before the mitre and not after". In the meantime, as the privileges were inspected and heard, Geoffrey Ridel, archdeacon of Canterbury and afterwards bishop of Ely, twice entered the king's council in order to sow discord between the king and the abbot in relation to some article and just as he happened to be present, the article was being read on the free election and institution of the abbots. This he suggested was obtained to the detriment of the royal dignity, to which the king said: "All enjoy the same privilege, but we in such a case subject all privileges to our will, so go back to those who sent you and do not dare return and disturb us" The king then said to the abbot: "We have now heard, my lord abbot, what privileges you enjoy; we shall hear tomorrow on what the lord of Lincoln bases his claim to obtain your subjection and that of your church, and go safely to your lodging without revealing to anyone what has been done here". The king got up at once and returned to the chapel and the archbishops, bishops and other magnates whom he had left there and said to the bishop of Lincoln: "See to it that we car inspect your privileges tomorrow so that we are able to take cognizance of the case that exists between you both and keep with the greatest certainty the rights of each church and, if it is found possible, to pronounce the most just sentence". And with this word the council was dissolved for that day. The following day, however, the bishop called upon the king outside and confessed that his case against the abbot of St. Albans was based not on privileges, but only on prescription. The king then said to him: "We believe that privileges have precedence over prescription particularly on this point, where the claim is based on the vacillation of the head of the church rather than on the servitude of the church. The abbot of St. Albans maintains that his church was free from the start, but fell into subjection to the church of Lincoln by the negligence and idleness of his predecessors and that it was recently restored to its native liberty by the goodwill of the Roman pontiffs, to whom it belongs to intervene in this sort of case and, by the authority of St. Peter, to restore everyone to his original status. Take therefore the counsel of the dean and the archdeacons and the other canons of your church concerning the common liberty and let us know whether it suits you to continue with the case or to come to an agreement". So the bishop returned to his people, reported the king's words and after common deliberation asked the king to establish peace between the litigating churches and bring about an amicable composition. The king, however, took with him Richard de Humez, the head of his knights, and Richard the archdeacon of Poitiers, went to Abbot Robert and the brethren who were with him and said: "Now, unless you create difficulties your privileges will stand in their entirety: if you like to give one of your lands to the church of Lincoln, the bishop will renounce the right which he says he has over

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 376 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the abbot and the church of St. Albans". Hearing this the abbot and those who were with him gladly replied to the king: "Lord king, our eyes are turned to you, in you we place our counsel, let the value of the plot of land be fixed as it pleases you and let it be given to the bishop of Lincoln". And the king replied: "Let the value of the land which you offer be ten pounds and we shall lend our support for it to be accepted". The king at once entered the chapel of the infirmary of Westminster joining the bishops, whereas the abbot and his people, staying in the infirmary itself, began to talk about the name of the land. The king offered the bishop of Lincoln land worth ten pounds on behalf of the abbot and this was accepted, whereupon the abbot with his people was called out into the chapel and the king coming towards them with the aforesaid bishops, asked what the name of the land was. The abbot, however, tried to give away some church and suffered a repulse, for it seemed almost a form of simony to give or to accept a church to redeem a liberty. Finally they talked about the value of the land called Fingest and it was found to be worth ten pounds, including the church of that land. As Abbot Robert, with all the brethren, wanted to be freed once and for all of the domination of the bishop of Lincoln and of all forms of subjection, which was lost by the simplicity of two or three abbots who had accepted his blessing and thereby had seemed to make a profession, hoped for perpetual peace and kept the future in mind, he promised the king, with the consent of his brethren and directed by their unanimous will, to give to the church of Lincoln the aforesaid manor of Fingest to be possessed in its entirety, yielding an annual rent often pounds. Having returned to his seat, the king told the Lincoln party the name of the land and the bishop of Lincoln and all the canons of his church, whose better and wiser part was sitting with him, were pleased. He got up immediately and resigned such right as he said he had in the church of St. Albans and Abbot Robert into the hand of the king through his head-gear called a hure. The king accepted it, transferred it at once into the hand of Abbot Robert and through the abbot invested the church of St. Albans with full liberty and immediately gave the bishop of Lincoln the property and the civil possession of the manor of Fingest through his gold ring, with the agreement, as was said, of the abbot of St. Albans and the chapter to whose right that land belonged. Charters were also written on both sides, confirming the aforesaid transaction. Firstly the charter of the church of Lincoln to which the seal of the bishop was immediately attached and assurance given that the seal of the chapter of Lincoln would follow, and afterwards the charter of the abbot concerning the land, on which the king also placed his hand, for he attached a lace of his cloak to it by way of testimony. Afterwards a royal charter of confirmation was drawn up and finally a charter of Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury. The charter of the bishop of Lincoln to which the seal of his chapter is attached begins as follows: "Robert, by the grace of God, bishop of Lincoln to all sons of Holy Mother Church, greeting. Be it known to you all that to the controversy etc.". The king's charter begins as follows: "Know that the controversy which had been carried on

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 377 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

for a long time, etc.". That of St. Thomas: "Decisions of cases, etc.... and therefore henceforth nothing to the monks of St. Albans and the bishop of Lincoln. The latter shall have the use of the advantages of the aforesaid land, the former shall enjoy an undoubted, secure and unshaken liberty, for they shall recognize him as their diocesan or bishop no more than the one of Winchester or Exeter; and not even that much, since they are more on their guard against him". This transaction was concluded in the year of grace 1163, in the month of March in the [ninth] year of the illustrious Henry, grandson of Henry I, William the Bastard's son and in the twelfth year since the abbot received the pastoral cure, in the presence of the said King Henry. Also present were St. Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Roger of York, the bishops Henry of Winchester, Nigel of Ely, William of Norwich, Hilary of Chichester, Jocelin of Salisbury, Walter of Rochester, Hugh of Durham, Gilbert of Hereford, Bartholomew of Exeter, Richard of Coventry and Godfrey Lanum of St. Asaph, the abbots Laurence of Westminster, William of Ramsey, Gregory of Malmesbury, Clement of York and Reginald of Pershore, the archdeacons Geoffrey of Canterbury and Richard of Poitiers, the earls Robert of Leicester, Hugh of Norfolk and William of Arundel, the constables Richard de Lucy and Richard de Humez, Henry son of Gerold the chamberlain and many others.

B. Notification by Henry II of the solution of the case.

Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians, count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls and all his barons and lieges of the whole of England, French and English, greeting. Know that the controversy that went on for a long time between Bishop Robert of Lincoln and Abbot Robert of St. Albans and their churches concerning the subjection of the abbot and monastery of St. Albans and fifteen privileged churches, was determined before me and Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury, Archbishop Roger of York and other bishops and barons of my kingdom in the following way. Bishop Robert of Lincoln has with the consent of his chapter given up forever the controversy which he had started against Abbot Robert of St. Albans and his brethren, as he claimed that the said monastery of St. Albans and the fifteen privileged churches in its territory were subjected to the church of Lincoln and to

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 378 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

himself as its bishop. And to put an end to it forever he received from the hand of the said abbot and his brethren the manor which is called Fingest with the church and all its appurtenances, yielding ten pounds a year and to be possessed freely and quietly by the church of Lincoln with my consent and the counsel of the bishops and the consent of the chapter of Lincoln, and he has given up in my hand forever for himself and his successors and with the consent of his chapter the right which he claimed for himself and his successors in the aforesaid abbey of St. Albans and in the person of Abbot Robert and his successors and in the aforesaid fifteen churches. Therefore I will that henceforth the monastery of St. Albans and the fifteen aforesaid churches shall be free to receive chrism for themselves and oil and blessing for their abbot and all other sacraments of the Church from whatsoever bishop they want, without any protest on the part of the church of Lincoln, and the abbey shall forever remain free in my hand as my demesne church, whereas the tithe of Wakerley, which they first had given to the church of Lincoln, shall remain with it forever. The other churches of the said monastery, which are situated throughout the bishopric of Lincoln, shall show the same obedience and subjection to the bishop of Lincoln and his archdeacons to which the other churches are held and if in the privileges of the monks anything is mentioned concerning those churches or cells or the persons who live in them, clerics and monks as well as laymen, it shall not stand against this agreement. Therefore I will and firmly command that this composition shall forever be firm and stable and I confirm it by this my charter. Witnesses: Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury, Archbishop Roger of York, the bishops Henry of Winchester, Nigel of Ely, William of Norwich, Hilary of Chichester, Jocelin of Salisbury, Walter of Rochester, Hugh of Durham, Gilbert of Hereford, Bartholomew of Exeter and Richard of Coventry, the abbots Laurence of Westminster, William of Ramsey, Gregory of Malmesbury, Reginald of Pershore, Clement of York and Ailred of Rievaulx, Earl Robert of Leicester, Earl Hugh Bigod, Earl William of Arundel, Richard de Lucy, Richard de Humez, the constable, and Henry son of Gerald. At Westminster.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 379 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

C. Notification by Robert, bishop of Lincoln, of the solution of the case.

Robert, by God's grace bishop of Lincoln, to all sons of Holy Mother Church, greeting. Be it known to all of you that with the consent of my chapter I have given up forever the controversy which I had started against Abbot Robert of St. Albans and his brethren and by which I claimed the monastery of St. Albans and those fifteen privileged churches which they have in their territory to owe subjection and obedience to the church of Lincoln and to me as its bishop. And to ensure that I shall leave them in peace on this point forever I have received from the hand of the said abbot and his brethren, with the consent of my lord king and with the counsel of the aforesaid bishops, our brethren, and with the consent of my chapter on this point, the manor called Fingest with the church and all its appurtenances, i.e. land worth ten pounds a year, to be possessed henceforth and forever freely and quietly by the church of Lincoln. And I have given up forever in the hand of my lord king for me and my successors the right which I claimed for my church and myself and my successors in the said abbey and in the person of Abbot Robert and his successors and in the aforesaid fifteen churches. Let therefore the monastery of St. Albans and the fifteen aforesaid churches be free henceforth to receive chrism for themselves and oil and blessing for their abbot and all other sacraments of the Church from whatsoever bishop they want without any protest on our part or that of our church and let the church henceforth remain free in the king's hand as his demesne. The other churches of the said monastery, however, which are situated throughout the bishopric of Lincoln, shall show to the bishop of Lincoln and the archdeacons the same obedience and subjection to which the other churches are held. This I have confirmed by the attestation of the present document and the attachment of my seal and that of the chapter in order to avoid any reopening of litigation. Witnesses as above.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 380 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

D. Notification by Robert de Gorram, abbot of St. Albans, of the solution of the case.

Robert, by God's grace abbot of the church of St. Albans, and the whole convent of the said place, to all sons of Holy Mother Church, greeting. Know you all that the controversy, which Bishop Robert of Lincoln and his chapter started against our monastery and ourselves concerning the subjection, was settled as follows by the counsel and with the help of our lord Henry II, the illustrious king of the English, and our venerable father Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury and the lord Archbishop Roger of York and the other bishops, i.e. Henry of Winchester, Nigel of Ely, William of Norwich, Jocelin of Salisbury, Bartholomew of Exeter, Hilary of Chichester, Hugh of Durham, Richard of Coventry and Gilbert of Hereford. The aforesaid bishop and Adelelm' the dean and the whole chapter of Lincoln have given up forever the claim by which they demanded subjection from us and our monastery and they have given up completely in the hand of the lord king in the presence of the lords archbishops of Canterbury and York and the aforesaid bishops all right which they claimed for themselves and their church in our person, in our monastery and in our fifteen privileged churches. And they admitted that henceforth we and our monastery and the aforesaid churches shall be at liberty to receive chrism, oil and the blessing of abbots, the ordination of monks and clerics, the dedication of the aforesaid churches and the consecration of altars and any other sacraments from whatever bishop we prefer without any reclamation on their part. We on the other hand, with the consent of our whole chapter and the consent and support of the lord king, have, for this surrender and renunciation, granted to the church of Lincoln in perpetual possession the manor of Fingest, which belongs to the right of our monastery, with the church and everything appertaining to that manor, being land worth 10 pounds. The tithe of Wakerley, which the church of Lincoln previously had from ours for the yearly rent of the aforesaid fifteen churches, shall forever remain with it. Furthermore, the other churches of our monastery or our cells, situated throughout the bishopric of Lincoln, shall show to the bishop of Lincoln and his archdeacon that obedience and subjection to which the other churches are held. And if the privileges of both churches contain anything concerning these churches or cells or the persons who occupy them, clerics, monks or laymen, it shall in no way avail against this agreement. This we confirm by the attestation of the present document and the attachment of our seal and that of the chapter, to avoid litigation being reopened. Witnesses: the aforesaid bishops, the abbots Laurence of Westminster, William of Ramsey, Reginald of Pershore, Gregory of Malmesbury and Clement of York, the archdeacons Geoffrey of Canterbury and Richard of Poitiers, the earls Robert of 405D ' O[Adelelm, dean of Lincoln, [1141 x 45]-d. 1179 (J. Le Neve, Fasti 1066 1300, iii. 8).]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 381 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Leicester, Hugh of Norfolk and William of Arundel, the barons Richard de Lucy and Richard de Humez and Henry fitz Gerald. In the year of the incarnation of the 2 Lord 1163, in the month of March. At Westminster.

406 The men of Wallingford and Oxford having complained to King Henry II about the market being held at Abingdon, the king issues a temporary prohibition. As the men of Abingdon object, the plaintiffs again go to the king and return with a writ addressed to the justiciar, ordering a sworn inquest in the county court of Berkshire. The inquest confirms the existence of the market in the time of King Henry I, but on the king's return to England, the plaintiffs suggest that the verdict was false, whereupon the king decides that another sworn inquest shall take place at Oxford before his justices, none of the jurors being men of the abbey. After contradictory statements, the earl of Leicester puts the matter before the king, testifying that he has seen a market in Abingdon in the time of King Henry I, whereupon the king confirms Abingdon's market rights. Shortly after the accession of Abbot Walkelin to this church the men of Wallingford together with those of Oxford went to this young King Henry suggesting that the situation concerning the market of Abingdon was different from what it should be and what it had been in the time of King Henry, his grandfather. They attempted with many deceitful words and falsehoods to obtain the king's consent for the prohibition of the market. As the king thought fit to give them credence, he ordered the market to be prohibited temporarily, except for the smaller goods that used to be sold there, until his return from overseas, where he was then preparing to go:' then he would examine the case more subtly. Although they had received the power, they refrained from the prohibition of the market until the king had gone overseas, but afterwards freely giving rein to their malice and taking with them the king's constable of Wallingford, they arrived at Abingdon on a Sunday, ordered by the king's word all those who had brought their wares to leave and committed violence on the peasants. The men of Abingdon, however - I do not know where their audacity came from - bore the prohibition of their market very badly and chased away with shame, far from the town, all the adversaries who had turned up. Excited to even greater evil by this repulse, their adversaries did not wait for the king's return to the country, but went to him where he happened to be and told him what had happened to them, not without great injury to the king, and added many vain things. Seeking to satisfy 2 0 [MONASTICON, ii. 186-187; Scammell, Hugh du Puiset, 86; Richardson and Sayles, The Governance, 292-293; lidem, Law and Legislation, 72; V.C.H. Hertfordshire,iv. 376.]o 406 1 '[The king eventually left for the Continent on 14 August 1158. He did not return until 25 January 1163.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 382 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

their importunity with the equity of the law, he gave them a writ and let them go home. They returned and believing that the king's letter contained the utter overthrow of the market of Abingdon, went to the justiciar of England, Earl Robert of Leicester, before whom the writ, with the following content, was read in the presence of Abbot Walkelin: "Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, to Robert, earl of Leicester, greeting. I order that you summon the whole meeting of Berkshire and cause twenty-four men of the oldest, who lived in the time of King Henry my grandfather, to be elected. If they can swear that in his day there was a full market at Abingdon so shall it be now, but if they have not seen it and cannot swear to it, then it shall be forbidden as is right, so that I hear no further complaint thereof" After the writ was read out, they were confounded in the hope which they had, although they were well aware of the truth. At the command of the earl, Sheriff Adam convened the whole county court at Farnborough and installed the elected men who according to the king's precept had to swear: they confirmed under oath that they had seen and been present at a very full market there of all sorts of merchandise. After the matter had thus been settled and the king had returned to his own kingdom 2 those quarrelsome people went to him pretending that the oath had been false and that some of those who had sworn belonged to the abbey and had said what seemed useful to them and not what the truth of the matter taught. Somewhat shaken by these words, the king ordered that those of Wallingford and the whole county court of Berkshire should meet again at Oxford before his justices and that from both sides older men should be elected who would swear about the market of Abingdon as it seemed true to them, but in such a way that none of the swearers should belong to the abbey, in order to avoid the suspicion that they might commit perjury for some reason. After the king had ordered this, he left for Salisbury,3 leaving behind all his justices to hear the case. All those who were to swear were brought together, as the king had ordered, and after they were separated they confounded their cause by the diversity of their opinions. Indeed, those of Wallingford swore that in the time of King Henry the elder they had never seen anything but bread or beer being sold in Abingdon; but those of Oxford, who also swore, said that they had seen a wider but not a full market there, as with boatand cartloads; the swearers of the county maintained that they had seen a full market of all goods and they were only doubtful about the boats on the Thames, although the abbot used his own boats as he liked. As the earl of Leicester, who was there as justiciar and judge, saw that their opinions varied, he did not dare give judgment but went to the king, explained to him what had happened, and in order to prevent the king from being doubtful out of ignorance, he witnessed that he had seen a full market in the time of King Henry and even earlier, when he was still a child and was being reared in Abingdon in the time of King William. The king was 2 0[The king returned to England on 25 January 1163.10 0 3 [The king was at Salisbury c. February 1163.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 383 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

delighted with the testimony of such an important man and felt that he should give more credence to one person who said the truth than to many who by their disagreement were inconsistent with the truth. In the meantime the foresaid plaintiffs came to the king, who was staying at Reading, and said that they could hardly hold his manors if the market remained in Abingdon as it had begun. The king was indignant about the pertinacity of their evil-mindedness and tempestuously sent them away and ordered that from that day onwards the fullest possible market should be held there, except for the boat-loads - the abbot only using his own ships - and he imposed silence on the claimants forever and forbade anyone to try to undermine what had been disposed in the time of King Henry, his grandfather, and he himself confirmed. Nevertheless, before the matter was thus brought to an end, Abbot Walkelin had gone to a good deal of trouble.4

407 In the king's court Robert de Montfort accuses Henry of Essex of treason because of his flight in a battle against the Welsh, and defeats him in judicial combat. During the combat Henry of Essex has a vision of a reproachful St. Edmund, who is apparently displeased because at some time in the past Henry involved the abbey of St. Edmund's Bury in costly litigation concerning a question of criminal jurisdiction. A. The narrative in Ralph Niger's Chronicle. In the year of the incarnation of Christ 1162 St. Thomas, the chancellor of King Henry II, was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury. The following year a judicial combat took place between Henry of Essex and Robert de Montfort. Robert left him behind half dead on the battlefield, but he afterwards continued to live praiseworthily for several years as a monk at Reading. But afterwards his sons never managed to obtain their father's inheritance.

I

o[See V.C.H. Berks, iv, p. 438: Boussard, Le gouvernement d'Henri II, p. 282 n. 7; Stenton, English Justice, p. 70 n. 103.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 384 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

B. The narrative in Jocelin de Brakelond's Chronicle.

When the abbot 1 had come 2 to Reading and we with him, we were received with due honour by the monks of that place; and among them Henry of Essex, who had taken the vows of a religious, came to meet us; and he, when the opportunity arose, related to the abbot how he was vanquished in duel, and how and why St. Edmund confounded him in the very hour of battle. I therefore set down his story in writing at the bidding of the lord abbot and wrote as follows. Since evil cannot be avoided unless it be known, we deem it fit to set on record the deeds and transgressions of Henry of Essex as a warning and not for imitation. For the castigation of error is wont to be profitable and painless, if it is enforced by moral examples. This same Henry, then, while he was in the blossom of his fair fortune, was accounted a man of high renown among the first in the realm, for he was of illustrious birth, conspicuous in feats of arms, the king's standard-bearer, and feared by all; for such is the privilege of power. The rest of his neighbours 3 enriched the church of the blessed Edmund, king and martyr, in property and revenues; but he not only shut his eyes to this duty and passed it by, but even by force, injury and wrong robbed the saint of a yearly revenue of five shillings and converted it to his own use. And in course of time, when a suit concerning the ravishing of a certain maiden was being heard in the court of St. Edmund, the said Henry appeared, protesting and asserting that this suit ought to be tried in his court because of the naifty of the girl; for she was born in his domain of Nayland.4 And on this pretext he presumed to vex the court of St. Edmund with journeys and countless expenses over a long space of time. But Fortune, who for a while had smiled on him in these deeds and the like, secretly brought upon him that which should work him endless woe, and under the flattering semblance of a joyous beginning contrived a dismal end for him. For it is her way to smile that she may rage, to flatter that she may deceive, and uplift that she may lay low. And right soon did Robert de Montfort, his kinsman and his equal in birth and strength, rise up against him, condemning him in the sight of the princes of the earth and accusing him of treason against the 407B ' '[Samson, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds 1182-1211.] 2 This excellent story is an interpolation, though based upon a narrative by Jocelin. The story begins with the words cum abbas venisset, and Jocelin is the speaker. Henry of Essex held lands in Suffolk: (i) Nayland (Lailand here, and Eiland in DB) in Suffolk (Babergh) on the Essex border, within the liberty of St. Edmund; hence the abbot's claim to try the case mentioned below in his court. (ii) The honour of Haughley in the hundred of Stowe, outside the liberty. This "honour" carried with it the office of constable and apparently standard-bearer. Previously Haughley had been held by a de Montfort. The fact that Robert de Montfort appealed Henry of treason and defeated him may be regarded as suggesting a grudge on the part of a descendant of the dispossessed line (J.H. Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville. p. 326 f.). 3 "neighbours", probably also with the implication that they lived outside the Liberty of St. Edmund. 4 Lailand, now Nayland. The L may be due to the tendency of French scribes to confuse L and N; e.g. the initial L of Lincoln is not infrequently altered to N. Alternatively it may be due to the addition of the French article to the Eiland of DB.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 385 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

king. For he alleged that during the war in Wales he had falsely cast away the standard of the king in the difficult passage of Coleshill 5, and had cried in a loud voice that the king was dead, thereby causing those who were coming to his defence to turn and flee. And in very truth Henry of Essex had believed that the glorious King Henry II had perished, cut off by the wiles of the Welsh; and this indeed would have come to pass, had not Roger earl of Clare, a man of famous birth and yet more famous in the field of war, hastened betimes with his men of Clare and raised up the king's standard to rally and hearten the whole host. And though Henry withstood the said Robert in the assembly and utterly denied his accusations, after a brief strife the matter came to trial by battle6 , and they met at Reading to fight upon an island not far from the abbey; and a great multitude of folk gathered together to see what the end should be. And it came to pass after Robert had thundered manfully against him with many a grievous blow, and his bold onslaught already promised victory, that Henry, his strength failing, looked about him, and behold! where land and river met, he saw the glorious king and martyr Edmund arrayed in armour and, as it seemed, hovering in air and with stern countenance and frequent nodding of the head, launching threats against him full of anger and indignation; and he saw yet another knight with him, Gilbert de Cereville, who seemed not only his inferior in rank, but shorter in stature by a head, turning indignant, angry eyes upon him. Now this man had at Henry's command been cast into chains and tortured so that he perished, having been brought to this pass by the accusations of Henry's wife, who turning her own wickedness against an innocent man, had said that she could no longer hold out against Gilbert's entreaties that she would lie with him in unlawful love. So when he saw these two, Henry remembered that past sin brings new shame, and now, giving up all hope and turning his mind to attack, he began to play the assailant and not the defender. But though he struck hard, he was yet more hardly stricken, and though he manfully assailed his enemy, he was yet more manfully assailed. In short, he was conquered and fell; and since he was thought to be dead, at the strong entreaty of great lords of England, his kinsmen, his body was given to the monks of the place that it might receive burial. But afterwards he recovered, and once more enjoying the blessing of health, he took the habit of a regular, wiped away the stains of his previous life and, desiring to adorn the long week of his life with at least one sabbath, he turned to the study of the virtues that so he might receive the fruits of felicity.7

Near Hawarden, where owing to Henry's rashness, his forces got into serious difficulties in thickly wooded country (1157); see J.E. Lloyd, Hist. of Wales, II. p. 498. 6 In view of the fact that after his defeat in this combat Henry was deprived of all his lands and honours, it may safely be assumed that R. de Montfort had formally appealed him of treason, and that this fight is a definite example of ordeal by combat. 7 '[We almost unvariably follow the translation of BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 68-71.]O 5

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 386 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

C. Reference to this judicial combat in a letter of John of Salisbury.

But our archbishop, in preparation for delivering the sentence, made the journey to Soissons in order to commend his combat by prayers to the Blessed Virgin, who has a famous shrine there, to St. Drausius, the refuge of those about to fight,' and to St. Gregory, founder of the English Church, who lies buried in the same city. St. Drausius is that most glorious confessor who, as the French and Lorrainers believe, saves from defeat those champions who pass the night in vigil at his tomb; and so even from Burgundy and Italy they fly to him in such a case of need. Robert de Montfort held vigil to the saint the night before he fought with Henry of Essex.2

408 Case of Richard of Anstey against Mabel de Francheville concerning the inheritance of the plaintiff's uncle, William de Sackville. Richard of Anstey claims that the marriage of William de Sackville to Adelicia de Vere, which produced Mabel de Francheville, had been annulled and that therefore Mabel de Francheville was illegitimate. The case came before lay as well as ecclesiastical authorities, i.e. King Henry II, Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury, Pope Alexander III and papal judges delegate in England, and the royal court finally adjudicated the lands to the plaintiff. A. Letter of Henry of Blois, bishop of Winchester, to Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, testifying that twenty years ago he received from Pope Innocent II a decretal, which he quotes extensively, concerning the marriage between William de Sackville and Adelicia de Vere, mother of Mabel de Francheville. To Theobald, by God's grace archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and legate of the apostolic see, Henry by the same grace minister of the church of Winchester, greeting. Be it known to your discretion that concerning the case which was conducted before me on the marriage contracted between William 407C

St. Drausius or Drausin was bishop of Soissons, apparently in the second half of the seventh century; his translation was celebrated there on 5 March (Acta SanctorumBollandiana,Mar. i (edn. of 1668), pp. 404-411, esp. p. 409). 2 Henry was alleged to have committed treason by dropping the royal standard in the Welsh campaign in 1157; the duel took place in 1163 and led to Henry's disgrace and forfeiture (Warren, pp. 70 n., 308 n. '[Warren, Henry H/]'; CP, x. 205-207, esp. 206 n. '[Complete Peerage]').For the curious sequel in his daughter's marriage, see GFL, pp. 214-218. '[GILBERT FOLIOT Letters. See J.H. Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, London, 1892. J.E. Lloyd, .4 History of Wales, ii, London, 1954, pp. 497-498; Regesta iii, p. xx; Warren, Henry II, 70. Translation taken from JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 168, p. 11 1.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 387 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

de Sackville and the daughter de Tregoz,' who afterwards unjustly married the daughter of Amfrid the sheriff2 in spite of the protestations of the former, I have consulted the lord Pope Innocent and the Roman curia because he had produced issue from the later union and not of the previous one, and that I received on this matter the following rescript. On the question which you have put concerning the sacrament of marriage I reply briefly as follows. I declare that woman to be [the lawful wife] who, as you say, was handed over to be a wife by her father and was committed by him to whom she has been handed over into the care of the father [of the future husband] until the latter would lead her into his house on the appointed day, because on the basis of legitimate consent she became a wife as soon as she agreed to be married by a spontaneous pact. There was indeed no promise for the future, but a confirmation for the present, therefore whatever happened with the other woman afterwards, in intercourse or in the procreation of offspring, is all the more reprehensible as what had gone before is more genuine: as the first stands, the more that is committed in connection with the second, the greater the guilt will be. This being known, it is easy for your discretion to deal duly with the business of the bearer of this letter.

B. Report on the Anstey case by John of Salisbury, a member of Theobald's chancery, sent to Pope Alexander III setting forth the statements of the parties and preparing the appeal lodged by Richard of Anstey on 18 October 1160 from the court of Theobald. It is our duty to set forth the statements of the parties concerned with faithful accuracy, when causes quit us to fly to your apostolic majesty. For this reason we have been at pains to send you a detailed account of the sequence of events in the lengthy controversy between Richard of Anstey and Mabel de Francheville, as far as it has been possible to assemble the various issues that have arisen. The aforesaid Richard, kinsman of William de Sackville and his nephew, as in common parlance a sister's son is styled, in order to obtain his uncle's estate, claimed that it was his by hereditary right. In reply Mabel, William's daughter, asserted in the secular court where the suit was being tried, that a daughter's claim to her father's inheritance must be preferred to that of a nephew. Richard denied that she had any hereditary right, since she was not born in lawful wedlock, but was the child of an adulterous union. Since a question of matrimony was involved, and matrimony is annulled or confirmed in accordance with ecclesiastical law, the court of our catholic sovereign Henry II, king of the English, decreed that the case should return for judgment to an ecclesiastical court, where the question of marriage 408A

'[Albereda de Tregoz, first wife of William de Sackville.] ° ° 20[Adelicia de Vere, daughter of Amfrid the sheriff, second wife of William de Sackville.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 388 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

might be duly determined in accordance with canon law, which the clergy know, whereas the common people do not. In obedience to the king's command we appointed a day on which the parties should appear before us, and at length after sundry postponements which Mabel secured for divers reasons, Richard renewed his claim. To make his case more clear and prove his adversary to be illegitimate, he asserted that his uncle William entered into a contract of marriage with a certain Albereda de Tregoz, then broke his promise and deserted her; after which he took to wife Adelicia the daughter of Amfrid the sheriff,' and by her he had Mabel and other illegitimate children. He further asserted that when William went through a form of marriage with Adelicia, Albereda his previous wife protested her claim to be his lawful wife at the marriage ceremony, forbidding her supplanter by the authority of the Church to pass into the illicit embraces of her husband. Since she failed to make herself heard by reason of the crowd and the frowardness of her husband, she approached the bishop of Winchester, then legate of the apostolic see, and as he testified by his letters, at length obtained his decree that her husband should leave his second partner and be restored to her. He said that the judgment of the bishop of Winchester had been confirmed by the apostolic see, which the bishop had consulted when they wrangled with him. He had received from your predecessor Innocent a letter advising him in the following terms,2 as is said; for we have never received the originals, but only the letter of the bishop of Winchester on this matter: "As to your question concerning the sacrament of marriage, I give you this brief answer. With regard to the lady who you said was given in marriage by her father, and was returned into her father's keeping by the man to whom she had been given until on a day appointed he should take her into his own house, I say that, if it was done by lawful consent, she was a wife from the moment when by her promise freely given she consented to be his wife. For it was not a promise for the future, but a present arrangement with immediate effect.3 Whatever has been done with another woman thereafter, whether by lying with her or begetting children, is as much more reprehensible in the second case, as it was more correct in the first. For while the first marriage still stands, the more that is done in the second the greater is the guilt". As a result of the apostolic letters, a divorce4 was made and although ten years or more have elapsed, this sentence has never been challenged by any legal process; it follows therefore that the union which the legate restored must be regarded as matrimony, whereas that which the apostolic see condemned must be considered an adulterous embrace. There can be no question which of the two unions was matrimony, since the answer is clear from the judgment that was 408B ' There is a pedigree of the Sackvilles and Ansteys in Palgrave, op. cit., p. vi, which he rightly views with suspicion. According to a thirteenth century account, William had two daughters, Agnes and Hodierna, and Agnes married Richard of Anstey (ibid., p. vii). This is clearly wrong. 2 For the text and relevance of Innocent's decretal, see Appendix VI. 3 cf. below, p. 267, no. 3. 4 i.e. legal separation or annulment - not, of course, div orce in the modern sense.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 389 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

given and from the divorce which ensued, and from the fact that from that date to the last days of his life William abandoned the adulteress and clove to his former wife. On all these points he said he had abundance of witnesses, so that no one could have the least doubt about the first marriage or the interruption of the subsequent concubinage or the canonically celebrated divorce. Although he alleged many things in support of his case, he laid special stress on the judgment and the sentence which he said was passed against the mother of Mabel in the London synod, 5 where the divorce was celebrated, by the lord bishop of Winchester, then legate of the apostolic see and vicar of the church of London. He also produced witnesses who had, he said, been present at the synod and the divorce. Since the children begotten of condemned and illicit intercourse or as a result of unbridled desire, are excluded from all benefit of inheritance - civil law does not recognize them and canon law disapproves of them so strongly that it does not even allow them maintenance, therein agreeing to some extent with civil law which actually deprives them of it - he contended that she, being a proof of her 6 father's sin, should be debarred from all hope of inheriting her father's estate. In answer Mabel, to defeat her kinsman's claim, asserted that her parents, William and Adelicia, were joined in lawful wedlock, and that the marriage was not clandestine, but openly performed with all the solemn rites of the Church. While she made no strong denial of the fact that her father William had made a compact with Albereda's father that he should marry hiis daughter, before he married Adelicia the mother of Mabel, she did deny that the compact resulted in marriage. She asserted that both parties should be free to make or break a marriage contract by mutual consent and that the contract made at their betrothal had been annulled with the agreement of both parties. This she sought to establish by producing witnesses who were prepared to prove that William refunded the dowry which he had received from Albereda's father 7 ; they added that Albereda and her party released William and his party from every obligation which had been entered upon with a view to making the hoped-for marriage, and that Albereda's father had been present at the feast given in honour of the marriage of William and Adelicia and had given his approval with the utmost readiness. Both the laws of princes and the papal decrees show clearly that a betrothed woman is not a wife, This was a diocesan synod (see below) held by Henry of Winchester as vicar of the see of London during the vacancy (1134-1141); he was papal legate from 1139- 1143, so that the synod must have been held between 1139 and 1141 probably c. 1139, since the case NNas coming to a head in 1138-1139 (n. 15). 6 cf. A. Esmein, Le mariage en Droit canonique, ii (Paris, 1891), 33 ff.; Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, ii2 (1898), 377. 7 Under Teutonic law the essential act of marriage was the handing over of the bride's dowry and mund (power) from father to husband. This was still a crucial matter in feudal eyes, but perhaps of less moment in an ecclesiastical court, although the dowry played an important part in the older canon law of marriage (represented in Gratian by C.3, q. 4, c. 4, and C.30, q. 5, c. 1: cf. the twelfth century gloss quoted in W. Ullmann, Medieval Papalism, London, 1949, p. 63. n. 1).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 390 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

since as Eusebius says, a betrothed girl may prefer a convent to marriage even though the man dissent; and as Gregory bears witness, the law inflicts no penalty on a betrothed girl who flies for refuge to a female community.8 Moreover a marriage is not complete until it has been consummated, though it begins with the first pledge of betrothal.9 If it is true that perfection takes precedence over that which is only begun, it is clearly wrong to say that the pact of betrothal takes precedence over a true and perfect marriage. For Pope Evaristus, after a preliminary discourse on the form of contracting matrimony and on the sacred rite of marriage which takes place in church, adds this: "Know that weddings thus performed are lawful marriages; but otherwise marriages are merely presumed and not true marriages, but rather adultery, lewdness, concubinage or fornication unless they are supported by the declared will of both parties and supplemented by lawful vows"."0 But William, after breaking off his first engagement, as is permitted, contracted a lawful marriage, nor did he ever consent to leave her with whom he was lawfully joined. As for the divorce which the other side brings up against her, either it never took place or was not rightly celebrated. For, on the death of the king who was a lover of peace,11 justice was banished from the realm, and as the madness of those who rejoiced in overturning the old order grew ever stronger, every man was provoked to all manner of ill; and her mother Adelicia so she alleges - was separated from her husband for no just cause, but was cast out with violence from his house; and this was done by the machination of Geoffrey, archdeacon of London,' 2 who for a bribe spared no pains to condemn her undefended and unheard, without even having received a summons. In this he relied on the support of the bishop of Winchester who, she asserts, had himself been corrupted by filthy lucre; though at the time he had not yet received the office of legate. This she tried to prove on the ground that Adelicia, when she was separated from her husband, approached the holy man Alberic, legate of the apostolic see in England, and demanded justice for the wrongs her husband and Gratian, Decretum, C.27, q. 2, cc. 27-28. The present passage seems to make use of Gratian's heading and comment to c. 28: this and the location of the references here and in the next note suggest that Mabel's advocates (and/or John) worked with a copy of Gratian in front of them (cf. above, nos. 99 100) O[=JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, pp. 153-160.]o The long quotation below (at n. 12) follows Gratian closely, with three minor variants from Friedberg's text; it agrees with Gratian against all the other sources except Ivo's Decretum (viii, 4 5; but the reading dubitaturis found in some mss. of Gratian, while dubitateis in Ivo and the Gratian mss. followed by Friedberg; the extract forms a single chapter in Gratian, but is divided into two in Ivo). Decretum, C.27, q. 2, cc. 35 36. '0 ibid., C.30, q. 5, c. 1. 11 Henry I. 12 Since the hearing was in chapter at Colchester (see below), this letter proves, what was probable on other grounds, that Geoffrey was archdeacon of Colchester (London diocese). His predecessor Cyprian occurs in 1132 (Historical Manuscripts Commission, 9th Report, Appendix, i, 67b); he himself c. 1136 1138 (in this letter) and between 1138 and 1142 (Report, ut supra, pp. 50b, 63b, 68a); he had been succeeded by Ailward by 1142 (see no. 7).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 391 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the archdeacon had inflicted upon her, whereas it is well known, as the dates show, that the bishop of Winchester did not receive the office of legate till after the departure from this country of the bishop of Ostia aforesaid. 3 But later on, when the bishop of Winchester was presiding over the synod of London to perform the duty of the bishop, the see being then vacant, Adelicia publicly produced the mandate given her by the previous legate, and demanded justice for the wrongs done to her by the archdeacon and her husband. But the weight of iniquity and filthy lucre had sunk the soul of her judge so low 4 that he could not rise to afford her justice, even though God and the legate commanded him so to do. It was clear that the former marriage between William and Albereda had never been contracted from the simple fact that it was only after Adelicia had been cast out by her husband that through the villainy of the archdeacon and the bishop of Winchester the solemn ceremony of their espousal was performed in church and the rites of marriage celebrated in public; and she produced witnesses to testify thereto. And so Mabel claimed that the sentence by which her mother was condemned in her absence, which was not due to contumacy, for she had never received a summons, was null and void in fact and in law, since it is recognised that a sentence passed in contravention of the regular legal procedure has no validity. She also produced many arguments concerning the privilege of persons and ignorance of the law, saying that her parents might well be excused, either because he was a knight or on account of the weakness of her sex, for not knowing that the engagement which is the beginning of marriage has the same force as marriage itself, seeing that neither by the authority of the civil nor canon law has it achieved the full status of marriage, and that ancient custom among us has hitherto not recognised it as a completed marriage. Moreover, as Gilbert, the venerable abbot of Colchester 5 testified in his letters, which though not sealed were supported by witnesses, and as many others of the religious who had been present gave evidence, her father on his death-bed had publicly professed his repentance for having acquiesced in the fraud practised by the archdeacon in the ejection of his wife. Whatever was done between her parents ought not, she said, to be a hindrance to herself or her children, since neither the archdeacon nor the bishop of Winchester gave any judgment against the children, but whenever they were questioned on this point, they said, as many persons bore witness, that they had made no pronouncement against the children of the marriage, which nonetheless they were scheming to annul. The bishop of Winchester committed the cause of the children to the illustrious Theobald, count of Blois, a prince who was a lover of justice and Alberic, cardinal bishop of Ostia, legate for England in 1138-1139 (H. Tillmann, Die pdpstlichen Legaten in England, Bonn, 1926, pp. 38-41). 14 cf. no. 100 and n. 170 [=JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 100. p. 160, no. 17.]o 15 Gilbert, monk of Bec and abbot of Colchester from 1117, died in August 1140 (Annals of Colchester in F. Liebermann, Ungedruckte Anglo-Normannische Geschichtsquellen, pp. 162163). 13

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 392 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

well skilled in the law that is in force on this side of the Alps, because they belonged to him of feudal right.16 After calling together the leading bishops of France and investigating the case, in accordance with their advice and that of the other wise men, he recognised the children, their father being dead, as lawful heirs, and declared that nothing which craft and subtlety had procured to their hurt ought to stand in their way. On all points she said she had witnesses in abundance, and produced them for most of the questions at issue. Richard took his stand on the judgment which had already been passed; and he could not be shifted from the position that a sentence which had been impugned by no legal process, not merely for the ten days provided by law, but for twenty long years, must stand. He also produced witnesses to show that he had been appointed as heir by his uncle William, while the others had been disinherited as being bastards. Furthermore, he said that privilege of persons should not stand in his way, since no one can be unaware of what he himself has done. Although William, the father of Mabel, was a knight, he should not have been unaware of what he did when he took Albereda to wife, not in hope of something in the future, but by a contract of marriage to take effect on the spot; and since it is consent that establishes matrimony, whatever has been done to the injury of the first, legitimate consent, it does not dissolve the inseparable bond of the first marriage. If carnal intercourse resulting in the birth of children has thereafter involved a breach of the marriage vow, this does not vitiate the first marriage, but proves the guilt of the subsequent union. Her father therefore, whatever he did, was aware or should have been aware of it; and it should not be of advantage to his children, if relying on his privilege as a knight he thought that he could with impunity play fast and loose with the good faith of people who were behaving correctly. It is possible that if it was an inheritance from a mother that was claimed, provision might be made for the children because the mother might have had no qualms of conscience in contracting such a marriage; but because the inheritance which is claimed comes from a father, the infidelity of the father confers no advantage on his children. There are occasions when the clemency of the law spares those who, though debarred from marriage by reason of their kinship, have married in ignorance, and frees from infamy and the loss of their inheritance the children of those who have been wrongfully joined together in ignorance by the Church, 7 whereas the full rigour of the laws and canons is exercised against those who wittingly form incestuous and illicit unions forbidden by the laws of God and man. Against these arguments many others, based on reason and on law, were put forward on Mabel's side to support her case and many precedents were quoted to that end; it was said that it would be impossible or nearly so that the children of the 16

Presumably William de Sackville held a fief of the count, but there seems to be no other evidence of the fact. Theobald V, count of Blois, was nephew to King Stephen and the bishop of Winchester (cf. no. 13).

17 See

Appendix VI, p. 270.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 393 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

king of France and others who were named, should be disinherited because their parents had been lawfully divorced 8 ; but it was not admitted by Mabel's defenders that her parents had been lawfully divorced, and also they said that the laws are inclined towards mercy especially in the case of innocent persons, whom it is unjust to comdemn for the sins of others. As for the separation made by the bishop of Winchester at the London synod, they tried to show that it was null and void because before that synod was celebrated -it was the only one summoned by the same bishop of London -the archdeacon, of whom we have spoken so often, had ordered in chapter at Colchester, as many there present attested, that Adelicia, unheard and undefended and without any preceding judgment, should be put away by her husband; and, what is worse, that the archdeacon in person cast out the wife from the house of her husband, though she was wholly ignorant that this question had ever been raised. When at the synod of London Adelicia addressed the bishop of Winchester, it was for no other reason than that she might complain of the wrong done to her by the archdeacon and might get justice in accordance with the order which lord Alberic, the legate, had given to the bishop of Winchester. But Mabel strove to prove that Adelicia came away having learnt nothing, save that she had laid her complaint before a judge who would not hear her. She complained also that the bishop of Winchester tried to interpret the advice of the lord Innocent to Adelicia's prejudice, although in Innocent's letters no reference was made to her parents, but merely to certain unnamed persons who were unsatisfactorily married, whereas their marriage was of a different character; but if the bishop suggested to the lord pope that it was not different, such culpably false suggestion and such iniquitous mendacity on the part of another ought not to prejudice her case. In fine, just as Richard, in his claim for inheritance, laid special stress on the fact that his uncle had appointed him his heir, and on the sentence passed by the bishop of Winchester, to prove the adultery which, as he said, had been condemned, so on the other hand Mabel relied chiefly on the last will and testament of her father and on the judgment of Count Theobald; for she promised to prove both of these points by witnesses. Moreover she protested that even if the plaintiff was not wholly in the wrong, she ought to receive some consideration owing to the time that had elapsed, her ignorance of the law, the number of her children and the authority of the Church which had made her parents' marriage. For in a harder case than this the Emperors Marcus and Lucius replied more kindly when they wrote thus to Flavia Tertulla in a letter' 9 which they sent by the hand of their freedman surveyor: "We are moved both by the length of time during which through your ignorance of the law you were the wife of your uncle, and by the fact that you were bestowed upon him by your grandmother, and also by the 18 Louis VII had two daughters, Mary and Alice, by Eleanor of Aquitaine: the parents were

subsequently divorced on the grounds of consanguinity, and Eleanor married Henry II of England. '9 Digest, 23, 2, 57a.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 394 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

number of your children; and therefore, since all these considerations point in the same direction, we confirm the status of your children who were born of this marriage, which was made forty years ago, as though they had been lawfully conceived" If such then is the clemency of secular princes that out of consideration for the children they pardon even incest, how shall Christian pontiffs dare to condemn with unparalleled severity those who are lawfully conceived in the bosom of the Church? When these arguments had been put forward on this side and on that, at length a peremptory date was appointed for the production of proofs by both parties, after two years of postponements which both parties had secured, the defendant more often than the plaintiff had sent others on her behalf to excuse her absence, on the ground that she was in childbed or suffering some other infirmity, or owing to the just absence of her husband, as she said. But Richard appealed to your court fixing as term the Fourth Sunday in Lent,20 asserting that he was aggrieved by the fact that he had now been troubled by a series of postponements for more than two years and had been cheated of his just claim by the shiftiness of a woman. C. Appointment by Pope Alexander III of Hilary, bishop of Chichester, and Laurence, abbot of Westminster, as judges delegate in the case of Richard of Anstey. Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his venerable brother Hilary, bishop of Chichester, and his beloved son Laurence, abbot of Westminster, greeting and apostolic blessing. The case which has been conducted for a long time between Richard of Anstey and Mabel de Francheville, the former maintaining that Mabel was procreated in illicit matrimony and demanding therefore the estates of his uncle by way of inheritance, has been brought to our audience by way of appeal from the presence of our brother Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury to the apostolic see. Since both parties arrived unprepared and had not brought with them the witnesses needed for the determination of the case, we have been unable to proceed to the final pronouncement on the case. Therefore, having full confidence in your prudence and discretion we commit this controversy to be heard and duly determined in your presence. We order you by our apostolic letters to convene the two parties at a suitable place and time before your presence, to listen carefully to the allegations on all the points, to receive the depositions of the witnesses from both sides if they appear, and - the obstacle of an appeal being removed -justly to decide the case within three months after the reception of this letter. If any party should appeal before the pronouncement of the judgment to our audience after the allegations and the depositions of the witnesses, for which as we said there is no remedy of appeal, then you will in no way proceed to giving 20 [26 March 1161.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 395 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

judgment, but you will put everything in writing and send those writings under your seals to us. Furthermore, if no appeal is instituted after the witnesses are received and the allegations proposed, as was said, then you shall pronounce a definitive judgment on this matter, but if a party does not submit to your summons or cognizance of the case, you shall by our authority pronounce a judgment of excommunication against it for this presumption. Given at Anagni on 8 April.

D. Letter of Pope Alexander III to Richard of Anstey declaring on the basis of the report of Bishop Hilary of Chichester and Abbot Laurence of Westminster and in accordance with the pronouncement of Bishop Henry of Winchester, that the first marriage of William de Sackville is valid, but his second void. Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his beloved son Richard of Anstey, greeting and apostolic blessing. Since the controversy between you and Adelicia and Mabel her daughter concerning the succession to your uncle William was presented to us and the question of the succession could not be fully settled unless we first clarified the problem of the marriage, no party having appeared sufficiently instructed, we committed the said matrimonial case to our venerable brother Hilary, bishop of Chichester, and our beloved son Abbot Laurence of Westminster with a mandate to receive according to the legitimate procedure the allegations of the two parties and the depositions of the sworn witnesses and to transmit the data to us by their own letters. As they were carefully examining the case, as we learned from their letters, you have strongly maintained that the aforesaid William, after being betrothed to Albereda and taking her as his wife, immediately went abroad, left her in the care of his parents who were to send her to his own house upon his return, and fell in love with the aforesaid Adelicia, married her at the devil's instigation and had twins by her. As the aforesaid Albereda immediately protested against their espousal and tried to forbid their marriage, the case came before our venerable brother Bishop Henry of Winchester, who consulted Pope Innocent, our predecessor of blessed memory, on this case. The pope, having studied the case in the bishop's letter, answered by his own letter that as the first marriage was valid, the second was void. On the strength of this answer and on apostolic authority the bishop gave sentence of divorce between the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 396 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

aforesaid William and Adelicia and ordered him to go back to his first wife. To this the other party replied that our aforesaid predecessor had not pronounced judgment in the presence of the parties, but had merely written back in answer to the bishop's question. However, having learnt from the reply of the aforesaid bishop of Chichester and abbot of Westminster that what had been suggested by the bishop to our predecessor was proved in their presence by legitimate witnesses, we hold the sentence of the aforesaid bishop of Winchester on that case which was pronounced in a canonical way according to the procedure indicated by our predecessor for valid and we decree that the first marriage was legitimate and the second void. Farewell.

E. Account of expenses made by Richard of Anstey in his case against Mabel de Francheville, started by royal writ, concerning the estates of his uncle William de Sackville. The plaintiff claims that Mabel, William's daughter, was not a legitimate heir, but a bastard. The case came before lay as well as ecclesiastical authorities, i.e. King Henry II, Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury, Pope Alexander III and papal judges delegate in England; finally the royal court adjudicated the lands to the plaintiff. These are the costs and charges which I, Richard of Anstey, bestowed in recovering the land of William, my uncle. In the first place, I sent a certain man of mine own into Normandy, for the king's writ, whereby I impleaded my adversaries, and he spent half a mark in that journey. And when my messenger brought me the writ, as soon as I received the writ, I proceeded to Salisbury with the same, in order that it might be returned under the queen's seal; and in that journey I spent two marks of silver. And when I came back, I heard that Ralph Brito was about to cross the water: so I followed him to Southampton, for the sake of speaking to him, in order that he might purchase for me the king's writ, addressed to the archbishop because I knew that the plea would be removed into the archbishop's court; and in that journey I spent twenty-two shillings and seven pence, and I lost a palfrey which I had bought for fifteen shillings. And having returned from thence with the queen's writ, I went to Ongar, and delivered the writ to Richard de Lucy, who, having seen and heard the same, gave me a day for pleading at Northampton, on the eve of St. Andrew; and within that term I sent Nicholas, my clerk, for Geoffrey de Tregoz and for Albereda, his sister - to wit, she who had been my uncle's wife, - whom he found at Barney, in Norfolk; and in that journey he spent fifteen shillings and lost one pack-horse, which I had bought for nine shillings. And when he came back, I went to Northampton to open my pleadings, with my friends and my helpers; and in that journey I spent fifty-four shillings. Hence Richard de Lucy gave me another day at Southampton, on the fifteenth day: and in that journey I spent fifty-seven shillings; and in that same

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 397 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

journey I lost one pack-horse worth twelve shillings. Afterwards Ralph Brito came from Normandy, and he brought me the king's writ, whereby the plea was removed into the archbishop's court, and I carried the writ to Archbishop Theobald, whom I found at Winchester; and in that journey I spent twenty-five shillings and four pence. And then the archbishop gave me a day on the feast of St. Vincent, and that plea was held at Lambeth. And thence he gave me a day on the feast of St. Valentine the martyr; and in that journey I spent eight shillings and six pence; and that plea was held at Maidstone. From thence he gave me a day on the feast of St. Perpetua and St. Felicity: and in the meanwhile I went to the bishop of Winchester, to speak with him, in order that he might certify the divorce which had taken place before him in the synod at London; and in that journey I spent one mark of silver. And having obtained the bishop's certificate, I appeared on my before mentioned day, ready to plead, and that plea was held at Lambeth; and there I spent thirty-seven shillings and six pence. From thence he gave me a day on the Monday next after Laetare Jerusalem; and in the meanwhile I went for Master Ambrose, who was then with the abbot of St. Albans in Norfolk: and in that journey I spent nine shillings and four pence; and I sent Sampson, my chaplain, unto Buckingham for Master Petrus de Melide; and in that journey he lost his palfrey, which I made good to him for one mark of silver, and he spent seven shillings there. Having thus got at the aforesaid clerks, I kept my day with my helpers at London; and, in that journey, I spent five marks of silver. Thence the archbishop gave me a day on Quasimodo geniti Sunday, and in the meanwhile, I sent John, my brother, beyond the seas, to the king's court, because it was told to me that my adversaries had purchased the king's writ exempting them from pleading until the king should return to England; and therefore I sent my brother for another writ, lest my pleadings should be stayed on account of the writ obtained by my adversaries; and in that journey my brother spent three marks of silver. And in the meanwhile I myself went to Chichester, to speak to Bishop Hilary, in order that he might give evidence of the divorce which had been decreed in his presence before my lord of Winchester, in the synod of London, and I received his evidence, viz. the letters which he sent to the archbishop testifying the divorce; and in that journey I spent fourteen shillings and four pence. I kept my day at London with my clerks and my witnesses and my friends and my helpers, and there I remained for four days, pleading every day; and in that journey I spent one hundred and three shillings. Thence he gave me a day on Rogation Day: and when I kept my day at Canterbury, my adversaries said that they would not plead, on account of the summons of the king's army for Toulouse; and in this journey I spent thirty-eight shillings, and departed without a day. And I followed the king and found him at Auvillar; and in this journey did I tarry for thirteen weeks before I could obtain the king's writ for proceeding with the pleadings, and in that

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 398 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

journey I spent four pounds of silver and ten shillings. Having purchased the king's writ, I returned: and having found the archbishop at Mortlake, I delivered the king's writ to him, and he gave me a day on the feast of St. Crispin and St. Crispinian, on which day I came to Canterbury, and in thatjourney I spent twentyfour shillings and five pence. And from thence he gave me a day on the octaves of St. Martin, and on that day I came to Canterbury; and in that journey I spent twenty-nine shillings, all but two pence. From thence, my lord of Canterbury gave me a day on the feast of St. Lucy the Virgin, and in the meanwhile I sent Master Sampson, my chaplain, to Lincoln, for Master Peter, and in that journey I spent half a mark; and when the day of my plea arrived, I could not appear in consequence of my illness, but I sent my essoiners who essoined me at Canterbury; and in thatjourney they spent ten shillings. And from thence a day was given me on the feast of St. Fabian and St. Sebastian, and on that day I came to London where my lord of Canterbury was; and in that journey I spent twenty-two shillings and eight pence. From thence he gave me a day on the feast of St. Scolastica the Virgin, and I kept my day at Canterbury; and in that journey I spent thirty-seven shillings and six pence. And from thence he gave me a day on Laetare Jerusalem, and I kept my day at London; and in that journey I spent forty-three shillings. From thence he gave me a day on Misericordia Domini Sunday; and in the meanwhile I sent Robert de Furness and Richard de Marcy, for Godfrey de Marcy, in which journey I spent ten shillings, and Robert de Furness lost a palfrey worth two marks; and I myself went to the bishop of Winchester, in order that I might obtain a more precise certificate of the divorce which had been decreed; and in that journey I spent thirty-four shillings and five pence, and I found the bishop at Fareham, near Portsmouth; and from thence I brought back with me Master Jordan Fantosme and Nicholas de Chandos, in order that they might testify viva voce what the bishop had already testified by his writ. And I kept my day, prepared to plead, at London; and there I spent sixty-three shillings and four pence. From thence the archbishop gave me a day on the Clause of Pentecost, and in the meanwhile I myself went to the bishop of Lincoln for Master Peter, who was then with him at Stafford; and in that journey I spent twenty-two shillings and seven pence, and I sent Sampson, my chaplain, for Master Stephen de Binham, whom he found at Norwich; in which journey he spent nine shillings, and then I kept my day at Canterbury, prepared to plead, with my clerks and my witnesses and my friends and my helpers; in which journey I spent four pounds and twelve shillings, because we were pleading there for two days. From thence, he gave me a day on the octaves of St. Peter and St. Paul the apostles; and I kept my day at Wingham; and in that journey I spent twenty-seven shillings and two pence. From thence, he gave me a day on the feast of St. Sixtus; and I kept my day at Lambeth; in which journey I spent eighteen shillings and two pence. From thence, he gave me a day on the Decollation of St. John the Baptist; and then I kept my day at Canterbury; and in

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 399 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that journey I spent twenty-three shillings. From thence, he gave me a day on the feast of St. Luke the Evangelist. In the meanwhile, I crossed the water, in order that I might solicit a licence from our lord the king, to appeal to Rome. And, in that journey, I lost a palfrey which I had bought for sixteen shillings; and I spent six marks and five shillings; and, having received the licence, I kept my day at London and I appealed to Rome on Laetare Jerusalem; and in that plea I spent sixteen shillings and eight pence. After this I sued for the archbishop's writ of appeal, but he refused to issue it immediately on the spot, but he gave me a day for receiving it at Canterbury; at which day I came and received my writ, but without seal, in order that I might show the same to my advocates and obtain their opinion whether it was according to law; in which journey I spent fifteen shillings. And afterwards I sent that same writ by Sampson, my chaplain, to Lincoln, to show it to Master Peter de Melide; and in that journey he spent five shillings and sixpence. And afterwards I sent the same writ to Master Ambrose, whom the messenger found at Binham; in which journey he spent eighteen pence; and the writ being corrected by my advocates, I carried the same back again to Canterbury, in order that it might be sealed; and having seen the writ, they refused to seal such a one, but they gave me another without seal. Hence, having received the writ, I went to show the same to the bishop of Chichester; and having heard his advice, I returned; in which journeys I spent two marks of silver. And then I sent the writ again by Sampson, my chaplain, to Master Peter; in which journey he spent half a mark of silver: I then sent the same writ again to Master Ambrose, at St. Albans; and, their advice being received, and the writ corrected, I went to the archbishop at Wingham, and there my writ was sealed; and in this journey I spent ten shillings. And when I came back, I sent John, my brother, to Winchester, in order that he might purchase the bishop's writ certifying the divorce to the Holy Father; and I myself went to the bishop of Chichester, whom I found at Salisbury, in order that he might certify the divorce by his writ, addressed to the Holy Father in the same manner as he had done before to the archbishop: and in that journey I spent seventeen shillings, and John spent nine shillings; and a second time and a third time did I send my brother to Winchester before I could have an available writ; and in those two journeys he spent nineteen shillings. Thereafter I got my clerks ready, and sent them to Rome to wit, Sampson, my chaplain, and Master Peter de Littlebury, and one man to attend them, in whose outfit, to wit, in horses and in clothing, I spent five marks of silver; and in that journey to Rome they spent twenty-five marks of silver. And when they came back, they said that they had spent forty shillings beyond what I had supplied them with, and which had been lent to them by a certain clerk of the bishop of Lincoln who accompanied them, and which I repaid to him. Having received the brief of our lord the pope, I carried the same to the bishop of Chichester and the abbot of Westminster, to whom the same was directed, in order that my plea might be brought into their court; and in these journeys I spent eighteen shillings and nine pence. After they had seen the apostolical precept they

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 400 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

fixed a day for me to plead at Westminster, in eight days of the feast of St. Michael; and I kept my day, with my advocates, and my friends and my witnesses and my helpers; and there we tarried three days before we pleaded, on account of the king's commands, about which the abbot and the bishop were employed; and in that journey I spent four pounds and ten shillings. From thence, they gave me a day in eight days of St. Martin. In the meanwhile I sent John, my brother, for Godfrey de Marcy, in order that he might attend as my witness: and he could not come, because he was ill, but he sent his son in his place; and in that journey John, my brother, lost a palfrey which he had bought for fifteen shillings, and he spent seven shillings and six pence. On the appointed day, I came to London, prepared and ready for pleading, because I thought I should then obtain my judgment; and there we tarried five days, and there I spent one hundred and four shillings; and then my adversaries appealed to the presence of the Holy Father himself, on the feast of St. Luke the Evangelist; and I requested the instrument of appeal, and they gave me a day at Oxford on the feast of St. Andrew; and I kept my day; and I tarried there for nine days before I could obtain my instrument; and there I spent thirty-four o[?]o shillings. And having received the writ, but without seal, I carried the same to Master Peter, at Lincoln, in order that he might correct it; and in that journey I spent one mark of silver. The writ being corrected, I carried the same to the bishop of Chichester at Winchester, on the octaves of the Epiphany, in order that it might be sealed there; and the bishop would not seal it, because the abbot of Westminster was not there: and in this journey I spent two marks of silver: but afterwards it was sealed at Westminster on Laetare Jerusalem, where I spent twenty-three shillings and four pence. Afterwards, I went to the archbishop of York for his writ deprecatory, to be addressed to the Holy Father, and to the bishop of Durham for his writ to the Holy Father and the cardinals; and I found them both at York; and I returned to the bishop of Lincoln for his writ, addressed likewise to the Holy Father and the cardinals; and in that journey I spent forty-eight shillings. And when I returned, I proceeded to the bishop of Winchester for his writ; and I found him at Glastonbury; and there I spent thirty-two shillings. Afterwards, when the time of appealing drew nigh, having prepared my clerks, I sent them to the court of Rome, where they tarried sixty-two days before they could have my sentence; and there they spent eleven marks of silver. And when they came back, they brought a sentence of adultery. One instrument was directed to the archbishop, another to Richard de Lucy, and the third to me: and with these instruments I proceeded to my lord Richard de Lucy, whom I found at Romsey; and there we awaited the return of the king, who was about to come back from Normandy. Thence I followed the court for three weeks before I could make fine with the king; and in that journey I spent five marks of silver. And because the king was vexed on account of his Holiness not having directed any brief to him, I sent a messenger on the following day to the Holy Father, for a writ directed to the king, which my messenger afterwards brought to me on the Clause of Easter, at Windsor; and in

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 401 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that journey the messenger spent fifty shillings. After I had fined with the king, my lord Richard de Lucy, by the king's precept, gave me a day for pleading at London at Mid-Lent; and there was then a council; and I came there with my friends and my helpers; and because he could not attend to this plea on account of the king's business, I tarried there for four days, and there I spent fifty shillings. From thence, he gave me a day on the Clause of Easter; and then the king and my lord Richard de Lucy were at Windsor; and at that day I came with my friends and my helpers, as many as I could have; and in the meanwhile I sent my brother for Ranulf de Glanville, whereby he lost a palfrey, which he had bought for twenty shillings, and he spent half a mark in this journey; and because my lord Richard de Lucy could not attend to this plea on account of the plea of Henry de Essex, the judgment was postponed from day to day until the king should come to Reading: and at Reading, in like manner, it was postponed from day to day until he should come to Wallingford; and in that journey I spent six pounds and five shillings. And from thence, because my lord Richard was going with the king to Wales, he removed my plea into the court of the earl of Leicester at London; and there I came; and in that journey I spent thirty-five shillings and seven pence; and because I could not get on at all with my plea, I sent to my lord Richard, in Wales, to the end that he might order that my plea should not be delayed; and then by his writ he ordered Oger the steward and Ralph Brito that without delay they should do justice to me: and they gave me a day at London; and that messenger spent five shillings. I kept my day therefore with my friends and my helpers; when I spent twenty-seven shillings and three pence. From thence, my adversaries were summoned by the king's writ and also by my lord Richard's writ, that they should come before the king; and we came before the king at Woodstock, and there we remained for eight days; and at last, by the grace of God and of the king, and by judgment of his court, my uncle's land was adjudged to me; and there I spent seven pounds and ten shillings. These are the gifts which I gave in the archbishop's court to the pleaders and the clerks who helped me - to wit, eleven marks of silver; and in the court of my lord of Winchester, fourteen marks of silver; and to Master Peter de Melide, ten marks, and a gold ring worth half a mark of silver; and to Master Robert de Chimai, one mark. And in the king's court I spent in gifts, in gold and silver, and in horses, sixteen marks and a half; and I gave forty shillings to Master Peter de Littlebury; and amongst the other pleaders, my neighbours, who were accustomed to come to my pleas, I spent in gifts of money and horses, twelve marks and a half. To Ralph, the king's physician, I gave thirty-six marks and a half; to the king a hundred marks; and to the queen one mark of gold. In the first year of my plea, when I sent John, my brother, beyond seas for the king's writ, I borrowed the forty shillings which I spent, from Vives, the Jew of Cambridge, upon usury, a groat a week for the pound; and I kept the moneys

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 402 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

during fourteen months, and I rendered for hire of the same, thirty-seven shillings and four pence; and this was on the third day after Mid-Lent. And at Easter following, the said Vives lent me again sixty shillings, at a groat a week for the pound; which I kept six months, and for hire thereof I rendered twenty-four shillings. And when I myself crossed the sea for the king's writ for pleading, then Comitissa of Cambridge lent me four pounds and ten shillings, which I spent on the journey, at a groat a week for the pound; which moneys I kept nine months, and for which I rendered for usury, fifty-four shillings. And when I went for Master Peter at Stafford, then Bon-enfaunt the Jew lent me fifty shillings, at a groat a week for the pound; these moneys I kept five months, for which I rendered for usury, sixteen shillings and eight pence. And at the Clause of Pentecost, when I pleaded at Canterbury, then Dieu-la-Cresse the Jew lent me forty shillings, which I kept two months, at a groat a week for the pound; for which I rendered for usury, five shillings and four pence. And when I crossed the water to obtain licence to appeal to Rome, then Jacob, the Jew of Newport, lent me sixty shillings, at a groat a week for the pound, which I kept thirteen months; for which I rendered for usury fifty-two shillings. And when I sent my clerks to Rome, then Hakelot the Jew lent me ten pounds at the rate of three pence a week for the pound, which I kept seven months; and for which I rendered for usury, seventy shillings. And after Michaelmas, when we first pleaded in the court of the bishop of Chichester and the abbot of Westminster, then Hakelot the Jew lent me sixty shillings, at three pence a week for the pound, which I kept three months, and for which I rendered for usury, nine shillings. And at the feast of St. Martin, when we pleaded again in the court of the said judges, then Jacob, the Jew of Newport, lent me seventy shillings, at a groat a week for the pound, which I kept eight months, and for the usury whereof I rendered thirty-seven shillings and four pence. And at the same time Benedict, the Jew of London, lent me ten shillings, at two pence a week, which I kept three years, and for which I rendered for usury, twenty-six shillings. And when I carried the writ of my appeal to Winchester to the bishop of Chichester, that it might be sealed there, then Jacob the Jew lent me a hundred shillings, at three pence a week for the pound, which I kept ten months; and for which I rendered for usury, fifty shillings. And when I sent my clerks again to the apostolical court, then I borrowed four pounds from Hakelot the Jew, at three pence a week for the pound, which I kept six months; and for which I rendered for usury, twenty-four shillings. And when I went to my plea at Windsor, then Dieu-la-Cresse the Jew lent me forty shillings, at the rate of three pence a week for the pound, which I kept four months, and for which I rendered for usury eight shillings. And in the same journey to Windsor, because my money fell short, I borrowed halfa mark from Bruno the Jew, at three halfpence a week, which I kept ten weeks, and for which I paid for usury fifteen pence. And in the same journey when I was at Reading, Hakelot the Jew, whom I

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 403 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

found there, lent me thirty shillings, at three pence a week for the pound, which I kept five months; and for which I rendered for usury, seven shillings and six pence. And when my uncle's land was decreed to me at Woodstock, then Mirabella, the Jewess of Newport, lent me four pounds and ten shillings, at a groat a week for the pound, which I kept a year; and for which I rendered for usury, seventy-eight shillings. And when I rendered to Ralph the physician his moneys, at the first term, Hakelot the Jew lent me seven pounds, at three pence a week for the pound, which I kept a year and a half, and for which I rendered for usury, six pounds and sixteen shillings and six pence. And at the next term of payment, Comitissa of Cambridge lent me one hundred shillings, which I kept for two months, at three pence a week for the pound; and for which I rendered for usury, ten shillings. At Easter last, it was two years since I paid fifty marks of silver into the exchequer, in part of my promise to the king, of which Hakelot the Jew lent me twenty pounds, at two pence a week for the pound: and I yet owe the principal and all the interest; and the hire has mounted up to twenty-six marks of silver. Again, at the Easter following I paid twenty-five marks of silver into the exchequer, of which Hakelot the Jew lent me seven pounds, at two pence a week for the pound: and for which I yet owe him the principal and all the interest; and the usury has mounted up to sixty shillings and eight pence. Again at Michaelmas I paid into the exchequer ten marks, of which Hakelot the Jew lent me forty shillings, at two pence a week for the pound, which I kept three months, and for which I rendered for usury, four shillings. The total sum is three hundred and forty-four pounds six shillings and four pence.

409 King Henry II wants a cleric, who has seduced a girl and killed her father, to be judged in a lay court. Archbishop Thomas Becket refuses and keeps the cleric in ecclesiastical custody. The first estrangement between the king and St. Thomas occurred because of some cleric who was said to have slept with the daughter of some honest man in the territory of Worcester and to have killed the father because of her. The king wanted this cleric to be examined by the judgment of a lay court and judgment to be passed on him, but the archbishop refused and let that cleric be kept in the bishop's custody, so that he would not be given over to the king's justice.

408E I '[Translation almost invariably taken from Palgrave, CollectedHistoricalWorks, vii, 9-29; see Barnes, The Anstey Case; Cheney, From Becket to Langton, 54 58.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 404 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

410 King Henry II wants a cleric, who has stolen a silver chalice in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London, to be judged in a lay court, but Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury has the thief degraded in an ecclesiastical court and branded. Another [estrangement] occurred because of a cleric who had stolen a silver

chalice in a church of the said archbishop, situated in London and called the church of St. Mary [le Bow] in Cheap and whom, after he had been arrested, the king wanted to be judged by secular judgment. The archbishop caused him to be dismissed by a judgment of the Church and on top of that caused him to be branded in order to placate the king.

411 Philip de Broi, canon of St. Paul's in Bedford, after purging himself in the court of the bishop of Lincoln of the accusation of killing a knight, is prosecuted again by the king's justices in eyre at Dunstable, but violently rejects their jurisdiction. One of them, Simon fitz Peter, complains to King Henry II, who wants the canon to be tried in a secular court. Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, resists this demand and has the canon tried in his own court on a charge of insulting behaviour. A. The narrative in the anonymous life of Thomas Becket, formerly ascribed to Roger of Pontigny. Not long afterwards another violent quarrel broke out between [Henry II and Thomas Becket] because of a canon called Philip de Broi, who was accused by some people of killing a knight. After he had cleared himself before his bishop of the accusation of homicide and had purged himself by an oath to make the proof of his innocence all the stronger, while his adversaries completely failed in their case, a certain Simon fitz Peter whom the king had appointed as judge in the region of Bedford, where Philip lived, strove to reopen the case against him. Philip, however, refused to stand trial again in a case that was already closed and terminated according to the judicial process, particularly so in a lay court. He

therefore indignantly repelled this Simon, who insisted with pertinacity, and heaped a torrent of abuse and vituperation upon him. So when the king was at London the aforesaid Simon went to him and told him what Philip had done to

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 405 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

him. Upon hearing this the king became furious and, swearing awfully by God's eyes as was his custom, maintained that it was as if the abuse which Philip had heaped upon his knight had been heaped upon himself, wherefore he ordered him to be brought to justice without delay. The archbishop, however, who was present and heard this said: "This will certainly not be done, for laymen cannot be judges of clerics and whatever this or any other member of the clergy has committed should be emended in an ecclesiastical court, therefore, whatever the king's or his knight's complaint may be, let him come or send somebody to Canterbury and he shall obtain full justice by the authority of the Church". Although the king was extremely furious and said many things, at last he reluctantly sent some bishops and magnates to a hearing which the archbishop had appointed at Canterbury, where as soon as they arrived they impleaded Philip on the old complaint of homicide. After judgment had been given that a case which had been settled by an ecclesiastical sentence could not be examined again, the question of the contumely suffered by a royal knight was at last mentioned. As Philip thought it beneath his dignity to engage in this quarrel -for he was a great man and from a great family his adversaries jumped forward and said: "We demand judgment upon an evident injury that has not been denied". And though Philip declared himself disposed to give spontaneous satisfaction, it was nevertheless found necessary to proffer a judgment. So it was decided that Philip should relinquish his prebend into the king's hand during two years - during which period the king should do with the income what he liked - and that he should offer himself naked before the knight in order to give satisfaction according to the custom of the land. As those emissaries returned and explained what had happened, the king replied that this judgment had failed to respect his honour. But the bishops maintained that they had given a just judgment except for the fact that they had punished Philip more than he had deserved because of the king's peace and honour. Thereupon the king became even more angry and said: "By God's eyes, you yourselves are going to confirm to me by oath that you have given a true judgment". But it would be too long if we were to report verbatim whatever was outrageously said or done by the king and firmly by the archbishop, therefore we leave this subject and turn our attention to the common cause of the Church. B. The narrative in Edward Grim's Vita. A claim that had been dealt with in the past was introduced again with the premeditated purpose of hurting a certain cleric called Philip de Broi, who had been appealed for the death of some knight but had been purged according to ecclesiastical law in the audience of the bishop of Lincoln, where the case was heard, and who had returned as a free man among his kinsmen after the case had been resolved. However, a minister of the king, to whose province this business

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 406 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

belonged and who wanted to destroy the cleric out of the old hatred, took the case to court again and reiterated the accusation of homicide. The cleric, however, as a free man who was affected by sorrow and indignation, attacked the sheriff with abuse. And when the latter told the king about the contumely which the cleric had caused him, the king gladly, it is believed, seized the opportunity to act against the clergy and turned his wrath against Philip. And after the question of the cleric was raised in the presence of the archbishop, the king insisted that full justice should be done concerning the homicide as well as concerning the abuse and that the solution reached previously would not stand. The archbishop, however, took the cleric into his court and the protection of the Church to speak there for himself and answer the plaintiff, and after the king had sent bishops and others of both orders to judge the cleric, the latter denied the homicide, maintaining that he could not be forced to answer any further on that count and that the laws did not provide for a case to be reopened that had been ended by a solemn purgation and buried by a peace concluded with the adversaries. "That I have dishonoured a minister of the king because I was overpowered by bitterness" he said "I confess, but I promise to make full amends for that misdeed without, however, the sanction exceeding the limits of reason" "And we" they said "decree that your prebend shall remain in the king's hand for a period of two years and that your possessions and whatever income you have, shall be given to the poor on his instruction" The messengers added that he was to stand naked before the king's minister, as is the lay custom, and to offer him arms for the injury and to live in his subjection. The cleric accepted the judgment, happy to have escaped the death sentence with which the king had threatened him. But the king on the contrary, who had wanted that man to undergo the death penalty, maintained that an injury had been done to him and that his court had suffered a prejudice. He also claimed that the bishops had treated him leniently because of the archbishop and had not judged according to the consideration of equity, adding: "By God's eyes, you are going to confirm to me under oath that you have given a just judgment and have not spared this man because he is a cleric". And when they were ready to swear, he did not know what to do or to whom to turn for fury, and finally, having consulted the sons of Belial, who incited him against the saintly archbishop, he thought of ever more pitfalls. C. The narrative in the Life of St. Thomas by Garnier de Pont-SainteMaxence.

And afterwards there was a violent conflict in London Because of a canon who was living at Bedford, Philip de Broi, who was wrongly accused

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 407 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

For having killed a knight. The king wanted to send him to the port of no return. For this I say that he was vexed quite unjustly, For he had pleaded in the bishop's court for a long time And all his adversaries had given up their claim And he had nevertheless purged himself of it by law. And yet, the authorities reopened the plea. Simon fitz Peter was the justice in the plea, who would gladly, if possible, have obtained a death sentence. This made Philip very angry and he said many ugly words. Thus the king said he had committed as grave a misdeed As if he had said or done it against himself. They who killed God [nevertheless] committed a graver crime Than they who afterwards killed St. Peter or St. Vincent. But King Henry said then what he wanted And swore that he would have that cleric stand trial. Archbishop Thomas took him into his court And said that he would do him right there. Whether the king wanted it or not, he had to send Bishops and barons there to implead the cleric; He requested that they should do full justice upon their oath. They first impleaded him for the death of the knight. The cleric replied that, without entering into a plea, He completely denied the murder, as he had not done it; Also he had been relieved of that accusation in the past And had freed himself by purgation. He would not enter a plea thereon, or answer, or defend himself. Thereupon they made him answer and plead for the insult. The cleric belonged to a famous family and refused to deny anything And said that he was quite prepared to put the misdeed right And would gladly give the knight what he was entitled to. "Since he makes no denial" they said, "he should be judged by us" They gave judgment that he would lose his prebend for two years: During that time the king would take the rents, And give them to churches and the poor, and for the upkeep of bridges And in other alms, as it would please him. Now Philip can say that he has a rich almoner! They condemned him, moreover, to appear naked Before the knight, if he allowed it, And carry arms before him in the sight of his friends;

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 408 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

According to the law of the land he would swear on them To accept such amends for such a misdeed. And after they had shown this judgment to the king, He said that they had acted to his great detriment, For they had treated him leniently because he was a cleric. He would have preferred them to pronounce a death sentence. They replied that they had pronounced a very just judgment. "By God's eyes", he said, "you are going to swear to me That this judgment of yours was completely lawful". "Sire", said the bishops, "we are ready; But Philip is too heavily burdened by this judgment" 1 They offer to swear, at which the king becomes furious.

D. The narrative in Herbert of Bosham's Vita. It should not be left unmentioned that around that time a certain Philip called de Broi, a canon in the cathedral church of Lincoln, heaped abuse upon royal justices, who are called "erring in the land" by the people, so that the king was angry, not only with him but rather with the whole clergy of the kingdom. It is indeed so that if one member of a profession commits some turpitude or enormity this tends quickly to be held against the whole profession. But in reality this was an overhasty and inconsidered judgment out of anger or envy, as if the whole body would be thought to be covered with ugly warts because a stain has been spotted in some tiny part of it. There is no doubt that this cleric committed a considerable wrong by pronouncing his insults, but the complaint was brought before the archbishop, the cleric was summoned and punished even more severely than the crime deserved in order to pacify the indignation of the king: he was condemned to the discipline of public whipping and was deprived of every ecclesiastical benefice which he had in the kingdom for a number of years, how many I do not remember. Since the royal wish had not been complied with, the king was not satisfied and remained very angry. This indeed is the fourth saying of the wise man that unless the fire of anger is completely extinguished one should never say "It is enough" While the king did not deem this punishment to be sufficient and thought that this cleric should rather have been subjected to some corporal punishment, he hesitated to say so expressly because he saw that the sternness of the archbishop could not be influenced in this sense. The king was unyielding, so was the archbishop. The king had in mind the peace of his people, as did the archbishop 411C 411D

We would like to thank Mrs. H. Bauwens-van Deyck and Professor J. Thomas, both of Ghent University, for their precious help with the translation of this French text. Ignis vero nunquam dicit: "Sufficit". Prov. xxx. 16 (where there is no mention of anger).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 409 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the liberty of his clergy, and heard and saw and was informed of many reports and complaints about light punishments for this sort of clerics, who would more truly be called devils, whereby crime was not repressed but rather grew daily worse throughout the kingdom and therefore he solemnly summoned the archbishop and his comprovincial bishops and the rest of the clergy of the kingdom to come to London and meet at Westminster.

E. The narrative in the Chronicle of Meaux. The king, however, who was displeased with the archbishop's answer looked for new ways of hurting him and tried to hand over to lay judgment and execution a cleric who was accused of homicide, in order to spite the archbishop. However, the archbishop took the cleric into his court and the protection of the clergy, so that he could speak for himself there and reply to the plaintiff. And as the king tried to bend the will of the archbishop and the other bishops to the detriment of the Church and desired that they should confirm customs which his predecessors had enjoyed against the freedom of the Church, the archbishop utterly refused to comply and again provoked the king's wrath. However, Archbishop Roger of York, Bishop Hilary of Chichester and Bishop [Gilbert] of London, spontaneously submitted to the royal will hoping that the attitude of Archbishop Thomas might be more easily unbent because of their example.

F. The narrative in Ralph de Diceto's Imagines Historiarum.

It was Philip de Broi, a canon of Bedford, who was the cause of this controversy for as he was impleaded on a charge of homicide, he used abusive language against a justice of the king and since he would not deny this before the archbishop, he was deprived of the benefice of his prebend and banished from the kingdom for two years. G. The narrative in William of Canterbury's Vita. There was a third element that made the king angry. There was a canon of the church of Bedford, called Philip, from a noble family, who had been accused of homicide and had purged his innocence and conducted his case in such a way that his adversaries left him in peace. The king, however, led possibly by his zeal for justice and in order to fight crime in his kingdom, revived the case against him

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 410 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

through some judge' called Simon and as he was again accused under the latter's jurisdiction of the aforesaid crime and could not bear the injuries of the judge, he started abusing him. This upset the king as if the abuse had been heaped upon him personally. The primate, however, took the cleric to be examined in an ecclesiastical court in order to avoid his being brought before a lay court and executed or mutilated; he thereby also avoided the prejudice which could have been caused if he stood before a lay court and protected the interest of the clergy in the person of that cleric. As he was again accused of that crime, he replied that he was not obliged to answer since the matter had been determined in a previous plea; and as far as the abusive language is concerned, he received as a sentence that he was to let the revenue of his canon's prebend be given to the poor during a period of two years, that he should offer his body to the judge to be flogged and that he should swear that in so far as he had committed a crime against him, he [Simon] would receive compensation from him [i.e. Philip]. When the king heard of this punishment he began to be angry because the bishops had given too light a sentence against a man of their own profession.

H. The narrative in William Fitzstephen's Vita. One day, when the king's justices in eyre were at Dunstable, a quarrel broke out between Simon fitz Peter and a canon from Bedford, Philip de Broi. Afterwards Simon complained to the king that Philip had dishonoured him by using vile language, while he was in the king's service and before a large audience. As Philip had been sent before the archbishop by the king for this reason and had been unable to deny the fact, he answered that he had been provoked to speak abuse by the heat of his anger, not by the judgment of his soul. The king demanded a judgment and in order to placate him the clergy decreed that Philip was to be deprived during a year of the benefice of his prebend and at the same time of dwelling in the realm. Thus it was done and yet the king was not satisfied.'

411G 411H

'

Simon fitz Peter. See the Life by Fitz Stephen (Giles, i. 214 °[J.A. Giles, Vita Sti Thomae, i, London, 1843]o); Foss, Judges of England, i. 242. '[Richardson and Sayles, The Governance, 34; Ch. Duggan, "The Becket Dispute and the Criminous Clerks", Bulletin of the Institute of HistoricalResearch, xxxv (1962), 1-28.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 411 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

412 Godric, a holy hermit, is consulted about the result of a forthcoming judicial combat. A. The narrative by Reginald of Durham. Around that time a certain monk, by habit and repute,' came to him and wanted to commend himself in some special way to his prayers. Among several things which he tried to obtain from the man of God that monk inquired diligently about the brother of the servant who was with him, how certain predictions which had been made about him and his servant would eventually materialize, and particularly what the crime committed by that brother of his servant was to lead to in the future. The carnal brother of that servant, who there accompanied the monk, had committed some very grave crime of which he would soon have to show his innocence before secular examining judges of the king, even though his conscience was branded by guilt:' if he was convicted, he was bound to be condemned to death by hanging. The man of God told him: "In truth, my son, for this crime he will lose neither limbs nor inheritance, as you fear, nor shall he undergo the death penalty, but it will all turn out well, peace will soon be made with his enemies and the whole case laid to rest" And this is what against everybody's expectation did take place, possibly because what God's Ghost had predicted through the mouth of his man could not happen differently.

B. A shorter version in the HistoricaNarratiomade at the request of Ailred

of Rievaulx. Somebody had to purge his innocence before royal officials for committing some grave misdeed. But that well-known monk asked the venerable Godric how his case was going to end, for if he were convicted he would be hanged. The holy man told him: "My son, he will lose neither limbs nor life nor any part of his inheritance for this, since he will shortly come to an agreement with his adversaries". Against everyone's expectation this happened, as the just man had predicted.

412A 1 0[The description monachus habitu et nomine is somewhat puzzling; it could, for example, be that the monk belonged to the well-known Le Moigne family, so that he was a monk wearing the habit of his order, but also called "the monk".] 2 1 Tim. iv. 2.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 412 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

413 Bishop Gilbert Foliot of Hereford orders Elias de Say, who has tried a priest of the bishop's diocese, to leave the trial of clerics to him.

Gilbert, by God's grace bishop of Hereford, to his friend Elias de Say, greeting. You know, dearest, how constantly you have promised to me and the Church around you the love, honour and peace, which you were going to observe in such a way that we would hear no complaint about you and we would have no need to write to you anything but what is peaceful and friendly. Many things could greatly astound me, but I am much more astounded to hear that you subject to the judgment of your court a priest of ours and a dean and that you claim against the Church this power which kings and emperors, in spite of much sweat and labour, have not been able to obtain against her until this day. We therefore order you, dearest, that you shall let us judge our clerics and this one in particular and that you shall in no way presume to judge others, but that you shall let them serve the Lord in peace in the order which was granted to them. If you do not listen to us, we shall not hesitate, however unwillingly, to pronounce sentence against you and your goods and if you have any complaint against the lord Walter, we offer to do full justice concerning this case. We wish that you are well and that you please the Lord by your good deeds.1

414 Judgment having been given in the court of the abbot of Reading that Philip de Sarnesfield is to swear with twelve oath-helpers concerning a rent of the church of Leominster, Bishop Gilbert Foliot of Hereford orders him first to come and discuss the matter. To his friend and parishioner Philip de Sarnesfield,' greeting. I hear that the court of the lord abbot of Reading2 has adjudged to you the administration of proof by the oath of twelve hands that you or your predecessors have never paid 413 ' Elias (a layman) has presumed to try a priest and dean of Gilbert's diocese in his court: that is for the bishop alone to do, and if Elias has ajust plea against Walter (evidently the name of the priest and dean, perhaps also the Walter of no. 118; the two cases may possibly be connected, the letters are adjacent in B), Gilbert will give him full justice. Elias was lord of Clun (Salop). See The Complete Peerage,x, Appendix, p. 113; Eyton, The Antiquitiesof Shropshire, xi, 228 (for the Say family see The Complete Peerage,xi, 464 ff.). 414 The place was doubtless Sarnesfield (Herefs). For Philip, see HerefordshireDomesday, c. 11601170, ed. V.H. Galbraith and J. Tait, London, 1950, 86. 0 2 [During the period 1148-1163 the following abbots of Reading occur: Edward (1136-c. 1154), Master Reginald (1154 1158) and Roger (1158-1165).]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 413 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

for the land of Sarnesfield to the church of Leominster the five shillings which he demands from you. I recognize, however, through a definite record of Holy Church that this cause came before the lord Bishop Robert of blessed memory and was settled by his counsel. Since therefore I see something contrary to your salvation and that of your people if you proceed to this oath, we order and command on your Christian faith that you shall not proceed to it or allow one of your people to do it until you have spoken to us and have received more fully our counsel on this matter. I also beg the lord abbot by a letter of mine to see to it that you shall not suffer any detriment because of this delay to your case. Farewell.3

415 A quarrel breaks out in Wymondham, a cell of the abbey of St. Albans, founded by William I d'Aubigny called Pincerna.The abbot, alarmed by the violence that has occurred, determines to visit the cell, but meets with opposition and decides to discuss the situation with William II d'Aubigny, the founder's son. As this does not lead to any positive results, the quarrel is brought before Robert, earl of Leicester, at Northampton. William II d'Aubigny deludes the abbot with promises, is summoned by Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, and threatened with excommunication. Finally, after the abbot has explained his inability to produce the foundation charter of Wymondham, an agreement is reached. In reporting the deeds of Abbot Robert we follow an artificial order, narrating first what happened last in accordance with the importance of the events that took place. He tamed the indomitable William, earl of Arundel, who used to rage like a madman against numerous people. There belongs to St. Alban's a cell of monks at Wymondham, founded, as we explained before, in honour of St. Mary and St. Alban by William d'Aubigny, King Henry I's butler and father of the aforesaid Earl William. It so happened at the time of Abbot Robert that the prior of Wymondham, Ralph de Nuers, a religious man apt to get angry more than was fitting, went to Happisburgh, a place belonging to the church of Wymondham, in order to demand from his people there an aid for his church because of some pressing necessity. But they resisted the prior and his demand to his face, so that he became angry and called the servants of the earl to help him with his demand. They Judgement has been given in the abbot of Reading's court that Philip is to swear with twelve oath-helpers that he and his predecessors never paid a pension of five shillings to the church of Leominster. Gilbert recalls a judgment on the issue made by his predecessor Bishop Robert, and insists that he discuss the matter with Philip before Philip takes the oath. The letter lacks heading or author's title; but it was certainly written by a bishop of Hereford who had a predecessor called Robert (more probably Robert de Bethune than Robert of Lorraine); and in view of this and of its place in the manuscript, it may be taken as reasonably certain that it was written by Gilbert as bishop of Hereford.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 414 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

destroyed doors, broke locks and fences and cruelly attacked the serfs of the church, putting several of them in prison and in stocks and carrying off loot. The serfs, however, fled to the seat of St. Alban and carried with them the broken locks as proof of their sufferings and, tearing their clothes, complained tearfully to the abbot. The abbot asked against whom he should rather complain as guilty of the injury, the servants of the earl or the prior. The serfs replied that it was through the wicked design of the prior that they had suffered the earl's violence. Considering this the abbot came to the conclusion that he should go to the place to discuss more secretly and strictly with the brethren and the servants of the place the nature of this case. And behold, as he was travelling to Norfolk and at a distance of eight miles from Wymondham, he was met by the prior of the place and his men. The prior told the abbot that he had heard from the earl's servants, who had already arrived at Wymondham, that they were to resist the abbot and to deny him entrance to his cell by violence. The abbot, however, called his people together and asked them what was to be done in this matter. One said that it would be wise to travel on to Norwich and to send a messenger thence to the earl to inquire whether this had happened by the earl's authority. But a younger brother said: "The abbot has not yet suffered any violence, nor is there any reason to complain unless some bodily violence takes place, therefore the lord abbot should go to his cell, enter it and listen and see if one of the servants commits violence". The abbot was pleased with the junior's counsel and he went to the dwelling of his cell. But, behold, a messenger arrived with the news that the cook of the abbot, who had gone ahead of the abbot as was his custom to prepare the food, had been deprived of his horse. When the monks, who were present, heard this, they attacked the thief and shamefully hit him with their fists and freed the horse. The abbot was not slowed down by this and when he arrived, was met at the gate by the whole convent of the place and acclaimed unanimously as the spiritual father and the lord of that cell and followed as far as the door of the forecourt of the house of God. But as the abbot tried to enter he was stopped by Roger de Millers and his large crowd of helpers. The abbot asked him: "By what authority, Roger, do you forbid me to enter my house? On the very day when I received the government in the church of St. Alban, I also received the cure of this house, for the cure of this house depends on the cure of that other and one follows the other like a daughter her mother. I know that you are a man of the king and you know that I am his abbot and by his authority I forbid you to use violence against us" And spurring on his horse he went inside amidst the serjeants, none of whom offered him any resistance. As he returned from prayer, the said Roger and his company went to him and begged the abbot to leave so that they should not incur the wrath of the earl which experience had often taught them to be intolerable. But he replied: "Behold, night is falling and where can I go so late? Let me stay here and the brethren who are with me and one servant for each monk, and all the others I will send away until I hear from the mouth of the earl by his own messengers whether he or the fury of others has

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 415 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

undertaken against me what has happened. As soon as I hear from him I shall either stay safely here in our house or leave and see to our indemnity". And what he requested and promised was done. The prior of that place and Richard de SaintClair and Henry de Gorham, the abbot's godfather, whom the abbot had sent to the earl to arrange a meeting between the abbot and the earl, told the abbot that the earl expected the abbot to meet him on the following Wednesday at Attleborough. On the appointed day the earl arrived, surrounded by a considerable retinue; the abbot also arrived but with a small company. As the parties had taken their seats facing each other, the earl spoke first, as follows: "My lord abbot, I and you we have met in order to talk by common counsel about the emendation of my cell of Wymondham and to see what in the aforesaid cell belongs to me, what to you and what to my prior, thus avoiding confusion in the house of the Lord if you were to usurp what is mine or I what is yours and avoiding cause for hatred, which would be to our common disadvantage. First of all therefore show the charter of my father and whatever the authority of the charter gives you shall be yours, but if you do not have it, I would like to know by whose authority you claim any lordship in my land". To which the abbot replied: "We have come to set right whatever the spiritual cure demands amongst our monks of Wymondham and similarly those of Binham, for this comes first for us to seek the kingdom of God and secondly not to neglect the external elements which need our dispensation. As we arrived at Wymondham to perform our office, the people whom you had sent resisted us and impudently denied us entrance. We sent messengers to you to hear from your own mouth whether your authority had intervened and you denied it. It was our ardent desire to talk to you, you indicated for a meeting and we behaved well towards you on all points and behold here we are. The rustics of the church of Wymondham have put before us their tearful complaint, i.e. that your officials attacked them, took their goods, broke the locks of their chests and took away the contents. How detestable this was under a peace-making king and in time of peace is easily understood. One deed should be redressed before all others and the rest can be dealt with afterwards as circumstances require. However there is no question yet of your father's charter nor have we come to that, for there is no doubt as to what the abbot of St. Albans has in the church of Wymondham: it is known to all that he appoints the priors and if necessary deposes them. He also visits the brethren of the place once a year and if need be more often. During his visitation he stays somewhat longer so that through sorrowful deliberation the weak souls can be cured and non spiritual matter provided for if circumstances require" To this the earl replied: "If I have done something to the men of my prior which I should not have done, it is no concern of yours this can well be left to me and my

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 416 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

prior, for you have no lordship whatever in the church of Wymondham except that, as a sign of subjection and order the prior of the place must pay you and your successors one mark a year. If you want to visit your brethren of Binham, hospitality at Wymondham is owed to you for one night on your trip there and for another night on your return, without the number of thirteen horses of those in your company being exceeded. It is in this way that the cell was given by my father to Abbot Richard, as is explained in my father's charter and this I will observe all my life". The abbot replied: "As far as the men of your church or your prior of Wymondham are concerned, everything concerns me, for this prior, whom you produce as if he were yours, was created by me and the right which he has in the monks or in the goods of the monks of Wymondham he possesses thanks to me", and turning to the prior he added: "My lord prior, whose prior are you, from whom do you have the external and internal cure in this church of Wymondham of which we are talking?" To which he replied: "My lord father, from your paternity". Thereupon the abbot pursued his discourse and said: "If the prior has the title of prior from me and also the office, then all he possesses is mine. It is my duty to see to it that the men who have been entrusted to him do not lack justice, as it is my duty to redress in all things the prior's shortcoming. The argument for this is the yearly payment of a mark which he pays as a token of subjection, either in his own name or in that of the church and it is clear that he pays for the church, since it is being paid throughout time. And if payment is made in the name of the church, then the church that pays is subjected to him to whom payment is made. If I arrive on a visit, my stay should not be counted in days or numbers of horses since Richard, in whose time the church of Wymondham entered the patrimony of St. Alban, was not content with the number of thirteen horses or with lodging for one night on the way there and another night on his return from Wymondham nor were the other abbots who preceded us. For all our brethren could not uncover to us the secrets of their hearts in one day, yet their spiritual well-being depends on our counsel. Therefore it is necessary to give time to a wise physician of the souls more than once, so that what cannot be cured on the first day can be dealt with on the second or the third or following days. It is necessary that they who receive the host to offer it to God for the souls of your ancestors and all faithful, should be saintly and pure, for they appeal to us and particularly to those to whom they were close during their lifetime". To which the earl replied in great anger and with customary fury: "What you say has never been and never shall be, as long as I shall wear the girdle of knighthood" and carried away by his anger he got up, broke off the talks and left. So the abbot returned home and having stayed at Wymondham as long as this new matter required, he intended to go to Happisburgh. This was not unknown to the earl who sent out serjeants on whose cruelty and violence he could best count and whom he adjured by their pledges not to allow the abbot or anyone from his escort to enter the gates of Happisburgh. And so it happened: on their arrival there the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 417 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

abbot and his escort were not allowed to enter. Therefore, having taken counsel with his men, he sent the aforesaid brother Nicholas to the earl of Leicester who, as we said, was in charge of judicial matters in England, and put before him a complaint about the injuries caused by the earl and obtained letters of summons to the head of the province [i.e. the sheriff of the county], by which he could summon the aforesaid earl to be present with all his accomplices, who had taken part in the injury caused to the abbot of St. Albans at Happisburgh, at Northampton on the appointed day to answer the abbot concerning the violence which, so he complained, he had suffered. So the earl having been summoned came to Northampton and through the mediation of some people who loved both parties, the earl promised before proceedings were started that he would give satisfaction to the abbot for the violence in the church of Wymondham as it pleased him and that he would implore the earl of Leicester to grant his permission; he also gave pledge through his men that he would stand by the agreement without any mischief. The abbot gave his agreement and going to Norfolk returned without concluding the business, having experienced the earl's deceit. Again a complaint was laid before the justice of England and a new summons was similarly issued. They met at London where the terms of the agreement were repeated and put down in a chirograph, so that the earl could not, as was his custom, escape because of a verbal quibble. The abbot again went to Norfolk, without finishing the business and the earl did not produce the testimony of the chirograph. So he finally turned to the remedy offered by ecclesiastical justice. St. Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, summoned the earl and on the appointed day both parties appeared before him and the earl of Leicester. The abbot alleged in a rhetorical way, since he was a nobleman and of urbane eloquence, the damage and injuries which he had suffered and the frustrating delays. The earl ran the risk of being excommunicated, but the abbot following the counsel of the magnates of the realm did not insist, for they said that if the earl were struck by excommunication, the church of Wymondham, whose patron he was, might for that reason suffer gravely. Therefore efforts to establish peace between them were renewed and the result was that the earl would confirm by his charter to the church of Wymondham whatever his father had granted to it out of his lands. And since those words were captious, the abbot often said to the mediators who were trying to bring about peace: "If we leave this meeting, the earl will demand his father's charter to be shown to him in such a way that he can proceed according to the form of the charter. However, I want you to know that in the time of King Henry I the newly established monasteries or conventual churches of the English did not need another charter than that of the king alone, for in those days nobody was in a position to establish a congregation in the kingdom of England except with the king's permission. Indeed, the king's permission was given except when the founder resigned the monastery or the church in his hand so that henceforward it depended for temporal matters only on the king. Thus it has come about that,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 418 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

contrary to what some maintain, we have never had another charter concerning Wymondham than that of the king. Therefore, if the earl is prepared to confirm to Wymondham everything that is contained in the king's charter and everything else which according to the testimony of good men was given by his father to the monastery of Wymondham, I forgive him every injury and whatever I claim from him by way of restitution, and on top of that I shall give him a sum of 40 marks" The abbot said this in order to blind the earl with gifts, as he was driven by ambition and poverty, but also because he did not have at hand the charters concerning all the possessions of the monastery for which he fought. So finally through the mediation of Geoffrey de Mandeville junior, i.e. the earl of Essex, and Richard de Lucy and friends on both sides the following peace was established between the men in discord. The earl made his charter and by the oath of three men who spoke sincerely he excepted the church of Rising and several tithes which, although they were mentioned in the charter of the king, had never been in the possession of the monks of Wymondham. And thus the friendship which had been brought about, or so it was thought, was based on simulation and not on solid truth. The earl blushed considerably for having been beaten in such a case by an ordinary man and he who had conquered invincible men confessed to being defeated by a simple man, wherefore the earl afterwards used to say, turning serious matters into a joke: "By the lance of God, your name will henceforth be changed and you will be called "Robert Matefelone", taking and keeping your name from your accomplishment" '

416 A priest in the diocese of Salisbury is accused of manslaughter and sent to the court of the bishop of Salisbury, where royal officials and kinsmen of the victim demand his condemnation. He fails in the purgatory oath and the bishop consults Archbishop Thomas Becket, who orders that the culprit be degraded and imprisoned for life in a monastery. It happened that some workmen of the devil, clerics by name only but of Satan's brood, were accused of misdeeds and kept in fetters as often happens in the kingdom to those who commit enormous crimes and violate the peace. Among them was a priest infamous for manslaughter and accused by the kinsmen of the dead man. Having been arrested this man was, because of the privilege of his order, transferred to [Jocelin] the diocesan bishop of Salisbury; and the king's officials and the kinsmen of the dead man, who brought forward the accusation, sharply insisted that the bishop should do justice. But as the priest constantly denied the

415 ' o[V.C.H. Norfolk, ii. 336-337.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 419 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

charge and his guilt of the homicide could not be established by the accusers, the canonical purgation was imposed on the accused, while the accusers gave probable arguments against the accused and in this were particularly helped by his bad reputation. And as he failed in the purgation, the bishop sent a message to the archbishop to consult him concerning the legal position and to act all the more surely in imposing the punishment. The archbishop, having been consulted, sent a mandate that he was to be deprived of every ecclesiastical benefice and dismissed and be shut up forever in a monastery to lead a perpetual life of the strictest penitence. And this punishment, following the failure in the purgation that had been indicated by judicial sentence, was the same as if it had been imposed on a convicted man. And the clerics, who had been accused of misdeeds in this way and convicted or arrested, and also the clerics of bad repute and those who failed in the adjudged purgation, were punished, throughout the province, through a decree of the archbishop that was sanctioned by old and authentic canons, by a spiritual and not corporal punishment, without any mutilation or deformation of limbs. Nevertheless, the punishment could be aggravated or alleviated according to the quality of the misdeed and also according to the rank and the order of the delinquent and the manner and the cause of the delict.

417 After King Henry II has taken the land of Luton into his hands, the abbot of St. Albans brings the matter before the royal court; thanks to a certain arrangement with Richard of Ilchester, archdeacon of Poitiers, the king grants Luton (and also Houghton) in frankalmoign to the abbey. A short while after these events Stephen, the most benign king, went the way of all flesh and was succeeded in the kingdom by Henry II, duke of the Normans, who published an edict that all the lands throughout Britain which had at any time according to the oath of his men been in the lordship of his predecessors, the kings of England, were to be restored without any contradiction and to be kept in the future in his lordship and that of his successors. Thus it happened that those oathswearers, under the influence of the assertions of old people, testified and confirmed under oath that the church of Luton had of old belonged to the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 420 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

jurisdiction of the king, for many old people maintained that the church of Luton was founded on a demesne fisc of the kingdom and therefore belonged to the king's gift, but that afterwards the church which one sees now, being entirely assimilated to the land, was built on the fee of the earl of Gloucester.1 Having heard this, King Henry let the church of Luton be seized into his hands by Richard, the archdeacon of Poitiers, Baldric de Sigillo and Adam the clerk being utterly removed. Saddened by all this the abbot went to see the king who was staying in London and although he was a bold plaintiff he implored him to have mercy upon his church out of reverence for his protomartyr.2 The king took pity, discussed with his counsel and gave him the whole church of Luton with the appurtenances to be kept until he would more fully decide what he wanted to do, either personally or through his messengers. Hence the aforesaid abbot, having been put at ease, secretly went to see the aforesaid Richard of Poitiers, who had the king's ear, to obtain that he would persuade the king effectively to grant the said church to the church of St. Albans. To this he agreed on condition that the two parts of that church which the aforesaid two clerics, Baldric and Adam, had held should be granted to him. This the hard pressed abbot meekly did, although it was not quite according to the canons. Not long afterwards Abbot Robert went to see the king who was staying at Clarendon and made requests and promises, sometimes appealing to strict law and also threatening his enemies with the martyr's revenge. It was finally discussed and, thanks to God, decided that the king would grant the whole church of Luton and the church of Houghton with all their appurtenances through royal liberality in free and perpetual alms to Abbot Robert, who then was there, and the church of St. Albans to ensure the care of poor guests, and this he confirmed by his charter so that his confirmation should be valid forever.

418 Abingdon Abbey recovers the church of Marcham which Turstin fitz Simon had unjustly given to Ralph de Tamworth, a royal clerk. The latter tries to regain it by appealing to the pope, but King Henry II, after hearing a complaint by Abbot Walkelin, puts pressure on Ralph to restore it to Abingdon.

417 ' '[This is Earl Robert of Gloucester (1122-31 October 1147), the direct overlord of the Luton 2

land.]' 0

[The protomartyr meant here is St. Alban, the first martyr in Britain, in the third century

(Monasticon, ii. 178).]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 421 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Furthermore at the time when the aforesaid Turstin held the thing whose recovery we have mentioned,' he gave the church of Marcham without the land to a royal clerk namely Ralph de Tamworth. After Turstin had lost his acquisitions, the normal consequence was that Ralph could no longer unjustly hold the part he had received from Turstin, who justly had lost everything. Seeking relief for his loss and an opportunity to recover it, Ralph, showing letters of the king and his barons, convened the abbot and the convent frequently, asking that they should at least allow him to hold the church as a rent-paying tenant. But as they utterly refused, he went to the pope2 and, strengthened by papal authority and letters, went to Walkelin, the successor of Ingulf, not with a request but with a demand, in the hope of obtaining from the latter what he had not obtained from the former. However, the latter abbot did not resist the realization of Ralph's plan with less vigour than the former: he went to the king and pointed out to him how fraudulently his clerk had acted against the church of Abingdon. The king was indignant and told his clerk that if he wanted to stay at his court or even in his kingdom, he should seek to make his peace with the church of Abingdon; and thus this church, restored and afterwards defended by the king, is subjected until this day to the altar of St. Mary. 419 Several clerics guilty of various crimes are prosecuted by royal officials and imprisoned, but claimed by Archbishop Thomas Becket on pain of excommunication. The king agrees on condition that they shall be returned to his officials after they have been degraded, to which the archbishop objects that in this way the clerics would be punished twice. Afterwards, as the king molested the Church and ecclesiastical men even more vehemently than usual and was resisted constantly by the archbishop, the devil, the fomenter of evil, stirred up a grave action against the Church; for, as the king's officials were tirelessly examining and with more than usual solicitude investigating everything, several members of the clergy were found to be guilty of various crimes, whom they arrested and put in prison in chains. Some of them were priests, others deacons and clerics of various orders, of whom it was established that they

418 1 '[See no. 363.10 0 2 [Adrian IV (died 1 September 1159) or Alexander 111 (7 September 1159-30 August 118 1).]°

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 422 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

were amongst the worst criminals and guilty of theft and homicide; but the venerable archbishop thought that not even they could be left to lay justice and, on the contrary, he constantly and under threat of anathema claimed them back from the king, forbidding anyone to presume passing judgment on them outside a church court, as he was prepared to do justice upon them and pronouncejudgment against them according to the canons and decrees. Finally, compelled by the force of reason, the king agreed to return them to the archbishop on condition, however, that he should restore them to his officials for condemnation after they had been degraded as their guilt demanded. As against this the archbishop maintained that they were not to be punished twice and degradation would be sufficient punishment: if however they were caught afterwards committing crimes, then it would be no concern of his by what judgment they were condemned. This conflict was protracted for a long time and in various ways.

420 John Marshal complains that he has been denied justice in the court of his lord, Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury, in a plea concerning land of the manor of Pagham: on the strength of a recent royal constitution he appeals to the king's court. The archbishop, having been summoned there on 14 September 1164, fails to appear and the case is postponed till the opening of the council of Northampton, which is convened for 6 October. On 7 and 8 October the discussion before the king on Marshal's complaint concerns procedural technicalities and in the absence of John Marshal, who is in London in the king's service at the exchequer, no conclusion is reached. After

a discussion amongst the groups of barons and bishops which of them was directly concerned, the court adjudges the archbishop to be in the king's mercy. A. The version in Herbert of Bosham's Life of St. Thomas. He began proceedings against several magnates of the kingdom, great and powerful men, about lands of which his church had been deprived through the weakness or negligence of his predecessors. Some of those lands he reclaimed but

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 423 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

several others, where the injury seemed to be manifest, he revoked without judicial proceedings. Such were those lands which in the country are called in the vernacular fee farms: right at the start of his pontificate the archbishop revoked them all into his own demesne as belonging to his own estates, putting out those people who are called farmers without having recourse to a royal judge. As he was questioned about this, he replied that he was not going to plead concerning those lands which were very well known to belong to his demesne, even though they had been unjustly alienated by some sort of title, and thus he managed those lands as he wished and held them until later he was driven out and banished for the sake of justice and lost those and others, as will appear from the following pages. Furthermore, he most eagerly reclaimed the fee that was said to be that of William de Ros, a fee, unless I am mistaken, of seven knights, which had been confiscated soon after the death of Archbishop Father Theobald, but having only made his claim concerning this fee, the archbishop did not go ahead but waited for the return of the king, who at that time was not in the kingdom. However, because of some other events he did not make his claim concerning that fee even when the king next returned, but decided to wait since there was at that time a sharp conflict between the archbishop and the noble man the earl of Clare, because the archbishop demanded that homage should be done to him for the castle of Tunbridge and all the territory of the castle and particularly everything within the league surrounding the castle and which in the vernacular is called the banlieue, which in better Latin could be rendered as the ban of the league. The earl offered to do homage, but refused to specify for what, as the archbishop had requested. He furthermore reclaimed the custody of the tower of Rochester, which he also maintained belonged by right to his church, producing a public instrument on this question, viz. a charter of William the illustrious late king of the English of blessed memory, who had forcefully acquired the kingdom with a strong hand and by battle. Having undertaken the recovery of those and similar possessions, revoking some lands and reclaiming others, the archbishop was soon faced with numerous conflicts, suits and adversaries, although the latter all still acted stealthily out of fear of the king, as they were still much impressed by the very high favour which, as we have explained before, the archbishop enjoyed with him, wherefore they were quite fearful of the archbishop's displeasure. Nevertheless, several who felt they had suffered injury or were afraid of suffering went to see the king, who was still busy outside the kingdom, and some explained and complained which injury they had suffered and others which injury they were at the point of suffering at the hand of the archbishop unless royal clemency extended the hand ofjustice, and trying to shake somewhat the constant favour of the king for the archbishop, they added that too much royal favour might encourage the archbishop to go too far. The king, however, who really and truly loved him, did not lend his ears to those words and since he was on the point of returning, he told the complainants to wait till he was back in England.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 424 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

B. The version in William Fitzstephen's Life of St. Thomas. The archbishop began to talk about William de Courcy, who had occupied one of his dwellings, and asked the king to order that it should be vacated for him. The order was given. Thereafter he talked of his summons because of the complaint made against him by John Marshal, for John claimed from the archbishop one land, part of the archiepiscopal manor of Pagham,' and as some days had been fixed for that case, he had gone to the archbishop's court with a royal writ. As he made no progress there because he could not base himself on any right, he finally proved - as the law then provided - that the archbishop's court had denied him justice, but this he did on a troper which he produced from under his cloak, whereupon the justiciars of the archbishop's court pointed out that he should not have brought with him that book or such a book for this purpose. Upon his return to the king, he bought a writ of summons ordering the archbishop to answer him in the king's court, the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross2 being appointed as the day for the suit. On that day, however, the archbishop did not come but sent to the king four knights with letters from himself and the sheriff of Kent, similarly bearing witness to the injury caused by John and the imperfection of his proof. But to what avail? The king was indignant that the archbishop whom he had summoned did not appear personally to allege this if he wanted to. He treated his messengers badly and molested them with anger and threats, as if they had brought to the king's court and against his summons a false, void and useless excuse, and finally he allowed them to return with difficulty, after they have given pledges. At the request of the aforesaid John he fixed another date for this same case, viz. the first day of the council, and sent his writ to the sheriff of Kent for summoning the archbishop, for he then refused to write to him and had done so for a long time, because he did not want to greet him; and the archbishop received no other solemn and first summons to the council by letters which were addressed to him, as was the ancient custom. The archbishop, I say, declared that he had come for the case of John at the king's command, to which the king replied that John was in his service in London but that he would shortly arrive and that he would then take cognizance of their case: indeed that John was in London with the treasurers and other receivers of fiscal money and public revenue at the square table commonly called the exchequer after the two-coloured counters, although in fact it is rather the king's table with white-coloured coins, where also the king's pleas of the crown are dealt with. On that day nothing more was done between the king and the archbishop, but the king told him to return to his dwelling and come back for his case in the morning, whereupon he left. 420B ' *[The land in question is that of Mundham, of the manor of Pagham (Sussex). It is noteworthy that the list of people excommunicated by Thomas Becket (MATERIALS BECKET vi. 601-602) mentions "the land of Mundham of the manor of Pagham, which the king took away from the 0 0church of Canterbury because of John Marshal".] 2 [The Exaltation of the Holy Cross is 14 September. The year must be 1164.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 425 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

On the second day 3 all the bishops, earls and barons of England and several of Normandy were together in session except for the bishop of Rochester, who had not yet arrived, and one other, and there the archbishop was accused of lesemajesty against the royal crown because, as we already explained, he had failed to appear or properly to excuse himself after the king had summoned him in the case of John. The archbishop defended himself by recalling the forementioned injury caused by John and by pointing out his own jurisdiction in this case and the integrity of his court, but in vain: the king demanded judgment and none of the archbishop's arguments was accepted. Everyone believed that, out of reverence for the royal majesty and because of the strict obligation created by the liege homage which the archbishop had done to the king and because of the fealty and observance of his worldly honour, which he had sworn to him, his defence or excuse was insufficient, since having been summoned by the king he had neither appeared or alleged through messengers some bodily infirmity or the necessity of some administrative action connected with his ecclesiastical office, which could not be postponed. They said that he should be condemned to the loss of all his chattels in the king's mercy. There was disagreement between the bishops and the barons about who was to pronounce judgment, each group finding excuses and trying to make the other do it. The barons said: "You bishops must pronounce judgment, this is not our task since we are laymen and you are ecclesiastical persons like he and his fellow priests and fellow bishops" To which one of the bishops replied: "Not so, this belongs rather to your office and not ours, since this is not an ecclesiastical but a secular judgment: we sit here not as bishops but as barons and we as barons and you as barons are peers here. It is in vain that you use our order as an argument, for if you point at our ordination, you ought to do the same with him, but the very fact that we are bishops makes it impossible for us to judge our archbishop and lord" What more? The king was angered by this dispute about the pronouncement [of the judgment] and put an end to the controversy: the lord [bishop] of Winchester was ordered to speak and at last and unwillingly he pronounced [the judgment]. Since, however, it is not allowed to contradict a sentence or record of the court of the king of England, the archbishop with the counsel of the bishops restrained himself and in order to placate and honour the king performed the gesture of placing himself in his hand as was the custom there, thereby indicating that he accepted the judgment, and all the bishops gave gage except Gilbert of London, who refused the request of engaging himself for him - a singularity that made him noteworthy.

3 0 [Thursday 8 October 1164.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 426 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

C. The version in the Life of St. Thomas by the Anonymous I. The king had also made a new constitution which, he thought, would be useful to him, but caused great injury to all the magnates of the kingdom who grumbled and lamented. This is what was decreed: "If anyone has a case in the court of his lord and sees after the first or second day of the plea that the matter is not going well for him or according to his wish, he shall be allowed to retire thence and to flee to the court of a higher lord, provided that he has first sworn with two others that his case has suffered unjust delay". It happened, however, that one of the magnates of the land called John Marshal, who had a case in the court of his lord the archbishop, declined judgment there and left the court on the authority of this new constitution and after having sworn the oath. But he had not done this according to custom, on the text of the Gospels or relics of saints, but on a book which they call a troper, which he had caused to be produced for that purpose. Thus John, who knew that the king would be very pleased with any opportunity of acting against the archbishop, went to him and maintaining that the archbishop had committed default of justice towards him said: "He did it because I am loyal to you". The king seized the opportunity and ordered the archbishop to be summoned, commanding him to appear and to answer the charge that he had denied justice in his court to one of his magnates, but the archbishop, who happened to be ill at the time and could in no way appear on that day, took care to send a reasonable excuse to the king arguing his incapacity. The king, however, who was looking for opportunities to cause him harm, replied that he accepted no excuse for his absence. ... For immediately and without any moderation another complaint was put forward concerning the aforesaid John Marshal who, it was said, had been denied justice in the court of the archbishop. The archbishop replied that he had in no way failed to do him justice, but that John himself had thoroughly failed in his case, had not been able to prove his right and had evaded judgment by swearing an oath against usage. As the king understood that he was not getting anywhere with this case, he turned to another.

D. The version in Roger of Hoveden's Chronicle. On the day after the meeting Archbishop Thomas came to the king's court in his chapel and immediately asked his permission to travel and see Pope Alexander, who at that time was staying in France, but he did not obtain it, as the king said to him: "You shall first answer me for the injury which you caused John Marshal in your court" The said John had indeed complained to the king that, as in the court

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 427 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

of the archbishop he had claimed to hold some land from him by hereditary right and had carried on a plea on this for a long time, he had not been able to obtain any justice thereon, wherefore he had, according to the custom of the realm and under oath, declared the archbishop's court to be false. The archbishop replied: "John suffered no default of justice in my court but, I don't know at whose advice or on the spur of his own will, he brought into my court a certain troper and swore on it that he left my court for default of justice, and it seemed to the justiciars of my court that he caused me injury by thus receding from my court, since it was decreed in your kingdom: "Who wants to declare somebody else's court false ought to swear on the holy Gospels".' The king, however, paid no attention to those words and swore that he would have judgment on him. The barons of the court judged him to be in the king's mercy and although the archbishop considered that judgment false, he nevertheless because of the prayer and the advice of the barons, put himself in the king's mercy for five hundred pounds and found pledges. And so he left the court to return to his dwelling and fell seriously ill because of the anger and indignation which he conceived in his mind.

E. The version in the Life of St. Thomas by Edward Grim. Having decided to hold a solemn council in the castle of Northampton, he convoked all those who held from him in chief, the archbishop was also summoned. Before that council one of the courtiers of the king,' who was very powerful with the king, claimed in the court of the archbishop some possession which had of old belonged to the right of the church, but as the knight could not follow up his claim as justice demanded, he brought the business before the king, complaining that the archbishop had deprived him of his right by an unjust judgment and that the archbishop's court had been false; and he maintained under oath that this had caused injury to the king. So the king, who was looking for opportunities against the archbishop, ordered him to appear and to answer the knight about the violence, but as he could not be present because of great illness, he excused himself for that day to the messengers, who would take his reply to the king. The king, however, accepted no excuse at all and suspected that he was evading a public hearing. For this cause, so it superficially appeared, the holy bishop was summoned to Northampton before Caesar's tribunal as if he were to stand trial on those matters, whereas in fact the intention was, as the outcome of the action has shown, that attacked in public and giving up the judgment he would 420D

420E

The rule is thus laid down by Glanvill, xii. 7: "Quod (sc. curiam ipsam ei de recto defecisse in placito ipso) et ipse petens sic esse suo juramento et cum duobus aliis id audientibus et intelligentibus et cum eo jurantibus, probabit." "Sufficit ei falsare curiam ipsam sub forma praedicta." *[This refers to John Marshal.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 428 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

either give in to the king concerning the acceptance and observance of the laws of the kingdom or, if he offered stubborn resistance, undergo a sentence of condemnation. [The archbishop] arrived, as was said, and went at once to the king and very submissively asked for his permission to go to the lord pope for the sake of their common advantage and welfare. Angered by this request, the king replied that he would certainly not leave as he hoped, saying: "You shall first explain why you neglected to appear on my summons". To which the archbishop replied: "My lord should not talk like this: I was detained and excused by illness". But not even this humble excuse nor the illness influenced the king, who ordered that judgment should be given speedily and that it should be established what sentence he would undergo for contempt. It was adjudged that the king was to be paid five hundred pounds by way of satisfaction for this default. As the judgment was being pronounced, the saint lamented, seeing iniquity taking the place of judgment, but as he attempted to contradict the judgment, they all protested and suggested that he should forget his anger and try to placate the king on this point at least. He finally agreed in the hope that by so doing he might put an end to the controversy that had been started. He was requested to give pledges who would be responsible for the agreed sum and, after he had found them, the case of the knight with which the dispute had started was brought forward again. Seeing that they were looking for some excuse to accuse him on some point or other, the saint maintained with the greatest freedom that he did not have to answer anyone thereon outside a church court, since the knight could in no way prove that in his case any judgment had been given against justice in the archbishop's court: the oath by which he had attempted to falsify the judgment of the church was neither usual nor legitimate, from which he inferred that there was no reason to force him to answer on this matter outside his own court. The knight, however, who had not been afraid to molest the holy archbishop and raise his hand against the anointed of the Lord, in that same year lost two sons whom he had intended to provide with church lands and himself lost his life and his goods. F. The version in the Life of St. Thomas by William of Canterbury. On the following day, which was to witness the first tumult, he was accused of numerous things. First of all that he had not done suitable justice to a certain John, who was conducting a case under his jurisdiction and that, when royal severity had summoned him to answer on this charge, he had refused to appear and to obey the law. He answered that John had vindicated some land before him as a judge, but after judgment intervened, had failed to obtain his right in a possessory action, and that when he [i.e. Thomas] had been summoned for this matter, he had excused his

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 429 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

absence, as is usual, through suitable men, because on the day on which he was to answer he was gravely ill. Nevertheless and although this exception should by law have helped him, he was condemned by a judgment of the court to pay fifty pounds of silver into the fisc for not appearing when he had been summoned by royal edict. After this judgment, however, they started proceedings because he had not agreed to the requests of the aforesaid man; but as a man who could speak powerful words he confounded the impudence of the claimants, pointing out that the aforesaid man had been pleading for a long time under his jurisdiction and finally, as he tried to transfer the case to the cognizance of another judge, had, because he was lacking proof and had lost hope in his case, sworn that he had lost his right through the iniquity of the judge - swearing this oath, however, not on the Holy Gospels as was customary, but, against custom, on some little old book which he had brought along for that purpose. The king indeed had made a law allowing those who were vexed by long drawn out litigation and who made an oath supported by someone else to the effect that the corruption of the judge stood in the way of their rightful demands, to bring the case before the jurisdiction of a higher judge, who had precedence over the other judge. On the strength of this authority the man whom we have mentioned did not fear to defame the truthfulness of the judge by a false oath, disdaining the majesty of the Maker by using some little old book and thinking nothing of perjuring himself on parchment, if only he could thus avoid the authority of the detested judge, for in the words of Augustine: "Who swears on a false stone is a perjurer" 1And I say this because many are mistaken on this point, believing that they are not guilty of the crime of perjury if that by which they swear means nothing. On the contrary, he also is a perjurer who makes a false oath by that which he does not hold for holy, for if you do not think that that is holy, he before whom you swear believes it to be holy. Indeed, when you swear, you do not swear to yourself or a stone, but to your neighbour. If you swear to a man in front of a stone, is that not before the Lord? The stone does not hear you when you speak, but God punishes you when you commit a falsehood. But in that same year that man and two of his sons were struck by the hand of God and underwent His revenge for disdaining the holy character of the oath. G. The version in Ralph de Diceto's Imagines Historiarum.

[The archbishop] had to stand trial after John Marshal had brought a complaint before the king because of some manor of the archbishopric which, it was said, the archbishop had constantly possessed for a long time, and finally, 420F ' "Qui per lapidem falsum jurat, perjurus est." (Aug. Sermo clxxx. c. 12, ed. Bened.) '[This refers to the complete edition of St. Augustine's works by the Benedictines in 8 vols., Paris, 1679 1700, reprinted in 22 vols., 1836-1840.]o The biographer probably borrowed this from Gratian, Decr. p. II. causa xxii. qu. 5, c. 10, where super stands for per.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 430 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

having suffered considerable vexation, he had to undergo an unfavourable sentence on several articles and to give the king very ample suretyship, fixed at five hundred pounds, for the adjudged payment.

H. The narrative in the Life of St. Thomas by Garnier de Pont-SainteMaxence.

He has decided to hold his council at Northampton And by his ban made the prelates and barons go there, All those who ought to hold from him in chief. To this council all together went The earls and the barons, bishops and abbots. Archbishop Thomas did not refuse To go there with the rest of the baronage, But the baron went in great humility. In the archbishop's dwellings horses had been put up By the king's men who were fully aware of the council's intentions. And he told the king that he would not plead in his court Until he had given orders to evacuate all his dwellings: Thus horses and squires were driven out. The baron was there summoned for a given day On which he was to be ready to answer in person. The king had made a law in the kingdom, Which caused the barons of the country great grief, Whereby everyone lost his court through a false oath: If anyone pleaded for land in his lord's court, He should come on his first day with his people And if his case does not go forward, He should go to the justice and make his complaint, He should then come back with two oath-helpers, He should swear, his hand being the third, in his lord's court That the court had deprived him of his full right. By this oath, whether unlawful or sound, He should go to the court of the next lord, Until finally he comes to the court of the sovereign lord. John Marshal pleaded in that way. He claimed a tenement in the court of St. Thomas, But since he obtained no right and achieved nothing there, He deprived [Thomas] of his court by such an oath.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 431 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

[John] complained to the king, who wants to aggrieve [Thomas]. Thus the king caused St. Thomas to be summoned to plead And to be ready on the day and to clear himself From the charge that he had not given John his full right. He was ill on that day and could not ride on horseback: He let two of his men essoin the day. This essoin the king refused to grant And therefore made the archbishop go to Northampton. And the baron went there and did not look for evasion. He dwelled with the monks at St. Andrews. The following day he had to undergo much grief For he went to ask the king's permission To go to the pope, so he told him, overseas: For Roger of York let his cross be borne Everywhere in his diocese, and this the baron refused to accept, And they had appealed thereon, so he has to go there. The following day he therefore went to King Henry And immediately asked for his leave To go to the pope. The king says that he shall not go, But that he shall immediately answer for that delay. He said that he was ill and that he essoined himself, But essoin and illness were of no avail: The king said that he wanted to have his judgment thereon. They proceeded to judgment, but did not want to see right: They have condemned the archbishop, as ignorant people, To give as amercement a sum of three hundred pounds. The baron wanted to gainsay them about the judgment, But they all together have forcefully asked him To renounce his anger and not gainsay them at all, He should do the king's will and wish: In that way he could find his reconciliation. Thus they have made him accept the judgment And find pledges to the king for those three hundred pounds. He quickly found them, as he could do nothing else, And as soon as he had found them, they made him enter in plea And they were going to accuse him in connection with the plea of that John. He refused to answer there, so the baron replied, For this man came to his court and could not show That he had suffered injustice; and when he wanted to turn away from it, He did not want to swear on any other book Than a troper, which he had brought forward. It is not the custom of the land to swear on a troper,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 432 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

But one must kneel before the four Gospels. Yet by this oath he thought he could mislead God. However, within the year the worms could eat his flesh And the bodies of his two sons, who were very dear to him.'

421 The proceedings of the Council of Northampton provide a famous example of the activity of the king's court. In a great judicial assembly of barons and prelates King Henry II brings various charges against Archbishop Thomas Becket who stands accused of irregularities committed during his chancellorship. The king demands specifically that Thomas return certain sums which he had borrowed as chancellor for the siege of Toulouse and obtains his condemnation on this point. He also demands accounts for Thomas' receipts from vacant bishoprics during his term as chancellor, but this is judged unreasonable by the bishops who try, in vain, to placate the king by an offer of money. Tension mounts when the king turns to a charge of treason. Thomas counters by prohibiting the bishops to give judgment against him, by appealing to Rome and by ordering the bishops to excommunicate anyone who should lay hands on him. The king, incensed by Thomas' appeal in breach of the undertakings given at Clarendon in January 1164, requires the bishops to join with the barons in sentencing Thomas. This they are most reluctant to do and they beg Thomas to resign, which he refuses. Thereupon they offer the king, if he excuses them from pronouncing judgment, to accuse Thomas in the Roman curiaand to obtain his deposition; they also appeal to the pope against the archbishop. The barons, however, clamour for the archbishop's condemnation and the court proceeds with its business in Becket's presence: while the earl of Leicester makes a critical speech, the archbishop forbids anyone present to pass judgment, and fearing his imminent condemnation for treason, leaves the hall and shortly afterwards the town and the country. A. The version in Roger of Hoveden's Chronicle. As this was clearly established to the king, he immediately sent for [the archbishop] to afflict him even more and summoned him through good summoners to appear the following day prepared to account to him for his stewardship, which he had exercised in his kingdom before his consecration. The archbishop, however, knowing that a grave threat of ruin hung over him if he hastened to go to the court, tried to find all sorts of delay, either because the term of the summons was too short or because he was gravely ill. But as the king saw that 420H I *[M. Cheney, "The litigation between John Marshal and Archbishop Thomas Becket in 1164: a pointer to the origin of Novel Disseisin?" in: J.A. Guy and H.G. Beale (eds.), Law and social change in British history, London, 1984, 9-26 (Royal Histor. Soc., Studies 40). We owe many thanks to Professor Jacques Thomas for precious help with this translation.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 433 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the archbishop did not appear on that day, he sent to him Earl Robert of Leicester and Earl Reginald of Cornwall to see his illness. When they arrived they found him ill in bed and upon his request granted him permission to appear in court the following day. On that same day he was told and notified by people familiar with the king that if he appeared in the king's court, he would be killed or put in prison. Thereupon the archbishop held counsel with his familiars and on the advice of some wise man he, in the morning before going to court, celebrated with the greatest devotion the mass of St. Stephen the proto-martyr, in whose office one reads the phrase: "Princes did sit and speak against me" 1, and he commended his cause to the highest judge of matters, who is God. Nevertheless, he was afterwards gravely accused because of the celebration of that mass by Bishop Gilbert of London, who spoke for the king, for the bishop of London accused him of having celebrated that mass exercising the art of magic and in contempt of the king. After the celebration of the mass the archbishop put his stole round his neck, put on his black canonical cope and at once left for the king's court, where immediately a large crowd gathered from everywhere, who wanted to see the outcome. He himself, however, carried his cross in his right hand, holding with his left hand the reins of the horse on which he sat and as he arrived at the king's hall he dismounted and, personally carrying his cross, entered the house of the king and afterwards went into the outer room, alone and carrying his cross, for none of his people followed him. As he entered he found a large gathering there and sat down amongst them, while the king was in a more secret room with his familiars. At that moment Bishop Gilbert of London came to the archbishop on the king's behalf, strongly chiding him for thus coming to court armed with a cross, and wanted to snatch it from his hands, but the archbishop held on to it quite strongly. Bishop Henry of Winchester said to the bishop of London: "Brother, let the archbishop keep his cross for he must carry it well". Whereupon the bishop of London was very angry with the bishop of Winchester and said to him: "You have spoken badly, brother; it will turn out badly for you since you have spoken against the king". Afterwards Archbishop Roger of York came to him - "Oh how often did he want to approach the blandishments and utter soft prayers" -2 but the old flames of hatred resisted and he did not let him say one peaceful word, but on the contrary attacked him strongly for thus coming to court armed with a cross and adding that the king had a sharper sword and that if he followed his advice he would lay aside his cross. Whereupon one of the onlookers said: "Believe me, if you believe him, you will be deceived. The fowler plays a sweet tune on his pipe to 3 deceive the birds. Impious venom hides under the sweet honey".

421A ' Ps. cxix. 23. 2 Ovid. Met. iii 376. 3 Ovid. Am. I. viii. 104.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 434 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

But the archbishop of Canterbury refused to put down his cross and said: "If the king's sword hits bodies carnally, my sword hits spiritually and sends the soul to hell". And while he was sitting and waiting, some said secretly that the king's men had sworn his death and from that hour he looked for an opportunity to leave the court and appealed to the presence of the pope to be able to leave all the more commodiously. He also put the cause of his church and his own under the protection of God and the lord pope, and ordered all the bishops to keep his appeal inviolate. Thereupon all the bishops suggested to him that he should submit to the king's will and surrender his archbishopric into his mercy, but the archbishop refused to follow them in this. The king then ordered him through his knights to appear without delay and fully to account to him for all the receipts which as long as he had been chancellor he had received from the proceeds of the kingdom, amounting to £30,000 of silver. To this the archbishop replied: "My lord the king knows that I have often enough rendered accounts for everything which he now claims from me before I was elected as archbishop of Canterbury and upon my election his son Henry, to whom the kingdom had been assigned by oath, and all the barons of the exchequer and Richard de Lucy, the justiciar of England, have quitclaimed me before God and Holy Church for all receipts and computations and all secular exaction on behalf of the lord king and thus I was elected to the administration of this office free and absolved, and therefore I refuse to plead on this any more" When this was reported to the king, he said to his barons: "Give me a speedy judgment on him, who is my liege man and refuses to stand trial in my court", and going out they gave judgment that he deserved to be arrested and put in prison. Thereupon the king sent Earl Reginald of Cornwall and Earl Robert of Leicester to notify him of the judgment that had been pronounced on him and they told him: "Listen to your judgment" To which the archbishop replied: "I forbid you on behalf of Almighty God and on pain of anathema to pronounce judgment on me to-day, as I have appealed to the presence of the lord pope". But as the aforesaid earls returned to the king with his reply, the archbishop left the room and passing through their midst reached his horse, mounted and left the hall, while they were all shouting after him and saying: "Where are you going, traitor, wait and hear your judgment" B. The version in William Fitzstephen's Life of St. Thomas. Afterwards on that same day' the archbishop was questioned as to the £300 received for the castellany of Eye and Berkhamstead. The archbishop having previously declined the suit for which he had not been summoned, said, but not as

421B ' '[Thursday 8 October 1164.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 435 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

in the course of litigation, that he had used that money and much more for the repair of the palace of London and the aforesaid castles, as one could see. The king refused to take upon him what [nevertheless] he had done and demanded judgment. Acting gracefully towards the king the archbishop agreed to restore this money since he would in no way let any amount of money cause anger between them and he appointed several lay guarantors who were his men, viz. Earl [William] of Gloucester and William de Eynsford and a third one. With that agreement they concluded the day. On the third day,' the archbishop was questioned by messengers under the condictio certae pecuniae as to the 500 marks borrowed for the expedition of Toulouse and for another 500 marks because of some royal pledge for it towards some Jew there. He also was questioned under the actio tutelae as to all the receipts from the vacant archbishopric and the other vacancies of bishoprics and abbeys that were vacant at the time of his chancellorship: on all these he was ordered to render account to the king. To this the archbishop replied that he had not come prepared or summoned for this and if he were to be questioned on it, he would at the [appointed] place and time do what was right to his lord the king. On this the king demanded warranty and suretyship, to which he replied that he needed the counsel of his suffragans and clerics. As the king persisted, [the archbishop] left and from that day onwards the barons and other knights who knew the king's state of mind refrained from coming and seeing him in his dwelling. On the fourth day3 all the clergy came to the dwelling of the lord archbishop, who had discussions on this with the bishops and the abbots separately and requested their counsel. On the advice of the noble Bishop Henry of Winchester, who had ordained him and had promised him strong support, it was suggested that the king might be seduced by money, for which he offered him 2,000 marks, which the king refused. Some members of the clergy said to the archbishop that he should protect the Church of God according to the duties of the office which he had taken upon himself, that he should observe his personal dignity and honour the king in all things, saving the reverence for the honour of God and the Church, without any fear since he was being accused of no crime or turpitude: the income of the church of Canterbury had been free from the chancery and from all secular demands by the king, since no vacant abbey would receive a monk from elsewhere who had been elected as abbot, unless he had been relinquished free of all obedience to his abbot. Others, who were secretly under the king's influence, thought quite differently and said: "The lord king is angry and annoyed with him and it seems to us from definite indications that it is the intention of the king that the lord archbishop shall throw himself upon the king's mercy in all things including giving up the archbishopric". Amongst them was Hilary of Chichester who was inclined to take sides with the king and said: "If only you could have stayed Thomas and 0

2 [Friday 9 October 1164.10

'[Saturday 10 October 1164.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 436 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

not become archbishop". He it is also who on some other occasion said about him: "Every plant that is not planted by the Heavenly Father shall be eradicated", as if to say that the declared will of the king had come before his election, about which the archbishop later in his exile said to somebody: "He amongst the brethren occupied the place of Judas the traitor"; afterwards, before the archbishop was recalled and peace made, he was struck by God and died. This [bishop] of Chichester continued saying in his own name and that of some of his accomplices: "Because of your closeness and familiarity with the chancery you know the king better than we do and it must be clear to you whether more can be obtained from him by fighting or by giving in. In the chancery, in peace and in war you have obtained his praise as somebody who exercised his office in an honourable and praiseworthy way, though not without causing some envy: those who then were envious of you, now excite the king against you. Who could vouchsafe for you such important accounting and for such uncertain terms of money? It is said that the king has declared that there is no place any more for both of you in England, he the king and you the archbishop. It is safer to leave everything to his mercy and so to avoid -may it never happen - the king retaining you or laying his hands on you, as his chancellor and one accountable to him and, questioned in connection with his money, as guilty under the leges repetundarum [on extortion] and lacking sureties, for this would bring great hardship upon the church of England and shame to the face of the kingdom". Somebody said: "May he not care so much for himself and his bodily well-being as to dishonour the church of Canterbury which elected him. None of his predecessors has done this, although in those days they have suffered persecution. Moreover, it is possible that he could for a time, and saving the right of the church, return to the king the archiepiscopal fee, the manors and such like, but never his office" Thus they were influenced and drawn towards different sentences, some saying yes and others saying no. The fifth day,4 which was a Sunday, was completely given to discussions with hardly a free hour to breathe and have refreshments. The archbishop did not leave his dwelling. On the sixth day5 a sudden sickness overcame him and prevented him from going to court: his loins were shaking with cold and pain and it was necessary to keep his pillows warm and replace them regularly. As he heard this, the king sent all his earls and several barons requiring from [the archbishop] the outcome of the counsel which he had taken and inquiring if he would not give warranty and suretyship concerning the accounting for the receipts at the time of his chancellorship from the vacant churches and stand trial thereon in his court. The archbishop replied through the bishops that if his weak bodily health allowed it, he would go to court the following day and do what had to be done. 4 '[Sunday 11 October 1164.] 5'[Monday 12 October 1164.]"

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 437 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

The following day6 in the morning he was celebrating at some altar the mass of St. Stephen the protomartyr Etenim sederunt principes,7 when royal messengers, who took the opportunity of his saying mass, told him by some malicious interpretation that he celebrated that mass for himself as another protomartyr Stephen, against the king and his evil people who persecuted him. Afterwards he went to court, and on the way said to Alexander, 8 who preceded him carrying his cross: "I would have done better to come wearing our formal apparel". It had indeed been his intention to walk to the king barefoot, wearing his mass vestments and carrying the cross, and to beg him to grant peace to the Church, but his clerics had diverted him from this plan, nor had they thought that he wanted to carry the cross. Having entered the hall of the castle and dismounted, he took the cross, which Alexander of Wales had until then carried, into his hands. The aforesaid Bishop Gilbert of London was also present at the gate of the hall, to whom Hugh de Nonant, an archdeacon of Lisieux, who had come with the archbishop to whose household he belonged, said: "My lord bishop of London, how can you stand by while he carries the cross?" To which the bishop replied: "My dear one, he always was a fool and always will be". Everyone gave way to him as he entered. He went into the room, sat in his usual place with the bishops around him, the one of London being nearest. All those who were present were dumbfounded and all eyes were directed towards him. The bishop of London advised him to give the cross to one of his clerics and said that it looked as if he was prepared to unsettle the whole kingdom. "You", said [the bishop] of London, "hold the cross in your hands, and if shortly the king holds his sword, we shall have a well equipped king and a well equipped archbishop" To which the archbishop replied: "If it were possible, it would be my intention to always carry it inmy own hand, but now I know what I shall do in order to conserve God's peace in my person and the church of the English. You say what you like: if you were here in my place you would feel differently. But if the lord king, as you say, were shortly to take the sword that surely would not be a sign of peace". The archbishop remembered perhaps how tense the situation had been at Clarendon when the king's messengers had come to him covered in tears. After all the bishops had been invited to join the king, they stayed a long time with him; with them also was Roger, the archbishop of York, who had been the last to arrive at court so that his entry would be all the more conspicuous and he would not seem to belong to the royal council; he also let his anticross, outside its province, be carried in front of him: "One leader threatening the other" 9 He had also been forbidden by the lord pope in a letter that had been sent to him to let a standard-bearer carry his cross in the province of Canterbury, but having received 0

°

6 [Tuesday 13 October 1164.] 7 o[Ps. 118.] B '[Alexander Cuelin or Llewellyn,

a Welshman who served Thomas Becket as crossbearer.]

I Lucanus, Phars., i. 7.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 438 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

this prohibition he had lodged an appeal on the grounds of a false suggestion made by the lord of Canterbury and thus thought that he was safe. Small wonder that pain and lamentation and contrition of heart besieged the archbishop, for he had heard on that day he was to be arrested on the basis of some sentence, or if he could avoid that, he would be killed by a conspiracy of evil men in some engagement and as if the king knew of nothing. In the meantime the archbishop's teacher in holy scripture, Master Herbert,1" said to him quietly and without being noticed: "My lord, if by any chance they lay their evil hands on you, you will have promptly to pronounce sentence of excommunication against them, giving them however a chance of being saved on the day of [the judgment of] the Lord. To which William fitz Stephen who was sitting at the feet of the archbishop replied in a somewhat louder voice, so that the archbishop could hear it: "May he not do this, for this is not what the holy apostles and martyrs of God did when they were arrested and taken to heaven: if this were to happen, he ought rather to pray for them and forgive them and possess his soul in patience, for if he were to suffer for the sake of justice and ecclesiastical freedom, his soul will, God willing, be at peace and his memory blessed. If he were to pronounce sentence against them, it would seem to everyone that he had done what he could to take revenge out of anger and impatience. He also would without any doubt be acting against the decrees, as St. Gregory"' wrote to Archbishop Januarius [of Cagliari]: 2 "You show that your thoughts are not on heavenly matters, but indicate that you have a worldly outlook if you use the curse of anathema to punish some personal injury, which is forbidden by the sacred rules". Upon hearing this, John Planeta"3 tried to hold back the tears that were breaking out and Ralph de Diceto, archdeacon of the church of London, similarly wept copiously there on that day. Hearing all this the archbishop considered the matter in his heart. Some time later this same William fitz Stephen wanted to talk to the archbishop, but was prevented by some royal marshal, who was standing there with his rod declaring that nobody was to talk to him, but after a while he turned to the archbishop and, raising his eyebrows and moving his lips, signalled that he should look at the cross and the image of the Crucified which he was holding and that he should be in prayer. The archbishop well understood this signal and acted in accordance, and was comforted in the Lord, as many years later in France at Saint-Benoit-sur-Loire [Fleury] the archbishop in exile, remembering his various anxieties, told this same William who was on the point of going to see the pope. But, oh Christian king, what are you doing? Because of a barony and a possession, you let judgment be passed in your lay court by the son upon his father, 0

[This is Herbert of Bosham, one of the biographers of Thomas Becket and a member of his household.]' Greg. Ep. ii. 49; Gratian. P. II., causa xxiii, qu. 4, c. 27. 2 [Januarius, bishop of Cagliari (591-604).]o 13 '[See on John Planeta, one of Becket's clerks, D.E. Luscombe, School of Peter Abelard, Cambridge, 1969, 58-59.]O

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 439 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

by the subject upon his archbishop, by the sheep upon his shepherd, although in a lay court not even the lowest cleric is obliged to answer against his will. You say not so, but a king his baron. To which: it is more important to you that you are a Christian, a sheep of God and an adopted son of God, than that you are a king. And hence it is of greater importance that he is an archbishop, a vicar of Jesus Christ, than your baron. Watch the status: his possession is of lesser importance than his order, but the more important is prejudiced by the less important, the worthy by the unworthy. Therefore the order should be stronger and more efficacious so that you should let him go free from your jurisdiction rather than let his barony and possession retain him there against his will. And if you take a higher view of his possession, it does not belong to him but to the Church: it used to be secular, but by being given to God it became ecclesiastical and its secular nature was absorbed into the category of divine law. Therefore the bishop is not subjected to a secular judgment because of [his barony]. Hence he is bound by the judgment of the court neither personally nor because of his possession: the archbishop is subjected to the judgment of the pope alone and the pope to that of God alone. If you had something against him that could not be settled through the intervention of agreement and charity, you should have submitted it to the lord pope and summoned by him he would there have answered our messengers, bishops and clerics; alternatively you could have obtained that the lord pope send legates to your kingdom with the fullness of judicial power. One day, Master Robert de Melun the bishop of Hereford, who for more than 30 years taught dialectic and the bible at Paris, at a meeting of some bishops and numerous clerics, posed the following sad question: "If, may it not happen, the lord archbishop were to be killed for the freedom of the Church in this case, shall we take him for a martyr? To die for mother faith means being a martyr". To which somebody replied: "There is no doubt that if this happens -may this not be the case -it ought to be said that he most gloriously obtained the crown of martyrdom. Faith is not the only cause of martyrdom, but there are several: truth, the freedom of the Church, love for the fatherland or one's neighbours, each one is a sufficient cause as far as God is concerned. St. John the Baptist did not discuss articles of faith with Herod or Herodias, but he died for the truth because he had said: "You are not allowed to have the wife of your brother" Likewise [Thomas] said: "You king are not allowed to oppress the Church with such a servitude that churchmen ordained by God are subjected to your constitutions, which go against the canons". Similarly the seven brothers have undergone various ways of martyrdom under the eyes and the encouragement of their mother to stand firm, because they refused to spurn God's command and the observances of the fathers against eating pork.' 4 The Blessed Archbishop Lanfranc also consulted St. Anselm, who was then an abbot, 14II. Macab. vii.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 440 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

concerning St. Aelfheah 5 whether he was to be placed amongst the martyrs of God, explaining that he was killed by foreign enemies who had attacked England from overseas because he refused to pay the gold which they had demanded from the sons and men of the church of Canterbury. The reply of the Blessed Anselm was: "He was particularly distinguished since he refused to let his sons and familiars be vexed for the treasure which the enemies had demanded, in order to save or prolong his own life. He died for the freedom and the salvation of his fellow-men. Nobody has greater charity than he who gives his life for his friends; and innocence, even when no struggle has taken place, makes a martyr,16 whence also Abel is said to be the first to have worn the crown of martyrdom. Even the pagans understood the wisdom of this sentence: "A dire fate and the crime of fratricide struck the Romans as the blood of the innocent Remus, sacred to his descendants, covered the soil".' 7 Good God, how many clerics and knights who were present pronounced truthful and excellent phrases on the contempt for the world while the archbishop sat there alone holding the cross and all his suffragans and the earls and barons had been called to the king and kept in his presence. Somebody said: "Oh deceptive world, which like a tranquil sea sometimes shows a serene surface while inside tempests are hidden". And somebody else said: "All things are uncertain but God's love not. Oh worldly honours, in which we ought even to fear what we hope for" The bishops who were talking to the king indoors told him, inter alia, that on the day when they went to the archbishop he accused them of treating him badly, because in the past they treated him and the barons with hostility and judged him more severely than was just and in an unheard of manner, since he was not to be condemned for contumacy because of one absence, which they call "against the king's assize" and they should not have condemned him to be in the king's mercy, i.e. to lose all his movable goods. Indeed, in this way the church of Canterbury could be destroyed if the king wanted to oppress him unmercifully and this judgment could in this sort of case also be dangerous for the bishops and the barons themselves, whereas it was established in the various counties that one single sum of money was to be paid by those who were condemned to pay a fine according to the king's mercy. In London, for example, the sum is fixed at 100 s.; Kent is treated more liberally since it is nearer to the sea, has to protect the seacoast of England against pirates and receives the first blows in a war against foreign enemies, which constitutes a heavier burden: therefore the constituted sum there for people who are thus condemned is 40 s. He [Thomas], who had his domicile and his see in Kent, ought only to be judged and taxed according to the law of Kent. The bishops added that on the same day within ten days after the t5 0[Aelfheah, archbishop of Canterbury (984-1012), celebrated on 19 April.]0 16 Eadmer, Vita S. Anselmi, i. 42-4; Migne, Patrol., clviii; Joh. Saresb., Vita S. Ans., c. 6, ib., cci. 17 Horat. Epod. 7.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 441 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

giving of the judgment, he had called them before the lord pope and forbidden them by the authority of the lord pope henceforth to sit in judgment on him for a secular complaint which was moved against him concerning the period before his archbishopric. The king was impressed and sent his earls and many barons to him in order to inquire whether he maintained this appeal and prohibition, particularly since he was his liege man and was bound to him as well by the common oath as by the special stipulation truthfully made at Clarendon that he would observe his royal dignities in good faith, without malice and lawfully, one of which was that his bishops were to be present at all judgments, except a blood judgment. They were also to ask him whether he was prepared to give pledges and stand trial in the king's court concerning the accounts of the chancellorship. Looking at the picture of the crucified Lord, firm at heart and showing a stern face and sitting down to preserve his archiepiscopal dignity, he gave the following excellent and steady reply, without hesitating for one moment. "Men, brothers, earls and barons of the lord king, Iam certainly bound to our liege lord the king by homage, fealty and oath, but the main concomitants of the priestly oath are justice and equity. I am bound to honour and be loyal to the lord king with all due devotion and subjection and obliged to obey him in all things for God's sake, saving the obedience to God, the dignity of the Church and my personal archiepiscopal honour: hence I reject this plea since, as I received no summons, I am held neither to give account nor to stand trial in any cause except that of John. 8 I confess and remember that I have received numerous administrative tasks and dignities from the lord king in which I loyally served him here and overseas and also that I have spent all my own income in his service - of which I am glad and have obliged myself for large sums to my creditors. However, after I was elected archbishop with divine permission and by the grace of the lord king and was about to be consecrated, the king before the consecration declared me to be quit and also declared that the income of the church of Canterbury was free, quit and absolved of all secular demand by the king, even though now in his anger he denies this: this is known clearly to many amongst you and to all the clerics of this kingdom. I pray, beg and call you as witnesses, since you are well aware of this truth, that you should assert this in the face of the lord king against whom it is not safe, even though it is permitted, to nominate witnesses, nor is there any need to since I am not standing trial. After my consecration I was determined to carry my new honour and charge with labour and pains and to be of some help to God's Church, whose head I seemed to be. If it is not given to me to be successful in this and if I cannot be useful because of some adversity, I do not blame the lord king or anyone else, but mainly my own sins. God is powerful enough to increase His grace for whom and when he wants to. I cannot give pledges to render accounts I have already obliged here all the 18O[This is John Marshal. For this case against Thomas Becket, see our no. 420.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 442 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

bishops and my helpful friends, nor ought I to be forced to do this since no judgment has been given thereon, nor am I standing in a case of account, since I was not called to that case, nor did I receive any summons, except for the case with John Marshal. As to the harassment that I undergo in connection with the prohibition addressed today to the bishops on my appeal, I admit that I told my fellow-bishops that they condemned me more severely than was just for one absence that did not amount to a contumacy, against custom and precedent of great antiquity. Therefore also I appealed against them and forbade them to pronounce judgment again on me, pending this appeal concerning a secular complaint for the time before I became an archbishop and I maintain this appeal and I put my person as well as the church of Canterbury under the protection of God and the lord pope". He had finished: the other magnates returned to the king in silence, considering and examining his words. Some said: "See, we have heard the blasphemy of the prohibition from his own mouth". Some of the barons, who lived by the king's grace, entered the room turning away their heads but, still looking at him from the corner of their eyes, talked to each other just loudly enough to be heard by him and said: "King William who conquered England knew how to tame his clerics. He captured his own brother Odo the bishop of Bayeux who had rebelled against him. He threw Archbishop Stigand of Canterbury in a dark pit and condemned him to perpetual imprisonment. And the father of our lord king, Count Geoffrey of Anjou, who subjected Normandy with a strong hand, caused Arnulf bishop elect of S6ez' 9 and several of his clerics to be emasculated and the organs of the eunuchs to be carried before him in a basin, because he had without his consent accepted his election to the church of S~ez and behaved himself as the elect". Having heard the archbishop's reply, the king insisted, ordering and adjuring the bishops by the homage and the fealty which they owed and had sworn to him that they should pronounce judgment together with the barons on the archbishop. They started to excuse themselves, referring to the prohibition issued by the archbishop. The king did not give in, maintaining that his simple prohibition could not stand against what had been done and sworn at Clarendon. Against which the bishops explained that the archbishop could lay his hand heavily upon them if they disobeyed his prohibition and appeal, and that for the good of the king and the kingdom they wanted and had to obey the prohibition that had been made. At last the king was persuaded and, having heard his counsel, the bishops went to the archbishop. Robert of Lincoln was weeping and some others could hardly retain their tears. The aforesaid [bishop] of Chichester spoke as follows: "My lord archbishop, saving your grace, we have a lot to complain about as far as you are concerned. You have greatly offended us, your bishops. You have placed us in a 19 '[The elect of S~ez maltreated by Count Geoffrey was called Gerard and not Arnulf: Fitz Stephen confuses him with Bishop Arnulf of Lisieux, see F. Barlow, Letters of Arnulf of

Lisieux, London, 1939, p. xxxiv (Camden third series, lxi).]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 443 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

tight corner, by this your prohibition you have placed us as it were between the hammer and the anvil, for if we disobey we are caught for disobedience and if we obey we shall be caught in the bonds of the constitution and the king's anger. Indeed, when in the past we met with you at Clarendon, 0 the king induced us to undertake the observance of his royal dignities and, to prevent any hesitation, he showed us the royal customs, of which he talked, set down in writing. At long last we gave our assent to them and promised to observe them, you in the first place and we your suffragans afterwards at your command. As the lord king, moreover, demanded our sworn and sealed warranty we said that he had to be content with the priestly oath which we had proffered, viz. to observe those royal dignities of his truly, faithfully, without malice and lawfully. The king was persuaded and agreed, but now you force us to go against it, forbidding us to be present at the judgment which he demands from us. Against this inconvenience and to prevent you from adding anything else detrimental to us, we appeal to the lord pope and thus we obey your prohibition". The archbishop replied: "I hear what you say and God willing I shall be present at the pursuit of the appeal. At Clarendon, however, nothing was conceded by me or by you through me except saving the honour of the Church. As you yourselves say, we there retained three limitations, viz. in good faith, without malice and lawfully, thus saving the dignities of our churches which we have by pontifical right, for what is due against the faith of the Church and against the laws of God cannot be observed in good faith and lawfully. Also it is not the dignity of a Christian king to let perish the liberty of the Church which he has sworn to observe. Moreover, the written text of these same royal dignities, as you put it, was transmitted by the lord king to the pope for confirmation, but he received them back not with approval but rather with disapproval. He gave a doctrinal example for us to follow, ready with the church of Rome, to accept what it accepts and to reject what it rejects. If, moreover, we lapsed at Clarendon - the flesh is weak -we must take heart again and with the strength of the Holy Spirit fight the old enemy who hopes that those who stand will fall and those who have fallen will not get up again. If we granted and in good faith and under oath made unjust promises, know that people who swear illicit undertakings are in no way legally bound" The bishops returned to the king and with his leave were excused from judging the archbishop and sat down apart from the barons; nevertheless the king demanded from the earls and barons his judgment on the archbishop. The sheriffs and aged barons of the second rank were called upon to join them and to be present at the judgment. After a while the magnates returned to the archbishop. Earl Robert of Leicester, who excelled above the others by the maturity of his age and character, put pressure on some of the others to declare themselves; and when they were reticent, he started to remind them article by article of the business that had been conducted at Clarendon, as he had done before. Bishop Hilary of Chichester, 20

'[This is the council of Clarendon held in 1164.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 444 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

who was far from hilarious, said to the archbishop that he should hear the judgment concerning him as one who had committed manifest royal lese-majesty and broken the promise that had truthfully been given there. Refusing to endure this any longer, the archbishop replied: "What is it that you want? Have you come to give judgment on me? You should not do it: a judgment is a sentence given after a controversy. I have said nothing to-day [as I would have done] in a lawsuit. I have not been called here to plead a case except the one with John, who is my opponent. Moreover, you cannot pass judgment on me: Iam a sort of father to you, but you are palace magnates, lay leaders, secular persons. I shall not listen to your adjudication" The magnates left and after a while the archbishop stood up and, carrying his cross, went to the door which had been firmly locked all day and which went open as it were by itself. Some foul-mouthed man followed him saying that he left as a perjurer to the king; another said that he left as a traitor who spurned the judgment of the lord his king. In the hall, which was full of people, he stumbled on a pile of wood which he had not noticed, but did not fall; and reaching the gate where his horses were, he mounted and took Master Herbert, who in all the hurry had not been able to reach his own horse, with him to his lodgings in the monastery of St. Andrew. Oh, what a martyrdom his spirit underwent on that day! But he returned all the happier from the council since he was considered worthy there of suffering contumely for the name of Jesus. Having prayed before the altar he placed the cross beside the altar of the Blessed Mary. He sat down surrounded by his familiars and William fitz Stephen said to him: "This truly was a bitter day" To which he replied: "The last day will be even more bitter". And after a while he spurred them on, saying: "Let all of you observe silence and peace so that no bitter word shall leave your mouths. I shall speak ill of no one whatever you answer, let them do the reviling. It behoves a superior person to suffer this and an inferior one to do that. Let us be masters of our ears as they are of their tongues. The slander does not hurt me, but him who realizes that he commits slander" Having heard of the archbishop's departure and of the courtiers pursuing him with vile language, and having been asked by Robert de Melun, bishop of Hereford, and possibly also by somebody else why he had taken no measures, the king ordered criers to go into the streets and forbid anyone to hurt him with vile or insulting language, so that neither he nor anyone from his entourage should be molested in any way. That evening the archbishop had dinner with his people as was his habit and afterwards all his knights who were present rendered him their homage and with his leave tearfully left him. Afterwards the archbishop sent three bishops, Walter of Rochester his chaplain and two he had ordained, Robert of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 445 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Hereford and Roger of Worcester, to the king to ask his permission and safe conduct for leaving the following day. They found the king in good temper, but he postponed his answer till the following morning. Having heard his reply from the messengers, the archbishop feared that this delay in the king's answer might contain some danger for him. It was night, the hour of compline, and the archbishop said to his associates that he wanted to keep vigil in church. He had indeed spent one of the past nights in vigil and prayer in church with his clerics, mortifying themselves and invoking on their knees all saints, male and female, who occurred in their litany. Some of his clerics told him that they also wanted to keep the vigil in the church with him, but he refused, saying that he did not want them to be vexed. In the silence of the dead of night he left accompanied by only two people and by none of his clerics or knights. As the king and the whole council heard this on the morrow and counsel had been taken what had to be done, [the king] decided to let the archbishop keep all the possessions of the church of Canterbury in peace and not to dismiss any of his officials because of the pending appeal. And following upon his heels he at once sent the archbishop of York and four bishops, viz. Gilbert of London, Hilary of Chichester, Bartholomew of Exeter and Roger of Worcester and two earls and two barons and three clerics from his household to the lord pope to pursue these matters. The rest of the day and the council was spent on discussing what army of foot-soldiers was to be sent against the rebellion in Wales and Rhys [ap Gruffudd] who broke his treaty; and various persons, clerics and laymen, put down in writing various quantities of fighters whom they promised to send to meet the king's request for help, whereupon the council was dissolved.

C. The version in Herbert of Bosham's Life of St. Thomas. Since, however, he did not appear in person at the first summons, although he sent an attorney, he was summoned again and time and place were also indicated, viz. that noble and royal castle which is called Northampton. The time, unless I am mistaken, was the month of October, the fifth day of the week and the sixth day before the feast of St. Calixtus, pope and martyr.' All the bishops and magnates of the kingdom were by royal edict most strictly convoked to attend on this day and place. But the boat which so far had been on the coast was now to be launched on the high seas, for we who so far had been harbouring in port, had now to sail on the large and spacious sea and conduct our ship between the dogs of Scylla and

421C

8 October 1164.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 446 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Charybdis, between the Syrtes and numerous other dangerous swirling seas. Oh whirls of the seas, oh dangers of the world, all your waves and all your currents passed over our heads: the spirit of the storm has spoken and his currents have been unleashed. Having been summoned, as we said, to this case or rather to this struggle, the champion of the Lord arrived at the aforesaid moment and place. And from the start, the anointed of the Lord, the priest of Christ, was surrounded by querulous persons as by a swarm of bees, and civil complaints were most sharply wielded against him as so many pungent stings. Since it was well known, as we already said, that he had not personally appeared on the first royal summons and as he alleged having sent a sufficient attorney, nevertheless, by the judgment of all the magnates and even the bishops, all his goods were quickly declared to be confiscated unless the royal clemency were willing to mitigate the judgment, i.e., as the popular saying in this land goes, he was judged to be in the king's mercy for all his movable goods. As he heard that he had already been judged thus, he said: "What sort of a sentence and what sort of ajudgment this is, whether of written or customary law, is clear to all skilled in the law; I do not have to say anything against this, but if I keep silent, future centuries will not, for this is a new sort of judgment in accordance possibly with the new canons which were recently promulgated at Clarendon" And moving on from the question ofjudgment, he protested that it was unheard of that [archbishops] of Canterbury were judged in whatever case in the court of the kings of the English, because of the dignity of their church and their personal authority, since [the archbishop] of Canterbury is the one spiritual father of the king and all who live in the kingdom, wherefore the archbishop has always been respected by the kings and the magnates of the realm. However, he complained much more about his suffragan bishops than about the judgment and the judging magnates, declaring that it was an innovation and a new procedure to let an archbishop be judged by his suffragans and a father by his sons, adding that it would be a lesser evil to laugh at the uncovered private parts of a father than to judge the person of the father himself. Indeed, so he said, their tie of profession and obedience was strict and continued to hold them, binding and uniting them because of their profession to their superior, as the members to the head; therefore even if they were subjected to the kings because of their temporal possession, this did not mean that they could or ought to pass judgment upon their superiors in temporal or civil matters: this was even forbidden, since the power of obedience was such that they were obliged not only to give up their temporal possessions, but also to accept great personal sacrifices. He objected against the fact that all the bishops had pronounced such a sentence which did not even deserve the name of a sentence, being rather a furnace of sheer hatred. Therefore he was not afraid that these events could cause any prejudice to the freedom of his successors or have any consequences in the future. He even declared in secret that he might have placed the bishops who were thus passing judgment on their archbishop or rather

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 447 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

unleashing verbal violence against their archbishop under an interdict of suspension, if it had not been that as a champion of Christ he was preparing for a greater conflict. And this sentence, thus pronounced on the fifth day, was the first action of the council. The following day2 the king himself demanded from the archbishop the money which, so he maintained, he had borrowed from him as chancellor at the time, viz. five hundred pounds of silver. Hearing this the archbishop was as it were dumbfounded and said: "It is uncivil particularly for a person of royal magnificence to reclaim what has been given. I do not deny that at the time of my chancellorship the money which, as I now hear, you reclaim has been handed over to me, yet not as a loan but as a gift. And it would be better to recall now how well I served you in that office instead of, as I feel, being spitefully vindictive against me for what was then transacted between us". But without paying attention to those words the king demanded a judgment and the aforesaid bishops and magnates were willing to give it and adjudicated that the sum of money demanded had to be paid, since the archbishop had admitted receiving it, albeit by way of donation which however he was not then able to prove. After the money had thus been adjudged to him, the king demanded warranty, but the archbishop replied that he had goods in the kingdom worth several times the adjudicated money and that if the king did not mind him saying so, it was not fitting for him to give other warranty or for the king to demand it. But to this it was objected that he did not have so much any more in movable goods, as all his movable goods had been confiscated by judgment the day before.3 Hence the warranty was demanded with insistence and he was told in very sharp terms and to his face that he had either to give surety or to stay there: a threatening insinuation that his body might be arrested. Faced by the king's frontal attack and seeing that the archbishop was destitute and could not count on the support of his suffragans but was rather beginning to flounder, several of them were moved to come forward spontaneously and give suretyship for him. There were five sureties, each of them for £ 100 and this exaction of the archbishop's money on the sixth day was the second action of the council. On the following day, a Saturday, 4 we were not enlightened by the light of the sabbath but it was a day of labour and affliction since, as we already said, the king took a position directly against us, for on this Saturday the king demanded accounts from the archbishop for everything he had had in his custody during the period of his chancellorship under the king's mandate, viz. the then vacant bishoprics and abbeys and also the numerous and large baronies and honours 2

Friday, 9 October 1164.

3 '[At the beginning of William Fitzstephen's narrative we are told of the condemnation of

Becket to fines of 300 pounds in connection with Eye and Berkhamstead, 500 marks in connection with the expedition to Toulouse and 500 marks in connection with a Jewish loan.]0 4 Saturday 10 October 1164.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 448 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

whose custody he, as chancellor, then had: for all those, the king said, he had not yet been asked to account, nor had he done so and the sum for which he was to account was estimated at about thirty thousand marks. The palace people and all the others who had come to the council were astounded when they heard this and started here and there to mutter that the arrest of the archbishop was the only thing left to be done, whereas others who were becoming more and more numerous expected even worse to happen. The archbishop, however, as we said before, who had entered the sea in this castle to battle against the dangerous waves of the sea of this world, was so perturbed by this sudden and unexpected demand of accounts, that he moved as if he were drunk and all his wisdom devoured, as the psalmist says: "They are perturbed, move as if drunk and all their wisdom is devoured". 5 After the bishops were convoked and discussed thoroughly what had to be answered to this and done, Henry the then bishop of Winchester, of holy memory, who was on the archbishop's side but did not dare to show it out of fear, finally reminded them that at the election of the archbishop, who then was archdeacon of Canterbury and chancellor of the king, the income of the English church was freed from all links with the court, as we remember saying when writing about the archbishop's election. The other bishops could not disagree with his so evident testimony. Therefore all the bishops finally and jointly bore witness before the king and the council to these words and thus they were dismissed towards the evening of the Saturday, although we were not left in peace because of these words, but the accounts that were thus demanded from the archbishop on the Saturday were the third action of the council. The following day, viz. the Sunday6 we had a rest because it was Sunday and having been summoned to appear on the second day [of the week], which is called Monday7 in the vernacular, we waited for the contest. However, on that day the archbishop became gravely ill during the night, struck by an illness that is called a colic, but the king and the others in the hall considered this to be a fiction and no real illness and sent some of the major magnates of the kingdom, who had gathered, to the archbishop to examine the matter. The archbishop told them: "As you see, I cannot come to court today as God prevents me through a grave illness, but know for certain that God willing I shall appear at the court tomorrow, on a stretcher if need be" But heaven granting and the Lord willing, what the champion of Christ had wished came about and he completely recovered the following night. On the following day, the third day [of the week],' which is called the day of Mars in the vernacular and for us truly became a martial day, he entered the court not as a sick man carried on a stretcher, but as the tower in Jerusalem directly Ps. 106. v. 27. Sunday 11 October 1164. Monday 12 October 1164. ' Tuesday 13 October 1164. 5 6

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 449 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

positioned against Damascus. However, early in the morning before he entered the court the bishops came to him confounded and terrified, and it was rumoured generally in the palace and here and there in the council, but not yet among the public, that all the archbishop could expect on that day was to suffer arrest or even worse. This had also been secretly instilled into the ears of the archbishop by some courtiers, who still loved him because of the fees and honours which he had previously bestowed on them. Hence the bishops, not openly, because of the enormity, but under the cloak of insinuation, artfully suggested that the archbishop subject himself completely to the king's will and decision for everything, even the archbishopric, hoping that the king's wrath and indignation might thus be assuaged, adding that if this were not done he would soon hear in court that he was accused of the crime of perjury and be judged as a traitor for not respecting the worldly honour which he had included in his oath of fealty to his worldly lord, by not observing his royal customs, which he had promised by a new sworn obligation specially to observe. Some said, with the support of the others, that it was no good to suffer the king's indignation and to be an archbishop, as this was the disturbance of kingship and priesthood rather than peace, a great detriment and no advantage, and that this sort of a bishopric was in fact more like a gibbet than a bishopric: by this counsel the bishops united against the Lord and against his anointed. Thus not only the aforesaid gnats, bees and scorpions but also fat bulls surrounded the champion of Christ, so that to this suffering head the words may be applied that were spoken about the sufferings of that other Head: "Numerous calves have surrounded me and fat bulls have besieged me". 9 The fat bulls were those bishops, the calves their numerous followers who all had but one counsel, i.e. total submission to the king's will: by these daily hammerings, by these daily pressures they hoped to obtain that he would fall upon his knees and give in and that under this pressure or rather oppression he would submit to worldly power the shoulders which he had put under the pastoral burden. This pillar of the Church, solid and strong, had once, as we said above, wavered but was now all the more unshaken, rooted in charity, founded upon a strong rock and standing firmly on it, firm against the onslaught of the enemy and strong against [the danger] of falling. Therefore this main pillar, this leading pillar of the pillars, i.e. of the bishops, who had understood from the insinuation of the brethren their vote and counsel, addressed them as follows: "Brethren, as you can see, the world rages against me and the enemy rises, but what I deplore most tearfully, because it is more detestable than everything else, is that the sons of my mother fight against me. Even though I will keep silent about it, future centuries will tell how you have left me alone in the struggle, how you have twice already in two consecutive days passed judgment on me, your archbishop and father, although a sinner, and you, who should have risen and stood with me against the evil ones, have become to me like thorns in the eye and a lance in the side. And I even understand from your 9 Ps. 21 v. 13.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 450 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

words that you are ready to judge me in a secular court, not only in a civil but also in a criminal case, but nevertheless I forbid you all jointly by virtue of your obedience and at the peril of your order to take part henceforth in a judgment where my person is at stake, and to stop you doing this I appeal to the Roman church, our mother and the refuge of all the oppressed, and if, as is already rumoured amongst the people, it should come about that secular men lay their hands on me, we similarly order you by the virtue of obedience that you shall exercise the fitting ecclesiastical censure for your father and archbishop. Know one thing, however, that although the world rages, the enemy rises, the body quivers and the flesh is weak, I however shall, God willing, not shamefully give in or commit the enormity of leaving the flock that is entrusted to me" After this short speech one of the bishops at once appealed against that command of the archbishop, viz. that the bishops should not hesitate to exercise ecclesiastical censure if secular men were to lay their hands on him after he had been judged; this bishop was Gilbert of London. And after these words of the archbishop, the bishops left and hurried to the court except two who only left the archbishop's room where the bishops had met somewhat later, having secretly comforted and encouraged the archbishop. They were the aforesaid Bishop Henry of Winchester of holy memory, who, as we said before, had consecrated the archbishop and therefore suffered more under this affliction, and Bishop Jocelin of Salisbury, but out of fear they acted in secret. So the archbishop went to the court as to his final agony and prepared himself for the struggle there, where he was expected alone since he conducted the struggle against a sole [enemy] and after the bishops had gone, he quickly entered a church and at the suggestion of a canon, who to judge from his posture and appearance was a regular canon, he celebrated the mass of the blessed protomartyr Stephen, which has the following introit: "The princes have sat down and spoken against me". And although it was not [St. he did it Stephen's] feast-day he celebrated that mass wearing the pallium, unless l0 because it was the birthday of the blessed pope and martyr Calixtus. How great was the devotion of the celebrant in that mass, how great the compunction of his heart and the emotion of the whole outer and inner man! How numerous and great his sighs and tears: he often was compelled during prayer to end the collect before it was finished and had with difficulty to return and begin again at the start. At last he finished mass as best he could and with difficulty because of the abundance of his tears and his frequent sobbing, but at once he left behind the face which he had worn during mass, viz. the face of humility, and assumed the face of a man, the face of a lion, very similar to those prophetic or rather evangelical animals described by the prophet, among which there was the face of a man and the face of a lion. And he would surely have gone to the court in those mystic and priestly garments decorated also with the pallium, in which he 10

Calixtus is celebrated on 14 October and not on 13 October as suggested by Herbert of Bosham.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 451 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

had celebrated mass there, unless some knights-templars, great and religious men, whom he had previously counted among his familiars, had retained him, for he said that he wanted the court to see and understand whom it had already twice judged and whom it was even ready to condemn. However, at the behest of the said men he laid down the sacred garment which we mentioned, but he took with him, albeit in secret, the Viaticum of ecclesiastic communion, i.e. the Eucharist, because many and important people believed and feared that on that day either arrest or something worse was imminent, as he himself also had very secretly been told by some courtiers. This made him all the more audacious and secure so that our evangelical lion went to the court as to his prey; there the bishops and magnates had already met, waiting for the arrival of the archbishop and the end of the affair. As he entered the hall, the archbishop soon took the cross from the cross-bearer who walked in front of him and openly and in the sight of everybody carried the cross himself, as the standard-bearer of the Lord carries the standard of the Lord in the battle of the Lord, fulfilling not only spiritually but also figuratively the words of the Lord: "If somebody wants to be my disciple let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me";' in truth this mystical gesture was the presage of his future crucifixion. As they saw this, they all were dumbfounded: the bishops fearful and the magnates indignant. As the king, however, who was elsewhere in an inner room, heard this, he was beside himself and one of the bishops who forthwith ran towards the archbishop as he entered the hall was dumbfounded by this sight and at once tried to tear the cross away from the hands of the archbishop, but in vain: this was Master Robert de Melun, whom the archbishop had ordained a priest and consecrated as bishop of Hereford. Another bishop, however, who had similarly rushed forward from the other side of the cross, scolded him saying: "If the king were to draw his sword as you have done now with yours, what hope can there ever be of bringing about peace between you? But you have always been a fool and your folly will be revealed to-day" How insulting to suggest that the disciple who was already partly on the cross did not want to deny himself the glory of the crucified Master: this was the aforesaid Bishop Gilbert of London. But the disciple who followed the Master on the cross did not repay malediction with malediction: insensitive to the insult he went ahead carrying the cross, until from the hall he entered into another inner house, where he sat amongst the bishops holding the cross in his hands. Oh what a sight to see Thomas, who in the past was conspicuous by his numerous foreign garments, now wearing a hair-shirt and a cross! In the past he was surrounded in the hall by a circle of so many and such important people to whom hardly anyone had access except the magnates only, now however he was by himself and alone and hardly anyone wanted to approach him, but they all stayed away from him so that the word of the Master was fitting for the disciple: " Mark 16, 24.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 452 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

"You have removed from me friend and neighbour and my acquaintances for misery".2 And the other word of the prophet: "He shall sit by himself and keep silent because he has elevated himself above himself". 3 This spectacle, God's judgment, however terrible also had something pleasing, i.e. the sight of Thomas carrying the cross in the hall where in an affluence of delights and wealth he had displayed all sorts of vanity: through a just judgment of God he began to undergo the punishment of rejection in the very place where he had known so much worldly elation. How true is the saying of the wise man: "When you enter the service of God, stand in justice and fear and prepare your soul against temptation"." Soon afterwards all the bishops and magnates were convoked by the voice of a crier and the king lodged the grave and great complaint that the archbishop had, to the shame of himself and the kingdom, entered the court not as if it were that of a king but that of a betrayer whom he wanted thus to expose for his betrayal, an unheard of deed in the court of a king of Christian religion. Several supported the king's word and said that [the archbishop] had always been vain and proud and that this insult concerned not only the king but the whole kingdom and all of them and that the king had deserved this to happen to him, who had made such a man the second after him in the kingdom, to whom all were subjected and who had no equal. Thus hither and thither they all shouted that he manifestly was a traitor who would not even, in accordance with his oath, respect the worldly honour of his lord and king, from whom he had received so many and important things, but rather by so doing impress upon the king and the kingdom an everlasting stain of betrayal. Therefore action should be taken against him as a perjurer and traitor to the king. This shouting became ever stronger so that those who heard it throughout the whole hall were struck with fear and horror, so much so that when some men came down from the room where the king was with his people to the lower house, where we were, the archbishop and all of us who were in that house lifted our hands to strengthen ourselves with the sign of the cross. Nobody, however, spoke to the archbishop nor did he address anyone except for the disciple who wrote this and who sat at the feet of him who was holding the cross. When some of the courtiers, who seemed to exercise the office of doorkeeper in the hall, came down in a great rush from the aforesaid inner room carrying rods and sticks and looked at the archbishop and the disciple who was sitting at his feet with menacing faces and pointing fingers, all those who were in the house crossed themselves and the archbishop lowered his head and said to the disciple at his feet: "I am also afraid for you, but you ought not to be frightened, one day you will share my crown".' 5 To which the disciple quickly answered: "Neither you nor I ought to be afraid, for you have erected that noble and triumphant standard, 2 Ps. 87, 19. "3 Threni

'[=the Lamentations of the Prophet Jeremiah]' 3, 28.

'4 Eccli. 2, 1. '5 This line may

be reminiscent of Luke 23, 42-43.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 453 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

sacred and terrible to every power by which many have won many wars, and these words of ours are taught and confirmed, inter alia, by the exemplary battles of Constantine the Great of holy and imperial memory. But this illustrious standard of the cross not only worldly but also heavenly powers have triumphed and won, and the world as well as hell have been subjugated by it and through it". And the disciple added: "Know that you who once were the unconquerable standardbearer of the king of the English would now be the most disgraceful, if as standardbearer of the King of the angels you let yourself be vanquished". As master and disciple were thus talking into each other's ears, the bishops were allowed by the king to separate from the magnates and have counsel by themselves, for the bishops were in an awkward predicament, as they would either incur the king's indignation or condemn their archbishop together with the magnates in the court on a criminal charge, which however they did not dare, because it was too manifest a transgression of the holy canons. For clever people who want to do evil do not just put their hands to any evil undertaking, but only to those which they can hide with mendacity and fraud. Hence the words of the psalmist: "They have talked to hide their snares saying: who shall see us?".' 6 Their ways are similar to those of the adulterous woman who according to the saying of a wise man: "eats and wiping her mouth says: I have done no wrong".' 7 No clever persons would do any evil if their wickedness could be unmasked evidently and without any tergiversation. Thus also in this awkward predicament the bishops mulled and mulled again over the question what was to be done and how they could get out of these straights and finally, by common counsel of them all, they decided to accuse their archbishop before the Roman see of the crime of perjury, truthfully obliging themselves and promising the king to make every possible effort to obtain the deposition of the archbishop on condition that the king was willing to free them from the judgment which was now imminent. Binding themselves thus to the king and accusing the archbishop of crime before the Roman audience, they expressly included in that appeal their own persons, their churches and their office. And so having been separated from the magnates with the king's agreement, they made their appeal and sat with the archbishop, each one in his own order. They all were struck with even greater terror and horror than before, since it was believed with great certainty that, as the king was sitting with the magnates. though without the bishops, as a tribunal, the archbishop's arrest or even worse was imminent. And indeed the magnates and all the major figures of the kingdom, speaking as a raging and roaring lion, passed judgment on the archbishop as a perjurer and traitor, as we were told afterwards; what thatjudgment was, however, we had to guess rather than knowing it, as will soon be shown. As the moment of giving judgment was approaching, the king stayed behind with a few people and all 16

Ps. 34, 7.

17

Prov. 30, 20.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 454 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the others went down from that room to the lower house, where we were, to pronounce it and stood before the archbishop. As they came down, the archbishop wanted to stand up, but the disciple who sat at the feet of the cross secretly intimated to him that it was in no way suitable in those circumstances that the father should stand up for the sons, particularly as he was holding with his own hands the standard of so great a King. The archbishop agreed and did not stand up for those who were standing in front of him nor could any indication of pusillanimity or inert trepidation be detected in any gesture, word or action of his. The noble man Robert, at the time earl of Leicester, most honoured amongst the honoured, who had been asked to act as spokesman, started to talk. First of all he recalled how he was received in the king's grace and household, how many and how important things he had received from the king's hand and how it now seemed that he ungratefully had forgotten them all, repaying good with bad and grace and glory with hatred and ignominy. And this earl, a great and generous man, who had always loved the archbishop from the time of his chancellorship with pure and sincere sympathy, which now he was hiding for fear, protracted his sad and compassionate speech, afraid of the conclusion. As the archbishop quickly noticed this, he interrupted the earl's speech and forbade, as a father his sons, all those present, by the virtue of obedience and by the faith which they professed in Christ, to pronounce such a judgment by which his person would be sentenced. Nevertheless the earl, unwillingly as was visible, carried on in a drawling way and morosely heading for the pronouncement [of the sentence]. As, however, he reached the point where he was going to condemn the archbishop for perjury and as he was, as could be seen, going to pronounce him a perjurer and possibly, as could be guessed, a traitor, the archbishop feeling what was coming, immediately and without waiting for the judgment stood up and protested that it was not for them to judge their archbishop for a crime - that is why we do not know for certain what was judged. Several who were present in order to pass judgment hastened to shout that he ought to leave the court as a perjurer and a traitor, but he turned towards them and, looking sternly at them, replied that if it had not been for his priesthood and if he had been allowed to, he would have defended himself against them [on this accusation] of perjury and treason. And thus we left the council. This is the disciple who bears witness to these events and who has seen them and written them down and who in these circumstances alone followed the archbishop, who was carrying his cross, outside the interior house until we entered the hall: on that day we became a spectacle for the world, angels and men. Having left the court and mounted on horseback, the archbishop had difficulty in directing his horse, carrying his cross and giving his blessing to those who asked for it: so large was the multitude of people who asked for his blessing, for as a presage of things to come, the multitude of the people full of adoration and asking for his blessing threw themselves in front of him as he left the court and carried the cross through streets and squares. As he reached his lodging, viz. the church of St.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 455 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Andrew, a conventual monastery of religious monks, the tables were put ready and as usual it became a great and solemn occasion. Soon, however, many of our household, particularly the knights and the young people of important families, asked permission to take their leave out of fear of the king and, having obtained it, went away from us in great anxiety and bitterness, illustrating in our case the pronouncement of the wise man who said: "A friend is somebody who shares your table, but does not stay on the day of need". I But they were excusable since they were laymen and therefore not without reason fearful of his indignation, although there were among those deserters quite a few men of our office, clerics I say, who were less excusable and had greater guilt, who as soon as they saw the future cloud between the king and the archbishop quickly flew away from us as if they were human swallows fearing the coming winter. Those people were like swallows and reeds, giving in at the first impulse of the wind, in truth they were sons of the breeze, friends of fortune, only keen on prey and pursuing their own aims. But I am not going to carry on exposing their shame: let it be sufficient that I have briefly mentioned it, particularly since afterwards, seeing the outcome of the events, they humbly confessed their error and did grave penitence for their desertion of their pastor and father. Nevertheless it was fitting to mention this so that in the future the men of our office shall follow their pastor and father without looking back and leaving him in difficult times, for as the wise man said: "A friend loves at all times and a brother is proved in difficult circumstances" Forgetting about those who left us and were not of us, let us pursue the narrative, only mentioning to the glory of such an archbishop that after some had withdrawn and others had left, he obscured everything by the strength of his soul as a man who relied firmly on the constancy of his virtues, as a column upholding the whole structure of virtues without which it dould not stand for a moment, but would utterly collapse. A great soul is in the habit of counting for little whatever happens in times of prosperity or adversity, considering, as somebody has said, that prosperity does not last forever and hardship is not durable. Since as we left the court night was falling, the archbishop, having finished the office of vespers, at once reclined at table with those of his followers whom he then had with him and during dinner a text was read from the HistoriaTripartitaof the Church concerning the persecution of Bishop Liberius, and as we heard the Gospel quotation: "When they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another",' 9 the archbishop looked at the disciple who wrote this, already planning evangelical flight, as I suspected and as the events soon proved. After singing a hymn, the archbishop left the table and immediately called Roger, then bishop of Worcester, and Master Robert of Melun, the bishop of Hereford, whom he had ordained as priests and consecrated as bishops -he has consecrated no others than those two either before or after - and also the bishop of Rochester, his own chaplain, and "8 Eccli. 6, 10.

19 Matth. 10, 23.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 456 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

sent them to the king to ask for a safe exit from his land. Those who had been sent that he postponed this point until quickly returned reporting the king's answer 20 further consideration on the following day.

422 The abbey of Pipewell undergoes a loss of land and is unable to recover it because of the lack of funds for litigation.

Memorandum that in the year of the incarnation of the Lord 1164 at the time of King Henry fitz Empress, under whom St. Thomas archbishop of Canterbury was martyred, the monks of Pipewell through the fault of some malicious and most false priest, called Hugh de Buckby, lost a capital messuage and two or three virgates of land forever, and they were unable to start litigation because of their poverty and because their house was at that time in the hands of the Jews in connection with a debt of 1,100 marks of silver.

423 Agreement concerning land and a wood in Aldenham between the abbey of St. Albans and the Taillebois family on the one hand and the abbey of Westminster on the other at the exchequer in the presence of royal justices: the land is quitclaimed to Westminster against payment of 23 marks of silver, and the right of pannage in the wood is quitclaimed to the Taillebois family. A. The narrative version in the Gesta of St. Albans. At that time [Abbot] Robert and the convent and Robert Taillebois and his brothers brought a claim against Abbot Laurence of Westminster at the exchequer 21

'[The three excerpts selected here are not the only texts concerning the Council of Northampton. A, Roger of Hoveden, was selected because of its brevity and clarity; B, William Fitzstephen and C, Herbert of Bosham, were selected because they were "the two eyewitnesses, who specially when they agree have every claim on our belief" (D. Knowles, The episcopal colleagues of Archbishop Thomas Becket, 1970, p. 67). The reader who wants to pursue the matter further can find some more information in the following sources: the Vita of St. Thomas by William of Canterbury (MATERIALS BECKET i. 32-41), that by Alan of Tewkesbury (MATERIALs BECKET ii. 326-335), that by Anonymous I (MATERIALS BECKET iv. 40-54) and that by Edward Grim (MATERIALS BECKET ii. 392-399). - For modern commentaries see Knowles, op. cit., 66-90, 163-166); Poole, From Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 207-209; M. Cheney, William FitzStephen and his life of Archbishop Thomas, in: Church and Government in the Middle Ages, Essays C.R. Cheney, ed. by C.N.L. Brooke et al., Cambridge, 1976, 141-142.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 457 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

in the presence of the justices and barons of the king, concerning the land and the wood of Aldenham, which the aforesaid Robert Taillebois and his brothers maintained to be entitled to hold from the abbot of St. Albans, as their forefathers had them. Abbot Laurence, who was afraid of hearing the judgment of the king's court since he clearly held that land by violence and unjustly, made his peace with the said Robert Taillebois, Abbot Robert and numerous monks of the church of St. Albans who were then present and making their claim and asking on behalf of the convent of St. Albans that the land, which belonged to the fee of St. Albans, should not be sold to the said knight and his brothers. For Abbot Laurence promised to the said Robert Taillebois 23 marks if he would renounce his right, and Robert Taillebois received them in our court at St. Albans at the demand of our brother Adam the cellarer and others. And the said Abbot Laurence, with the consent and counsel of the convent of Westminster, quitclaimed the pannage of 20 pigs a year in the wood of Aldenham, to which the said Robert Taillebois had made a claim, to the said Robert and his brothers and their heirs.

B. The charter version in a cartulary of Westminster

Let all faithful present and future know that Abbot Robert of the church of St. Albans for himself and his convent and Robert Taillebois and his brothers Roger and Simon for themselves and their heirs have quitclaimed to Abbot Laurence and the church of Westminster the claim which Abbot Robert made against the church of Westminster and the abbot for Robert Taillebois and his brothers, Roger and Simon, in Aldenham in the wood and in the plain. For this quitclaim the abbot of Westminster gave to the aforesaid brothers, with the consent of Abbot Robert of St. Albans, 23 marks of silver. The abbot and convent of Westminster also granted to the aforesaid brothers and their heirs quittance of the pannage of 20 pigs per year in the wood of Aldenham at acorn-time. This quitclaim was made at the exchequer at Westminster in the eleventh year of the reign of King Henry II on the feast of St. Michael in the presence of the justices of the king, Bishop Nigel of Ely, Archdeacon Geoffrey of Canterbury, Archdeacon Richard of Poitiers, Richard the king's treasurer, Wido the dean of Waltham, Robert the earl of Leicester, Richard de Lucy, Henry fitz Gerold and William Mauduit, royal chamberlains, Simon fitz Peter, Alan de Neville, Geoffrey le Moigne and William fitz Adam, royal marshals and Philip de Daventry.'

423B 1 0[Eyton, Court Henry 11, 85; V.C.H. Hertfordshire,iv. 376. Already in 1066-1077 there was a

dispute about Aldenham between the two houses, see no. 8.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 458 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

424 On the death of his father Turstin, Richard Basset claims four hides in Chaddleworth, which his grandfather Ralph had given to Abingdon Abbey. The monks obtain a writ from King Henry II ordering Richard Basset to let them hold the land freely and justly and an agreement is reached between the two parties. Richard Basset, a son of Turstin, who himself was a son of the aforesaid Ralph, succeeded as heir to his father upon the latter's death. He laid claim to the aforesaid four hides' and, bringing many and strange charges, tried by whatever means to get hold of them. However, the brethren, seeing through his craftiness, went to the young King Henry, who then ruled, asking that he should let them have in peace what they had justly been given. Benignly agreeing to their request he sent the following writ, confirmed with his seal to Richard. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Richard Basset, greeting. I command that my monks of Abingdon shall hold in peace, freely, quietly and justly four hides of land in Chaddleworth as they held them in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, and the liberties of the same and all their appurtenances, and I forbid anyone unjustly to implead them thereon. Unless you do this, my justice2 shall have it done so that I hear no complaint thereon for lack of full right or firm justice. Witness: William fitz John. At King's Cliff. Upon hearing this writ, Richard composed the following chirograph with those of Abingdon, as he could not contradict them in any way, but knew that he had committed a calumny. Let it be known to all present and future that I Richard Basset, son of Turstin Basset, have granted to the church of Abingdon in perpetual alms and have firmly confirmed in the chapter in the presence of all the convent and placed upon the altar by the sign of a knife with my own hands the four hides in Chaddleworth with their appurtenances in the wood and in the plain, which my grandfather Ralph Basset and my father Turstin Basset have given to the aforesaid church to be held free of all military service and exaction, except for the common geld of the whole county, and if my other lands are quit, so shall this be. However, when I am in this province I shall be entitled to wood from the forest adjacent to the said land for my hearth and my kitchen and to rods and pales for folds and fences around my court and to trees for my mills at Letcomb, if they can be found in that forest: all this is to be taken under control of the monks' forester and as he shall indicate, and my pigs of the demesne in Letcomb shall be free of pannage. The following witnesses were 424 ' '[Shortly before his death in 1129, Ralph Basset gave four hides of land in Chaddleworth to the 2

see ABINGDON Chron., ii. 170-171.]o abbey, 0

[Robert, earl of Leicester, chief justice of England until his death in 1168 (Eyton, Court Henry H, 327).]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 459 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

present: the whole convent, and as laymen: Adam the sheriff, Jordan de Sandford, John de St. Helen, Geoffrey de Sunningwell, Henry de Pusey, Ralph Brito, Ralph Placitor and many others. took one half of the chirograph with After this was accomplished, Richard 3 him, became a friend and went home.

425 Memorandum that in 1125 certain land in London had been given to the priory of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, London, by Blakeman, a moneyer, and been held from the priory by his son Reiner, who unlawfully gave it in mortgage to St. Giles' hospital, but later quitclaimed it to the priory. Nevertheless, under King Henry II, his son Matthew reopened the case and brought an action against the priory by a royal writ which ordered the bishop of London to do justice to him and the other heirs of Reiner. In the year of the incarnation of the Lord 1125, i.e. the year when King Henry meted out justice to the moneyers, a moneyer called Blakeman gave himself up to this church and became a canon and gave also to this church the land which he had in the soke of the bishop of London on the understanding that his son Reiner should hold it from this church, i.e. the church of Holy Trinity London, during his lifetime and pay 14 s. a year for it, without permission to give it in gage or to sell it except to this church. Not long afterwards, still during the reign of King Henry, the said Reiner gave that land out of necessity in gage to Prior Norman for 7 lb., retaining one part, for which he owed this church 2 s. per year, which against the agreement he gave in gage to a certain Adam, the warden of the hospital of St. Giles, without our knowledge. But in the following time we rescued it from the brethren and an agreement was reached between us that they could hold the land from this church for 18 d. per year and thus Reiner quitclaimed that land to us for the future and offered it on the altar before he got married, in the presence of several people in the time of King Henry. We held this land without disturbance at the time of King Henry and all the time under King Stephen as long as he lived and during the time of Prior Norman and his successor Prior Ralph, until the eleventh year of King Henry II. Then a son of Reiner, called Matthew, on the advice of a priest called Aldred, a nephew of Blakeman, brought many years after his father's death a claim against us concerning the aforesaid land by a royal writ in which King Henry ordered Gilbert Foliot, the bishop of London, to do justice to him and the other heirs of Reiner concerning that land, since it is in the bishop's soke. After

3 °[See V.C.H. Berks, iv, 163.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 460 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the altercations by both parties were heard before the bishop's steward in the house of William Facet, that land was finally adjudged to us free and quit in a judgment pronounced by Gervase de Cornhill.1

426 Condemnation of heretics at a council in Oxford in the presence of the king.

Some disseminators of bad doctrine were brought to trial at Oxford in the presence of the king, while bishops were also present. He exposed them to all the people as deviating from our faith and vanquished in the ordeal, and after their faces were branded, he expelled them from the kingdom.

427 Writ of King Henry II ordering a recognition to be made by old and lawful men of the city of Lincoln before the sheriff of Lincolnshire concerning the freedoms of the bishops and the clergy there. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the reeve of Lincoln, greeting. I order you to cause without delay a recognition to be made by the oaths of old and lawful men of the city of Lincoln before the sheriff of Lincolnshire and at his summons, of the freedoms which the bishops of Lincoln had in their land in Lincoln and in their burgage at the time of King Henry my grandfather and of the freedoms which the clergy of the city of Lincoln enjoyed at that time. And cause without delay Bishop Robert of Lincoln and all his men of Lincoln and the clergy of the city of Lincoln to have all those freedoms, according to the recognition, and impose no new customs on them. And see to it that the bishop shall hold all his tenements of the city of Lincoln well, peacefully, freely and honourably with all his freedoms and free customs, as any of his predecessors best and most freely ever held them at the time of King Henry my grandfather. Witness: John de Oxford. At Woodstock.

425 1 °[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 211, 222.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 461 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

428 Notification by Thomas fitz Paulin, canon of York cathedral, of his quitclaim to the abbey of Rievaulx of lands in Welburn whose boundaries were perambulated and confirmed by the oath of the venue and to which he had laid an unjust claim. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Thomas fitz Paulin, canon of the church of St. Peter at York, greeting. Be it known to you all that I have completely given up to God and the church of St. Mary at Rievaulx and the monks who serve God there the claim which I had to the bounds of Welburn, adjacent to my land of Nawton and Wombleton. These bounds are defined in the charters of Roger de Mowbray and his son Nigel as they were perambulated by the said Roger with his men and neighbours and he let it be confirmed under oath that such were the right bounds of Welburn. I had indeed made the said claim to the said bounds of Welburn because my men had falsely suggested to me that they belonged to my land of Nawton and Wombleton, but since I do not want to vex the aforesaid monks unjustly, I diligently inquired from loyal neighbours of that province and learned and discovered with the greatest certainty that the aforesaid bounds belong to Welburn and that I had laid the aforesaid claim to them against reason. And therefore I have completely given up all the aforesaid claim to the aforesaid monks and I have granted them that they may quietly enclose their land with a ditch along the aforesaid boundaries, as Robert de Daivill and my other neighbours from those vills have for their part allowed them to do. And I myself and my nephew Robert fitz Paulin and my kinsman John de Hereford and Robert son of Rainer le Poer have with our own hands pledged that I would never again make any claim to those same bounds, either personally or through someone else, so that if any of my men should attempt to vex those monks concerning those bounds, I shall resist him and stop him as far as I can. Witnesses: Peter canon of Guisborough, Robert fitz Paulin, Robert the cleric of Marton, Hugh fitz William and his brother Ralph, John de Hereford, Everard Haltain, William son of Edmund de Bradewade and Robert son of Rainer le Poer.

429 Dispute between two officials of King Henry II, Turstin fitz Simon, dispenser, and Adam de Yarmouth, sealer, about the refusal by Adam de Yarmouth to deliver a sealed writ to Turstin fitz Simon, free of charge. As the king's court is in doubt, the king himself decides against the dispenser.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 462 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

It was the custom of our court that sealed writs containing their names and duties were drawn up and delivered to the ministers of the court gratis. Now the king's dispenser laid an information against a sealer, that he had refused to deliver him a writ containing his name and duties without payment. Turstin fitz [Simon] was the dispenser, Adam de Yarmouth the sealer. The court after hearing them was in doubt and called in the king; he first heard Turstin and then Adam, who said: "I had received some guests and I sent a man to beg the lord Turstin to give me two cakes of your own royal sort. He answered: 'No'. Afterwards, when he wanted his writ, I remembered that 'No', and in like manner I said: 'No'." The king condemned him who had said "No" first. He made Adam sit at the bench with the seal and Turstin's writ placed before him and he compelled Turstin to put off his mantle and on bended knees present Adam with two royal cakes, decently wrapped in a white napkin, and when the present had been received ordered Adam to deliver him the writ and so reconciled them. And he added that his officers ought not only to help each other from their own stock or the treasury, but also to help anyone of the household, and even outsiders who were pressed by necessity. This I thought was a genial act.'

430 Notification that William fitz Osbert, William Avenel and Simon, son of Roger del Estre have, at the command of Richard del Estre, delivered to the canons of Christchurch (Twinham) the land which the said Richard gave to them, with various tenants. This delivery was carried out before the men of Newtown who made sworn statements as to the revenue from the property. Be it known to all that I William fitz Osbert and William Avenel and Simon, son of Roger del Estre, have delivered at the command of Richard del Estre to the canons of Christchurch the land which the said Richard del Estre gave to the aforesaid church with his body, with the men, wives and children who hold that land, viz. Sefare the palmer who pays 35 d., Ivo who pays 45 d., Richard who pays 3 s. 1 d., William Derby who pays 21 d. and a half, William the son of the weaver

429 ' Dr. Round also points out that Adam de Yarmouth was a justice in eyre in 1169 and 1173 and that Turstin fll. Simonis was similarly employed in 1173 and had for a colleague Walter Map himself. o[We almost invariably follow the translation by M.R. James, with historical notes by J.E. Lloyd, edited by E.S. Hartland, Walter Map's "De Nugis Curialium", London, 1923, p. 266.j0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 463 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

who pays 21 d. and a half and Gunore who pays 6 d. for the house which she holds. We deliver this land to the aforesaid canons by the oath of the men of Newtown who swore how much that land could be worth in gavel, services and church-scot. This land was handed over before all the men of Newtown by whose oath it was known how much it could be worth, as was said, i.e. 1 mark of silver.

431 William the Fleming lays claim to part of the land of Pipewell Abbey. Robert Butevilein, son and heir of the founder, gives the plaintiff land in Cottesbrooke in exchange, whilst the monks compensate Robert with certain other lands. A. The charter in the cartularies of Pipewell. Be it known to all those who see and hear this document that the following agreement was made between the abbot and convent of Pipewell and Robert Butevilein. A certain knight called William the Fleming, son of Henry, claimed half Pipewell and therefore much disturbed the monks, who lived there, by words and deeds. Finally the abbot of Pipewell and Robert Butevilein took counsel to satisfy William the Fleming and put an end to his complaint: Robert Butevilein gave William the Fleming 4 virgates of land in Cottesbrooke in fee and heredity, in exchange for the land of Pipewell and William the Fleming himself, having accepted the exchange from his lord Robert Butevilein, abjured his land of Pipewell, in plain and wood, in tofts and crofts and everything belonging to that land so that neither William the Fleming himself nor his heirs can ever claim anything in the land of Pipewell. But held by their oath, they must maintain as best they can the aforesaid abbey in its possession against all claimants. Robert Butevilein granted all his land of Pipewell with all its appurtenances to the aforesaid abbey in free, pure and perpetual alms, as his father had previously granted it and Robert Butevilein and his heirs must keep that land forever free of all secular service and against all people, the great ones and the little ones, to whom some service is due for it. To avoid Robert Butevilein being overly aggrieved

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 464 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

because of the exchange which he gave to William the Fleming and the service which he must do forever for the aforesaid abbey, the abbot of Pipewell and the convent restored to him the land of Cottesbrooke which his father William Butevilein had given in alms to the aforesaid abbey, so that Robert Butevilein shall possess that land of Cottesbrooke in perpetual heredity and without the abbot of Pipewell or the convent of that place ever claiming anything in it. And it should be known through the same agreement that the abbot of Pipewell is free to move where and when he likes with all his convent and all his possessions, in stocks and in lands, without any hindrance and with the benevolent agreement of Robert Butevilein and his friends, leaving behind only the abbey land which is contained within the fields of Pipewell, and leaving there a convent of our order with an abbot. Witnesses of this agreement: Hugh Ridel the priest of Kettering, Thomas the priest of Wilbarston, William the priest of Stoke Albany, Geoffrey the cleric of Lubbenham, Thomas the cleric of Lamport, Wallo the cleric of Rushton, the priest of Rushton, Stephen de la Lee and his son Robert, Simon the son of Peter of Brixworth, Simon Malesouvres of Lamport, William of Widevil', William de Lubbenham, Andrew de Rushton, Hernald de Cottesbrooke, Robert de la Mare, William Griffin, Ralph de Clandon, Robert son of Odo de Rushton, Robert son of Hardwin the priest of Rushton, Robert fitz Hervey de Desborough and Edward of the same vill, Ralph Bonde of Pipewell, Godwin Pati of Pipewell and Fresenat of Pipewell.' B. The narrative in the cartularies of Pipewell. At that time a knight called William the Fleming came at the devil's instigation and laid claim to half the land of Pipewell, causing so much sadness and sorrow that there was talk of leaving, but soon divine grace came to turn their sadness and grief into joy, for Robert son of William Butevilein went to the monks at God's instigation as soon as he heard of this and, after talking it over, they decided to pacify William and put an end to the conflict as appears from his chirograph, which we have already copied.

431A 1 '[See V.C.H. Northamptonshire,ii. 116.]

°

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 465 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

432 King Henry II declares that he is sending royal justices in eyre into the bishopric of Durham (to enforce the Assize of Clarendon) by way of an exceptional and temporary measure. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the justiciars, sheriffs and all his ministers of Yorkshire and Northumberland, greeting. Know that by the counsel of my barons' and the agreement of the bishop of Durham I send this time my justice into the land of St. Cuthbert to see to it2 thatjustice shall be done according to my assize to thieves and murderers and robbers,3 not that I want this to be turned into a custom in my time or that of my heirs, but I do this temporarily because of the aforesaid necessity, for I will that the land of St. Cuthbert shall have its liberties and old customs as it ever best had them. Witnesses: Geoffrey [Ridel], archdeacon of Canterbury, Richard, archdeacon of Poitiers, Count Geoffrey and Richard de Lucy. At Woodstock. 4

433 Writ of Henry II to Osbert de Brai ordering him to seise the monks of Lire of the church of Swallowfield as it was adjudicated after a sworn inquest before justices in eyre. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and of the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Osbert de Brai, greeting. I order you to seise without delay the monks of Lire of the church of Swallowfield and its appurtenances, as was recognized at Wallingford by the oath of jurors before my justice and adjudicated to them. And unless you do it, the sheriff of Berkshire shall do it. Witness: Simon fitz Peter. At Porchester. By Richard Binstand. 1

432 l The Assize of Clarendon describes itself as passed "de consilio omnium baronum suorum" 2 Notice the "justicia... quae videat", as answering to the "aliquis... qui audiat" in Geoffrey's charter. '[This is the charter of Empress Matilda for Geoffrey de Mandeville of 1141, ed. Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, 88-95.]

3 These are the words of the Assize itself, which deals throughout with "'robatores", "murdratores", and "latrones"

4 This charter is limited, by the names of the witnesses, to 1163-1166. 433 1 '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 286-287.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 466 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

434 Memorandum of a case concerning the parish of Smithfield before Gilbert, bishop of London, between the prior and canons of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, London, and Robert the Philosopher, who brought them to trial by producing a royal writ: it is decided that the parish, including the burial rights, belongs to the canons' church of St. Botolph by Aldgate. In the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1166 Robert the Philosopher brought us to trial by a royal writ concerning the aforesaid parish of Smithfield, maintaining that he and his church had been unjustly despoiled while he was absent at that time and in the king's service in the army of Toulouse1 and we have often appeared before Archdeacon Nicholas for this case and at some other time before Bishop Gilbert. We maintained that before restitution was made we were not obliged to answer him as long as our church of St. Botolph was deprived of some portion of the aforesaid partition, i.e. of 3 sheep and the corpse [of a female parishioner], and were prepared to produce witnesses that the aforesaid woman was our parishioner on the day and in the year when she was alive and dead. Seeing that he could get nowhere with this case and following the best and wisest counsel, he renounced his claim in the hand of the lord Bishop Gilbert forever, for himself and his church, and made a quitclaim in our favour, admitting that we had a just cause. This was done on the 9th of May at Westminster in the chapel of the infirm, on the day of the plea between Earl Aubrey 2 and his wife when an appeal was made to Rome. We the following were present there: Ralph the prior, Walter the subprior, Gilbert and Robert the canons, Living the monk, Nicholas the archdeacon, Ralph the archdeacon, Richard the archdeacon, Godfrey the treasurer, Richard the brother of Nicholas the archdeacon; and this Nicholas has put the aforesaid sentence in writing, sealed with his seal as appears below. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Nicholas archdeacon of London, greeting. Robert the Philosopher has at the king's command and by his writ brought a suit against the canons of Holy Trinity London, demanding and claiming the parish of Smithfield for his church of St. Peter in the Tower. After both parties had often appeared before me in this case and sometimes also before my lord Gilbert, bishop of London, Robert, having become wiser, and realising that the canons had a just cause, has confessed and renounced forever in the hand of my lord the bishop to the case and his claim, for himself and his church, and has declared the aforesaid parish completely free and quit in favour of the canons and their church of St. Botolph outside Aldgate, to which that parish belongs by parochial right.3 434

'°[The siege of Toulouse took place in 1159.]O 2 0[Aubrey III de Vere, earl of Oxford 1142-1194.]o 3 o[Calendared in LONDON ALDGATE TRINITY Cart. (Hodgett)

no. 969. Cfr. op. cit., no. 971.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 467 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

435 Misled by the oath of some of his knights, Abbot Robert of St. Albans adjudicates land in Broadway to Roger de Marden.

Misled by the oath of some of his knights, who were speaking in their hearts and with their hearts, he also adjudicated to Roger de Marden the land of Broadway, whereas this Roger had no right in it according to the true contents of the charter of King Henry I, which Abbot Robert was completely unaware that the church of St. Albans ever had.

436 Litigation concerning land in Luton in the king's court between Abbot Robert of St. Albans and a lay brother of the Order of the Hospitallers, in whose favour the case is decided by a local jury. In the meantime the aforesaid woman' went the way of all flesh and all the land which she had held is transferred without any trouble to the lordship of the abbot and monks of the church of St. Albans. Nevertheless a dispute arises between Abbot Robert and one H., a lay brother of the Hospital, for some little plot of land, which had long ago been turned into free alms of the church of Luton, and the question was repeatedly discussed before the king's justices. It was finally decided by judgment of the king's court to have the problem settled by the oath of the men of the town of Luton. Some people, swayed by the gifts of the aforesaid man H. and corrupted by numerous promises, produced mendacious witnesses who were ready to prove by oath that the said land belonged in no way to the said church of Luton, and although their wickedness was patent to all, their testimony, because such was the custom of the land, was admitted and confirmed by oath. And thus that land henceforward was possessed by the aforesaid H., but he did not get away with it unpunished, for he was immediately seized by a horrible and sudden indisposition and died miserably.2

436 1'[This is the wife of William Chamberlain, who appears repeatedly in connection with land litigation in Luton, see no. 296. The arrangement mentioned in ST. ALBAN's Gesta, i. 117 was that after his wife's death the whole fee of Luton was to be in St. Albans' demesne.]" 2 [Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 84.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 468 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

437 Record made before justices in eyre by elder men of the Holyworkfolk [Durham]' and Northumberland of a sworn inquest held in the time of King Henry I concerning fishery rights in the Tyne (see no. 255). In the time of King Henry I, son of King William, the following record of the fishery of the Tyne was made, as the older men of the whole Holyworkfolk and Northumberland have sworn in the time of Bishop Ranulf in the presence of the justiciars Walter Espec and Eustace fitz John, i.e. that Stanleyburn as far as Tynemouth and into the sea with half the water of the Tyne belongs to St. Cuthbert and the bishop of Durham and the other half to the earl of Northumberland; a third part of the water, however, will be common and free. And this water should be measured at flood-tide at high water so that it is full from bank to bank. And all the fisheries have places and names etc. This record was made by the older men of the Holyworkfolk and Northumberland in the time of King Henry II before the justiciars of England, i.e. Roger, archbishop of York, Robert, bishop of Lincoln and Hugh, bishop of Durham and Richard de Lucy. At Newcastle etc.

438 After losing their claim in the synodal court of Lincoln against Jordan, prior of Castle Acre, concerning the churches of Sutton and Lutton, William de Sutton, chaplain of Richard de Haia, and his sons renew their claim on the strength of a royal writ, but as the defendants invoke the exceptio rei judicatae,judgment is given against the plaintiffs.

A. The testimony of the chapter of Lincoln Cathedral. The chapter of St. Mary of Lincoln to all sons of Holy Mother Church present and future, greeting. We remember and testify by the present writing that William, the chaplain of Richard de Haia and the sons of William de Sutton have completely failed in the plea which they had moved in our presence against Prior Jordan of Castle Acre concerning the churches of Sutton and Lutton and the chattels which they demanded and that the monks of Castle Acre were absolved of their claim by the judgment of the synod. We furthermore want you to know that the aforesaid sons of William have moved their claim against William, the prior of the aforesaid monastery and successor of the aforesaid Jordan, on the same 437 I '[The haligwercsfolc (later also haliwerkfolc) are the people of the holy man, i.e. St. Cuthbert: those who held their lands by the service of defending his relics and territory, whence the name was also used for the county of Durham, where they dwelt.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 469 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

churches before us and on the strength of a royal mandate, although the case had already been settled by a judicial examination. We also want you to know that as the prior and monks put forward the exceptio reijudicataeand were ready to prove it, they contumaciously stayed away from our presence and again failed completely and the monks deraigned their case by ecclesiastical judgment and examination and were again absolved of their petition. Farewell.

B. The writ of King Henry II. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to Robert, bishop of Lincoln, greeting. I order you to let the monks of Castle Acre hold the churches of Sutton and Lutton as well and peacefully and justly as the charter of Richard de Haia testifies in their favour concerning his donation and as your charter and the charter of the chapter of the church of Lincoln testify that they twice deraigned them before you in the synod against the sons of William the chaplain of Sutton. And unless you do it, Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury shall. Witness: Peter de Mara. At Westminster.'

439 Sworn recognition held by the sheriff of Yorkshire and local landowners and confirmed by the bishops of Lincoln and Durham concerning the customs and liberties existing on the land of the archbishop of York in Nottinghamshire at the time of King Henry I. Ranulf [de Glanvill] the sheriff, Hugh [de] Burun, Ralph Halselin, Robert de Periers, Ralph de Annesley, Geoffrey de Lefremunt, Ralph de Heroville, Hugh fitz Wulf, Robert de Heringham, Alexander son of Toki, Symon fitz Richard, Robert de Periers, Richard de Croxton, William de Heriz, Walter de Amundeville, Samson de Strelley, Gervase fitz Richard, Richard de Morz, Ingram the brother of the sheriff,' Hugh fitz Roger, William brother of Reiner, Hugh fitz Aldred, Ardwin, Geoffrey de Stratton, have sworn that this was the custom and the liberty in the archbishop's land in Nottinghamshire in the time of King Henry and in the 438B I *[See Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 44, n. 1; a charter of the cathedral chapter of Lincoln, CASTLE AcRE Cart., fo 122, probably of the same date, testifies that Prior Jordan has deraigned the church of Fleet against Richard fitz Jocelin in the synodal court and also mentions that William, the chaplain of Richard de Haia, and the sons of William de Sutton have lost their case concerning the church of Sutton against the prior.]0 439 1 *[There is no reason to associate this Ingram with Sheriff Ranulf de Glanvill. We find in this period a Ranulf son of Ingram as sheriff of Nottinghamshire and Derby, whose brother may be meant here (Lists and Indexes, 102).]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 470 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

year and day when King Henry was alive and dead. All the archbishop's land outside the forest was contained within the following boundaries: as the Dover Beck flows into the Trent and in the higher part from the Dover Beck as far as the king's way [the Fosse way] as the road runs from Blyth, and all his land beyond the king's way and beyond the aforesaid road from Blyth was outside the forest as far as Bycarrs dike so that no royal forester had anything to do with that land on the king's behalf, but the archbishop and his men freely assarted and did what they wanted as with their own land. And in the old forest outside the aforesaid boundaries the archbishop hunted nine days per year, three around Christmas, three around Easter and three around Pentecost, in the whole wood of Blidworth; and in that wood of Blidworth the archbishop and the canons and their men had all their easements without waste and they had their foresters and honey and areas for hawks and sparrow hawks, and pannage. I [Bishop] Robert of Lincoln was present and signed with my seal. I Hugh bishop of Durham was present and signed with my seal.

440 Notification by Sewale de Oseville of his grant of a stream called Eastbrook to the Templars, who have given him as much meadow-land as they took from him, on the basis of sworn statements by Sewale's and the Templars' men. Know etc. that I, Sewale de Oseville, have given and firmly granted, for the salvation of my soul and those of all my ancestors, a stream called Eastbrook to God and the house of the Temple of Jerusalem in perpetual alms, free and quit of all secular service and they shall safely lead it through the middle of my land, i.e. towards the northern part of Alchester' as far as their mill-race, and I must warrant it against all men. And by the oath of my men and theirs the brethren of the Temple gave me of their meadow as much as they took from mine. And for this gift and grant the aforesaid brethren gave me 5 marks of silver. And I did this by the grant and testimony of my lord Geoffrey de Mandeville. 2 Witnesses: Ralph de Berners, Walter de Mandeville, William de Gweres, Thomas de Hastings, Walter Cann',' Ralph the cleric and others. 440

Alencestria i.e. Alchester, a hamlet east of Wendlebury, near Merton, Oxon. 2 i.e. Geoffrey de Mandeville II, earl of Essex. The Templars did not obtain Merton until 1152-

1153 (see No. 424), and the first Geoffrey de Mandeville died in 1144; this must therefore be his son Geoffrey de Mandeville II, who was created earl of Essex in Jan., 1156; d. 21 Oct., 1166. See his Charter. No. 433 infra. 0 [This must be Walter de Cantilupo who is mentioned among the men of Geoffrey III de Mandeville in 1166 (Red Book of the Exchequer, i. 345).]*

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 471 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

441 Writ of King Henry II ordering the sheriff of Lincolnshire to hold a recognition by the oath of lawful citizens of Lincoln to show whether on the death of King Henry I the canons there were seised of certain land near the water of the city, which Martell gave them. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the sheriff of Lincolnshire, greeting. I order you to cause without delay a recognition to be held by the oath of lawful citizens of Lincoln whether the canons of Lincoln were seised of the land which Martell gave them near the water of the city in the year and on the day when King Henry my grandfather was alive and dead; and if they were afterwards disseised unjustly and without judgment, then I order that they shall be reseised of it without delay and justly and let them have it well, peacefully, justly, freely, quietly and honourably. And let them not be impleaded for this until my return to England, unless I order it. And unless you do it, my justice shall. Witness: Manasser Biset, the steward. At Tinchebrai.

442 As Turstin fitz Simon has unjustly seized a tithe in Marcham belonging to Abingdon, the abbey obtains a writ of King Henry II ordering it to be reseised if it has been disseised unjustly and without judgment. The county court finds that Turstin holds the tithe unjustly and the sheriff reseises the abbey. In the time when Turstin fitz Simon unjustly held the land and the church of Marcham, as we said above,' he also seized the tithe of that manor, which did not belong to that church, but to the illumination of the altar of this church. Therefore one of the brethren was sent overseas to the king so that by his justice and authority the church should recover its right. This was done, for on his return the brother who had been sent out brought a royal writ from overseas with the following text. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to his sheriff and ministers of Berkshire, greeting. If the church of

442 1 '[See our nos 222 and 363.1

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 472 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Abingdon had the tithe of Marcham for the illumination of the church in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, and in the year and on the day when he was dead and alive and afterwards and was disseised thereof unjustly and without judgment, then I order that you reseise the church thereof without delay and cause it to hold as well, peacefully, freely, justly and quietly as it best and most freely held in the time of King Henry, my grandfather. And I order that when Turstin fitz Simon returns to England, the abbot of Abingdon2 shall have full right concerning the land which the aforesaid Turstin fitz Simon holds of the fee of the abbey, and if the abbot can deraign that he did not fail to do right to the aforesaid Turstin in his court, the abbot will do him right there. Witness Master John de Oxford. At Tours. After the king's writ was read in the full county court and it was manifestly found by the testimony of the whole county court that the aforesaid tithe belonged to the illumination of the altar of St. Mary and that Turstin held it unjustly, the sheriff disseised him on the king's authority and gave it back to the altar to which it belonged.3

443 Disseisin of four serjeants by the new bishop of Hereford, their lord. Request of reseisin addressed to King Henry II. A. After Gilbert Foliot, formerly bishop of Hereford and now of London, has written in vain to his successor Robert de Melun, bishop of Hereford, in favour of four serjeants of Hereford whom Robert had disseised, he writes again demanding a hearing for the dispossessed, whose treatment, he maintains, has been contrary to canon, civil and customary law. To his venerable brother Robert, by God's grace bishop of Hereford, brother Gilbert, minister of the church of London, greeting. If we required words we are satisfied, if something tangible, not so. Nevertheless we are duly grateful to you and your clerks for refusing our requests so honourably and so elegantly and with the Lord's consent we shall relate your actions when there is something to be thankful for. We are greatly amazed that you write that according to your understanding you cannot admit our prayers, which we have addressed to your fraternity for the reinstatement of our dispossessed men, because you must avoid gravely offending- which God forbid- against God's Church and the sacred canons. For these are the first elements of divine and human law: that no one is allowed to be judge in his own case, that those who have been expelled by violence 2 0 [Geoffrey, abbot of Abingdon, 1164-11751° .

'[See Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, pp. 168-169 n. 5,p. 203 n. 4 and p. 463, no. 98 where the writ is printed.]*

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 473 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

must in any case be reinstated, and that robbers and violent possessors must according to the interdict be given assistance even against the true owners. And there are many other principles to this effect expressed by the laws, confirmed by the decrees and commended by custom,' the best interpreter of both, which although they may be concealed to our detriment, we know to be well-known to your prudence. Since you will not deny us anything which you can grant to a friend, as you write at the end of your letter, we ask you to indicate a day and place for an audience for our dispossessed men, something which one should not even deny to one's enemy.

B. Gilbert Foliot, bishop of London, complains to King Henry II that Robert de Melun, bishop of Hereford, has disseised the four serjeants whom Gilbert enfeoffed when he was bishop of Hereford, and asks that they be reseised until the king's return. To his dearest lord Henry, the illustrious king of the English, brother Gilbert, minister of the church of London, salvation which is now and which we hope for from the Lord. While your presence, oh lord, favours us, all injury is far removed from us, but in your absence we shall immediately suffer various injuries to the detriment of our peace. It is indeed known to your excellence that while we were still serving the church of Hereford you granted certain assarts in Malvern, belonging to your crown, to us with royal munificence and out of sheer liberality. We, however, have given them, as a modest remuneration for their service to four serjeants of ours who had for some time loyally served with us on business of that church and we have asked your grace for your consent and confirmation. However, our venerable brother the lord bishop of Hereford has immediately after your crossing expelled them from those small possessions, and when he was summoned on this matter he showed himself inexorable towards us, being quite unmoved by the reverence for your charter or by our prayer. Therefore, having recourse to your well known clemency, we humbly beg that you add, if it pleases you, to the numerous boons which you have granted us this favour also of ordering William Folet, on whom we have conferred a modest donation, and our forementioned serjeants to be reseised until your return of those possessions of which they have been despoiled after your crossing without a hearing or judgment, so that when God's grace has brought you back to your kingdom, you shall hear in our presence what we have done and it shall please you to correct with royal equity what will seem to you to be in need of correction. The sum which we ask to be returned does not fully amount to ten marks, although the situation of the church has been improved by a rent of a full hundred marks by your donation and the time 443A 1 Cf. Digest, I, 3, 37.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 474 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and the labour that we spent on it. May God, beloved lord in Christ, keep you in good health for a long time.1

444 Alan de Neville, justice of the forest, having illegally demanded payment from Battle Abbey, Abbot Walter de Lucy makes a complaint and, after seeing the privileges of the abbey, the barons of the exchequer give judgment in his favour. The sums involved are restored and all mention of them erased from the Pipe Rolls. In those days Alan de Neville was chief among the king's foresters. By the power given him he most maliciously harried the various counties throughout England with countless and unaccustomed inquisitions. Since he feared neither God nor men, he spared neither ecclesiastical nor secular privileges. The king had gone across the Channel, and this Alan, among his other works of iniquity, bestirred himself against those manors of the church of St. Martin of Battle that lay within the forest. By force he demanded from one of them, Bromham, 20 s., and from its member, Anesty, a half-mark, and as much again from Brightwalton, for assarts. This money was collected by the sheriffs of the counties and taken up to the lord king's exchequer, where it was received by the treasurers and deposited in the lord king's treasury. When the abbot found this out, he sent one of his monks to the exchequer with the charters of his privileges and liberties, to complain to the justices about this unwonted and undue exaction.' The monk arrived there and took the complaint about the injury to Robert, earl of Leicester, and Richard de 443B I Bishop Gilbert complains that the bishop of Hereford, since the king's crossing, has disseised the four serjeants enfeoffed by Gilbert when he was bishop of Hereford on assarts at Malvern granted by the king. He asks the king to order William Folet (Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot andhis letters, pp. 225, 292) and the other serjeants to be put in possession until the case can be settled on the king's return. Henry II confirmed the assarts at Malvern in (or soon after) April 1158 (HEREFORD Charters, 19; Cambridge HistoricalJournal,viii, i (1944), 20). It seems clear that the bishop of Hereford was Gilbert's immediate successor, Robert de Melun (11631167): his successor, Robert Foliot, was not appointed until 1173, and was a close friend as well as a relative of Gilbert. The letter was written while the king was abroad, i.e. in March-May 1165 or between March 1166 and the death of Robert de Melun on 27 February 1167. It would be interesting to know whether the letter was written before or after the promulgation of the assize of novel disseisin (1166), but Gilbert's demand gives no hint of the procedure, and the principle was certainly much older than the assize (cf. R.C. Van Caenegem, Royal Writs in Englandfrom the Conquest to Glanvill, pp. 261 if; cf. G.D.G. Hall in EHR, lxxvi (1961), 317318; on the obscurity of its form in 1166: H.G. Richardson and G.O. Sayles, The Governance of MediaevalEngland, pp. 197-198). 444 The abbey's forged foundation charters contain general exemption from "all aids and pleas", from "all custom of earthly service and all subjection and exaction of any persons whatsoever". Regesta, i, no. 62; ii, no. 348a, p. 401. One refers specifically to assarts: Regesta, i, no. 261. A charter was probably forged for this very occasion, however, for it alone contains forest clauses and hunting rights for the abbot. Regesta, i, no. 263; ii, p. 397.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 475 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Lucy, who were at the time acting as the king's chief justiciars in his place, and to the other barons of the exchequer. He explained the matter thoroughly, offered the charters to be read and sought restitution of what had been taken. Having listened to the liberties of the abbey from the evidence of the charters, all unanimously judged that the money, already several days in the king's treasury, be taken out again. In front of everyone, it was given to the monk, the tallies were broken and all mention of the money was erased from the rolls.2 When he returned home the monk explained the whole affair to the abbot and left the money to his disposal. The abbot took the money and sent it to the manors to be restored to the men from whom it had been taken. This Alan never left off plaguing both ecclesiastics and laymen as long as he lived, in order to enrich the king. To please an earthly king he feared not to offend the King of heaven. But how much gratitude he earned from the king he thus strove to please, the outcome showed in the end. When he was dying, the brothers of a certain monastery, hoping, as one may well believe, to get for their house some of his wealth, went to the king and sought permission to bury his body among them. The king showed his feelings about him in his reply: "His wealth is going to be mine. You may have his corpse. The devils of hell may have his soul." Behold the mournful recompense; behold the wretched distribution of him and of his wealth. This should be a warning to officials of whatever powers, that they should consider this man of whom we speak. By his evil deeds he won neither gratitude nor goodwill from the king he strove to please, but he incurred the wrath of the heavenly King.3

445 Litigation concerning the advowson of the church of Thurlow between Hamo Peche, lord of Thurlow, and Battle Abbey after William de Orbec's appointment there without the consent of the abbot. Having gained initial satisfaction in the church courts and obtained the appointment of Robert the Philosopher, the abbot reopens the case on the latter's death, when William de Orbec tries to regain appointment and starts litigation in the king's court. At a first session in London the rights of the church of Thurlow are taken into the king's hands and at the final hearing at Northampton, charters having been read, Geoffrey Peche gives up his claim, in his own and his father's name. 2 The Pipe Roll for 1166-1167 retained the reference, noting that Battle Abbey had been given

quittance as the result of its liberties as contained in its charters. PR 13 Henry II, PR Soc. xi (1889), pp. 8, 132. The chronicler shows that he understood exchequer procedure and was probably the abbot's agent on the occasion. His remark that there was an erasure from rolls is significant as very early evidence for the existence of Memoranda Rolls. The Dialogue of the Exchequer mentions rolls of this sort in the reign of Henry II, but the earliest surviving roll is 1199-1200. Dialogus,pp. 115,151. Memoranda RollIJohn, ed. H.G. Richardson, PR Soc. N.S. xxi (1943). 3 0 [Translation taken from BATTLE Chron., 221-223.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 476 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Though it had been with much labour and difficulty that this success had been won, it made the abbot bolder and more willing to attempt the recovery of other unjustly seized properties. Now, in times past, one Roger, a priest, had held the church of Thurlow for a fixed pension paid yearly to Battle Abbey. As we have recorded, it was one of those with which King William II had endowed the church of St. Martin of Battle. After some time this priest, forgetful of fealty and religion, had stopped payment of the pension he owed, and tried to deprive the church of St. Martin of its rights over the church. When this came to the notice of the then abbot and convent of Battle they immediately began a lawsuit against him. His guilt was plain and when at length he recognized that he was powerless to resist and would be ejected from the possession of the church by ecclesiastical judgment, he came to Battle and sought forgiveness. In the chapter house before all the monks he promised on oath that he would in future not try anything of the sort. He declared that he would make it public in a full synod of his diocese that no one had any right in the church of Thurlow save the abbot and monks of Battle, and that no one should be instituted there save at their presentation. On this condition he obtained pardon, serving in that church by grace of the abbot and monks, and paying fully the pension he owed, he remained faithful the rest of his life, as tradition has it. After his death, when Henry 11 the peace-lover was already king, and the venerable Walter was abbot of Battle, a knight named Hamo Peche, lord of the manor, laid claim to the right of patronage in the church of Thurlow and, without consulting the abbot and convent of Battle, he granted it to a clerk, William de Orbec.' But since it was known to everyone that the entire right to that church belonged to the abbot and monks of Battle, this knight knew that the clerk would have difficulty in being instituted by the bishop on his own presentation and without the knowledge of the abbot and monks. Therefore he craftily got a mandate from the lord king to the bishop of Norwich to institute the clerk at his presentation as lord of the manor. 2 And so it was done. But the clerk knew that his institution was not canonical, and fearing for the future, he came to Walter, abbot of Battle, and made him many prayers and promises of obedience if only he might be confirmed by him in the church. But he was not successful. The abbot did not take calmly that the church committed to him should be at all deprived of its rights. First from the royal, then from the ecclesiastical courts he sought that full justice be done him, complaining in the former about the violence of the knight, in the latter about the intrusion of the clerk. After some time had been spent in vain, because of the 445 1 Hamo Peche was an important baron in Suffolk and Norfolk. He held a barony in chief in Suffolk, and held various fiefs of Roger Peverel, of the abbey of Bury St. Edmunds and the honor of Clare. Red Book, i, 48,363,364, 366-367, 393,403. He served as sheriff of Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire in 1163. PR 10 Henry II, PR Soc. vii, p. 16. Of William de Orbec nothing is known; Orbec is in Calvados, whence many of the lay lords and ecclesiastics of the area originated. Perhaps the king was represented as being ultimate lord of a manor in ancient demesne, and himself presented the clerk as a favour to Hamo.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 477 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

dissimulations and subterfuges of the opposing party, the abbot, seeing that the case was becoming costly, used Robert 'the philosopher' to obtain a mandate from the apostolic see to the venerable Gilbert, bishop of London, 3 to the effect that if it were judged that the clerk had been intruded into the church, he should remove him without any claim remaining, and should restore the church to the abbot and monks of St. Martin with apostolic authority. The clerk was summoned a first and a second time, and did not appear. Finally he was forced to come on a fixed date at St. Paul's, London. The parties met and commenced their suit before the bishop as the presiding judge. The abbot pleaded his case, appealing for witness to truth, reason and charters. The clerk argued with all his might, unwilling to renounce the church, though acquired uncanonically. Finally the time came for the judge to make the final decision. He went over everything with his assistants and listened to their counsel. Reason pointing in this direction, he altogether removed the clerk from Thurlow church by apostolic authority as an intruder, and restored it to the abbot and church of St. Martin of Battle. But the abbot went on to grant the church of Thurlow to Robert "the philosopher" As long as he lived he held it peacefully for a fixed annual pension paid to the church of St. Martin of Battle. Some time after, Robert "the philosopher" died and the abbot gave Thurlow church to a clerk named Thomas to hold for a pension from himself and from Battle Abbey, entrusted to his care. But before Thomas the clerk could be put physically into possession, the clerk William de Orbec, aided by the patronage of Hamo Peche, was bold enough to occupy the church again illegally. When the abbot heard this, he decided to implead not the clerk, who had already long since been totally removed from the church by apostolic authority, but the knight Hamo Peche who was claiming the right of patronage. Therefore he complained about this harassment before the magnates who were in the king's court in his place, accusing this Hamo as responsible for the violence. By royal authority a day was given for the appearance of both the abbot and Hamo in London, the one to prosecute his complaint, the other to answer. On the day and at the place set the abbot was there with his entourage, but Hamo did not come, sending instead a fictitious excuse of sickness. Those who were presiding over the king's court were displeased at the useless vexation of the abbot and at the subterfuge of the opposing party and they adjudged all right of patronage in the church of Thurlow to be taken into the king's hand.4 Furthermore they decided to set another day, 3 Gilbert Foliot, bishop of London 1163 1187. For Robert "the philosopher" see Letters of

Gilbert Foliot, pp. 514-515. The cases concerning advowsons appear to have been undertaken between 1164 and c. 1170. They portray vividly the problem that is the background of the assizes utrum and darrein presentment. In the Constitutions of Clarendon in 1164 (cap. 1), Henry II had declared litigation concerning advowsons to be within the competence of his court. Stubbs, Charters,p. 164. The assize of darrein presentment, which is not relied upon in these cases, was, in Van Caenegem's opinion, not available until 1179-1180 (Van Caenegem, Writs, 332-333). In Battle's litigation we have a very early example of curia regis procedure. After 1180 immediate seisin would be awarded the claimant who, in time of peace, had presented the last parson whose death left the church vacant, without prejudicing the question of right.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 478 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

without possibility of essoin, at Northampton, when Hamo might come and show publicly what right he claimed for himself in the church. The abbot, either unwilling or unable to tire himself by attending on the day and at the place fixed, sent in his place one of his monks, Osmund, well briefed in the affair, who took with him the evidence of charters. Hamo Peche did not show up, but sent his son Geoffrey Peche to make his excuses and otherwise to act in his place. When the parties were met, the monk complained of the injury and enlarged before the bench upon the right of his church, both orally and by the evidence of the charters that were read aloud. It was thought that something would be said in opposition by the opposing party, but suddenly Geoffrey, on behalf of his father and of himself as heir apparent, wholly renounced the litigation and the right that they had up to then claimed in Thurlow church. He swore that in the future he would undertake nothing against the evidence of charters of this sort, since the king who gave the church to St. Martin's of Battle, could, had he wished, have given the manor too without impediment. These unhoped-for words assured that all right to Thurlow church was awarded to Battle Abbey; and thus all the controversy ended. However, William de Orbec still remained in possession of the church he had taken uncanonically, as we have told. He acted as if he were the parson and received all its profits. It remained to sue him to remove all cause of dispute in future. But now that he was without the patronage of his former protectors, he was as far from reason as he was close to danger. He tried to defend his side of the dispute merely on the grounds that he had been instituted by the bishop. This was useless, since it was apparent to all that it had been uncanonical. He was quite hemmed in: on the one side he saw that he was without the goodwill necessary to possess it; on the other without means of resistance. Finding no other line of escape, he was forced to renounce all right he seemed to have in the church. In the presence of the lord bishop of Norwich he resigned into his hand the church together with any right he had there, and when he had thus been deprived, the bishop instituted Thomas the clerk at the presentation of the abbot and monks of St. Martin's, Battle. After that, this Thomas the clerk held it peacefully for a yearly pension, and all harassment by adversaries was everywhere quieted. 5

446 William de Curson, assisted by Richard of lichester, archdeacon of Poitiers, obtains a royal writ restoring to him some property of his predecessors, tenants of Bury St. Edmunds. He goes to Bury to claim the manor of Southwold and afterwards, as the abbot seeks to delay the affair, complains to Richard of Poitiers about this contempt of a royal writ. The abbot also intervenes with the archdeacon and obtains a delay of several weeks. William de Curson, however, is taken ill and promises to abandon his claim. 0

[Translation taken from

BATTLE

Chron., 229 235.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 479 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the 14th year of the reign of King Henry II, a knight called William de Curson, a descendant of Robert,' went to see Richard archdeacon of Poitiers,2 who at that time at the king's command exerted the greatest authority throughout England, hoping to recover his inheritance, of which alien hands had deprived him. As he managed to win him over to his cause by his prayers and without any payment, he married his niece in the hope of obtaining his assistance even more certainly and firmly. Hence the archdeacon, not less concerned about William's business than his own, obtained from the king the letters which he wanted about acquiring the right to his fortune. The letters contained that whatever the ancestors of the aforesaid knight had held in any place and in any way, it was to be restored to him by the action of the law and he was to hold it. Armed with the royal precept and strengthened by the support of the archdeacon, he not only tried duly to recover that which his ancestors had held by right, but he even tried to regain what they had unlawfully claimed in order to enrich himself. Thus he maintained that his inheritance also included the aforesaid land called Southwold,3 which in former times had been particularly bestowed upon the glorious martyr Edmund as a pious mark of devotion, because his ancestors had usurped it in times of disturbed peace and by violent invasion. It should not be passed in silence that one of his ancestors had upon another occasion brought royal letters against the saint concerning this same claim and as he was staying in the vill of the holy martyr in order to show the king's mandate to the abbot on the morrow, if he could have managed, some thieves turned up in that same night and not without the just agreement, as is believed, of the martyr, ran off with his possessions including the letters. But let us continue the story that we started. The aforesaid knight arrived at St. Edmunds and put the royal precept before the abbot,4 asking that restitution should be made to him without any delay. The abbot, however, though shaken by the rigour of the royal precept, refused to grant overhastily what was unjustly claimed and asked for a delay in order to examine in the meantime what justice the claim might contain. As [William] refused this, realising that his plan would make no headway in the future, he became very angry, proffered threats and showing scant respect for the sanctity of the martyr went to the archdeacon, who was staying in London, as if to make a complaint against him for contempt of a royal precept. The abbot,

446

'[This Robert de Curson occurs in the BURY

ST. EDMUNDS

Memorials, i. 79 in connection with

the manor of Southwold in the time of King William Rufus.]' 2 Of this Richard of Ilchester, archdeacon of Poitiers, many interesting notices occur in the "Materials for the History of St. Thomas Becket", edited for the Rolls Series by Canon Robertson. He was among the most eminent and able of the many astute officials employed by Henry II. Like the rest of the fraternity, he sided with the king in the great quarrel, and was formally excommunicated by Becket, at Vrzelay, in 1166. Later on, in 1170, he is named among the advisers of the young king. Southwold, on the coast of Suffolk; the church is named after St. Edmund to this day. 4 Abbot Hugo.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 480 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

however, not less active, sent the prior 5 of the convent as a messenger to the archdeacon in the footsteps of the plaintiff who had gone ahead and, as soon as he had arrived, he formally explained the truth of the matter. He also showed the written narrative of a miracle which divine power had once worked on the ancestors of the aforesaid plaintiff, who invaded the said land with undue presumption, in order to revenge the martyr. Finally he obtained a delay until the feast of the beheading of St. John the Baptist 6 - all this took place in the week of Pentecost - and returned to his monastery. The knight, their opponent, however, left the town on the same day as the prior but fell gravely ill on his journey; this was the martyr's manifest and quick revenge, and hardly managed to reach the lodging that was prepared for him at Chelmsford. The following day he reached Colchester7 amongst much anxiety and, as he was received there by the monks, he was smitten by such a miserable madness that not only his servants but even his wife left him. Showing the terrible behaviour of raving madness, he struck all those around him with horror. He was put inside a cloth, tied with tight ropes and could only be kept under control by the extreme effort of struggling men. As the abbot heard of this he sent the prior, who had been the messenger before, to take pity on that man and to persuade him, if his memory should be restored, to remember his misdeed against the martyr, ask his forgiveness for the injury which he had caused and promise due satisfaction. Upon his arrival he heard from those who gave assistance to the sick man that he had not yet recovered his memory. But immediately one of the servants called Richard came forward and offered the prior a gage, promising due reparation if the sick man should recover by the saint's compassion. The prior decided to wait till the morrow and at daybreak he went back and asked the servants whether their master had behaved more mildly. They replied that he had been quiet throughout the night and that by God's grace he had recovered his intelligence. Thereupon he approached the sick man, explained the immensity of his sin and persuaded him, who understood the wrong he had done, to hasten to make speedy amends. Gladly accepting the admonishments for his salvation, he recognized that he had misbehaved greatly, dropped his intention of to show himself a loyal servant of the claiming what was forbidden and promised 8 saintly martyr throughout his life.

5 Probably

Prior Hugo whom Jocelin de Brakelond states, at the beginning of his Chronicle, to have been deposed in 1173. '[The most recent edition of this chronicle is BURY ST. EDMUNDS 0

0Chron.]

[The decollatioor dies natalisof St. John the Baptist falls on 29 August; in 1168 Whit Sunday fell 0 on 19 May.] 0 '[We learn from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 46 that the abbey had two churches in Colchester.] 8 '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 222.]

6

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 481 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

447 On complaint by Abbot William of St. Stephen at Caen that in the time of King Stephen his abbey was unjustly disseised of a plot of land in London, King Henry II orders Robert, earl of Leicester, and Humphrey Buccuinte, sheriff of London, to settle the matter in the husting by a sworn inquest. In the absence of the defendants, John fitz Nicholas and Richard fitz Edith, the case is settled in favour of the abbey on the basis of a verdict by citizens of London. Waleran, son of Ranulf, granted to God and to the church of St. Stephen of Caen one mansion of land in London, which had been formerly the property of Leofred, the Englishman, situate in Wood Street, near the church of St. Peter, quit of geld and scot and of all other burdens, which Warin Bucherel and his heirs held from the aforesaid St. Stephen's Abbey for a long time. Nevertheless in their days a certain part of the land of the aforesaid mansion was fraudulently withdrawn and severed. Moreover John, son of Nicholas, the mercer of London, delivered the aforesaid land of the mansion of St. Stephen which he had severed and withdrawn and which had a breadth of twelve feet in front, to Richard son of Edith as in fee-farm, in the time of the persecution which took place in the reign of Stephen. And when Stephen died, Henry duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, by God's good will, obtained the throne of England and was constituted by God a brave and glorious king. In his reign William the abbot held the government of the church of Caen. And he, hearing that a division of this land of St. Stephen's Abbey had been made without his knowledge, came to London with the writings and commissions of King Henry addressed to the earl of Leicester and Humphrey Buccuinte, sheriff of London. These men the king enjoined to hear the truth concerning the land of St. Stephen's of Caen from the citizens of the city of London with the advice of the husting by the sworn inquest of legal men; furthermore they were to summon those who had held the land, and if they came ., but if they refused to come they were to hear the truth of the matter. They therefore having heard the king's command, summoned once, twice and even thrice John and Richard, who had held the land, to appear in the court of husting to hear the king's command and the truth and judgment concerning the land of St. Stephen's, which they had held. But they contumaciously failed to appear in the husting at the first, second or third summons. The justice therefore and those who were present, seeing how the matter stood, performed the king's command. By the unanimous decision of the husting and in accordance with the king's writ, they elected fourteen men of the citizens of the city of London who took the oath, and by their oath and record of the oath, St. Stephen's Abbey obtained possession of the whole of its mansion together with the aforesaid part, twelve feet broad, which John and Richard the son of Edith had held. These are the names of those who swore in the husting as to the division made in the land of St. Stephen's Abbey situated in London in Wood-

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 482 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Street: Martin the carter, Odo the shoemaker, Terric Bolloc, Serlo of Caen, William Toyri, Stephen the mercer, Engelramus Cobba, Albert the lorimer, Nicholas the Frenchman, Rainer Ward, Alberic of Peterhouse, William Garlic, John Toyri, Radulf, brother of Hervic. These were the four that took the oath: Martin, Odo, Terric and Serlo; the remaining ten William the abbot dispensed with, though they were ready to take the oath. And these are the names of those in whose presence they took the oath: Humphrey Buccuinte, sheriff of London, Geoffrey his brother, William fitz Ailward, alderman, Robert the Fair, alderman, Fromund, alderman, Henry fitz Ailwin, alderman, Peter, son of Walter, alderman, William Chamberlain, Robert, his son, John Buccuinte, Geoffrey Buccuinte, Ralph of Wood Street, Symond of Haverhill, Peter, son of Alfred of Windsor, Peter, son of Meillesme, Hervey of Torigni, Robert Neuler, Geoffrey the goldsmith, son of William, Everard his brother, William of Ely, William of Rouen, Rainer of Valence. And on the part of the abbot these are the witnesses: Roger de Montigni, William Manchon, Geoffrey Chamberlain, Richard of Dover, son of Rainald, Haymeric, son of Quintin, John, son of Gerold, Eustace de Ros'

448 William de Amundeville quitclaims all right in Cratley to Rufford Abbey; he receives a payment in advance on the understanding that he shall, in the court of Simon III de St. Liz, earl of Nottinghamshire and Huntingdonshire, procure the agreement of Hugh fitz Ralph (the most substantial tenant in Cratley) to an exchange of land. Let it be known to all present and future that William de Amundeville has granted to the abbey of Rufford all his right and claim which he had in the land of Cratley and has proclaimed it to be quit and free from himself and his heirs and as Earl Gilbert [de Ghent] gave that land to the abbey and confirmed it by his charters. For this grant and donation the aforesaid William received the fraternity of the house and that, when he dies, the monks shall do for him what they do for a monk. Moreover, William shall receive from them 30 marks of silver and 10 cows. They gave him straightaway 10 marks and 10 cows only, on the understanding that he will receive the rest when he has made peace between them and Hugh fitz Ralph and the latter's heirs and that he, William, shall see to it that Hugh appears in the court of Earl Simon and gives up his claim to the monks forever in the court of Earl Simon. And Earl Simon shall give an exchange for that land to Hugh fitz Ralph, as his father, Ralph fitz Reinger, received it from Earl Gilbert, i.e. a carrucate of land in Barton and his other land in Thorpe. And for this agreement William must find 447 1 '[Translation taken from Palgrave Collected Works, vii, 246-249.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 483 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

secure pledges for the monks to make sure that this pact shall be maintained, for which they give straightaway 10 marks and 10 cows, and if William cannot carry out what has been agreed, he shall on lawful summons by the abbot restore the 10 marks and the 10 cows without any subterfuge. This agreement was made in the presence of Abbot Gilbert of Swineshead, Abbot Acius of Vaudey, Galon the monk, Simon the cellarer of Sawtry, Earl Simon, Hervey de Gousele and William de Dive, a monk of Vaudey. As soon as William will have established peace on all counts and the abbot has sworn this to be the case, the abbot shall fully pay to William the remaining 20 marks of silver of the agreement, with the confirmation of William and Hugh fitz Ralph. Witnesses to this agreement: Adam de Wymondham, Robert Raache, Hugh de Neville, Simon de Ropsley and John fitz Osbert.

449

Gilbert Foliot, bishop of London, complains to Robert, earl of Leicester, because the latter summoned Baldwin, a canon of St. Paul's in London, to appear before him in a case between Baldwin and one of the latter's tenants. To his venerable lord and dearest friend Robert, earl of Leicester, brother Gilbert, minister of the church of London, salvation which is now with us and the one we hope to obtain from the Lord. Few words easily convince when the friend to whom one writes is ready to listen with benignity. Always hoping the best from you, we are confident that under the exhortation of charity we shall suffer no repulse when we have recourse to you. A letter of summons was sent by your highness to a canon and friend of ours called Baldwin to appear at Oxford before you at the next meeting and to answer some man of his, almost a rustic, for not observing some agreement which was passed between them, so he alleges, and confirmed by a chirograph. The case is unimportant and the object trivial: it is all about half a virgate of land and a yearly rent of 12 pence. If therefore some litigation has arisen between the cleric of St. Paul and his man concerning land belonging to his church, it behoves us, if it pleases, to hear what has happened and to do justice to the plaintiff in everything. Since he despises us and has gone to your highness bypassing us, we ask you, if it pleases, that such reverence should be exhibited to St. Paul and us that he understands the necessity of turning to us for the safeguard of God's Church and to stand trial, with your consent, as justice prescribes. We return your letter of summons to you because we do not at all recognize the style of your clerks in it. We wish that you are well in the Lord and

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 484 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that to Caesar will be rendered what is his,' so that you will also render to God 2 what is God's.

450 Quitclaim by Robert Coc of Horton in the court of his lord, William de Percy, of his right in Crooks House in the parish of Bracewell to Sawley Abbey.

To all those who see or hear this letter, Robert Coc of Horton, greeting. Know that by the counsel of my friends I have for the salvation of my soul and those of all my ancestors and heirs forsworn and quitclaimed forever in the court of my lord, William de Percy, to God and St. Mary and the monks of Sawley, who serve God there, all the right and claim which I had in Crooks House with all appurtenances, for which there was a plea between me and the aforesaid monks in the court of my lord William de Percy, for 20 s., which the aforesaid monks gave me. And my lord William de Percy gave me and my heirs 10 bovates of land in Horton in free service in exchange for the aforesaid land of Crooks House. And let it be known that therefore the aforesaid monks have granted me the full advantages of their house forever and, if I want to, to be buried amongst them at my death, and to receive the service for my soul as for one of their brethren in all things. Witnesses: Nigel de Stockeld, Baldwin de Bramhope, Peter de Plumpton, Oliver Angevin and many others.' 451 After Abbot Laurence of Westminster has impleaded Abbot Robert of St. Albans concerning land between the river Marford and Sandridge, an agreement is reached under Robert's successor, Simon, in the county court of Hertfordshire. 449

450

Cf. Matt. xxii. 21; Mc. xii. 17; Luc. xx. 25. Bishop Gilbert complains of a summons from the earl to Baldwin, canon of St. Paul's, to appear before him in a case between the canon and one of his tenants. The case - a trivial one anyway pertains to the bishop's court, and Gilbert is returning the summons, whose authenticity he doubts (very likely a diplomatic suggestion offering the earl a way out without loss of face). The earl addressed was doubtless Robert II, who was royal justiciar and died in April 1168. Possibly he was to preside at the court of Oxford in the king's absence. Henry II was in France for two periods between 1163 and April 1168, in March-May 1165, and from March 1166 onwards; on both occasions Earl Robert acted as regent (The Complete Peerage,vii, 529). Cf. same charter, but with a longer list of witnesses and dated [c. 1160-1175] by the latest editor, under no. 482.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 485 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

A. Abbot Laurence of Westminster repeatedly annoys Abbot Robert of St. Albans with litigation, inter alia, concerning land between the river Marford and Sandridge. [Abbot Laurence] has repeatedly and violently vexed us and has resuscitated litigation that had previously been settled in connection with some land between the river Marford and the land of Sandridge and other lands and possessions. In this he was supported by the king, for he maintained that he had been oppressed by Gervase, 1 who was of royal blood, and that therefore he was entitled to recover with the king's assistance.

B. Concord in the county court of Hertfordshire between Westminster Abbey and the abbey of St. Albans concerning land between Sandridge and the river Marford. This is the agreement between the monastery of St. Peter at Westminster and the monastery of St. Albans concerning the controversy over some land situated on the eastern side of the road which leads towards Marford between the land of Sandridge and the river Marford. Abbot Laurence of Westminster, with the consent of his convent and by the counsel and the consent of his men to whom the right in that land belonged, has granted in the presence of Sheriff Nicholas and numerous men of the county of Hertford to Abbot Simon and the monks of the church of St. Albans all that land on which there was litigation between the aforesaid monasteries, and other neighbouring land which was found to belong to St. Peter's right, i.e. 8 full acres and so much more as is contained in the space of a foot and a half in width and one furlong in length. Abbot Simon, however, of the church of St. Albans has granted, with the consent of his convent and by the counsel of his men, to Abbot Laurence and the monastery of Westminster in exchange for the aforesaid land a similar quantity of land in Sandridge which borders on his land of Wheathampstead, i.e. 8 full acres and so much more as is contained in a space of a foot and a half in width and one furlong in length, and this was done with the consent of Gregory, the priest of Sandridge to whose right that land belonged. Thus the aforesaid monasteries shall forever hold the aforesaid lands free from all service and claim. The abbot of Westminster shall warrant that land which he gave to the abbot and the church of St. Albans against all men, and

451A 1 [Gervase, abbot of Westminster from 1138 to c. 1157, was an illegitimate son of King Stephen and was removed as abbot by King Henry II.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 486 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

similarly the abbot of the church of St. Albans shall warrant the land which he gave in exchange to the abbot of Westminster against all men. This was done for the sake of the peace of both churches, and put in writing to avoid the possibility of resuscitating litigation between them in the future because of that land.

452 Roger de Nonant notifies Bishop Bartholomew of Exeter that Walter de Meroi, after claiming some land in his, Roger's court against the canons of Plympton, has transferred his claim to the royal justices at Exeter; the latter, however, have sent the case back to Roger's court, where sentence was given in favour of the canons. To Bartholomew, by God's grace bishop of Exeter, and all the clergy and the faithful whom God has entrusted to him, and to all his men and friends, Roger de Nonant, greeting. Know you all that a knight from the honor of Totnes, called Walter de Meroi, made a claim against the canons of the church of Plympton in the 15th year of the reign of King Henry the younger in my court of Totnes concerning a small plot of land called Scoblevill and thence transferred his claim to Exeter before the justices of the king, and at the command of the justices he was given a day to plead again in the court of Totnes, and he appeared there on the day of the plea and, having heard his counsel, this same Walter said that the land of Scoblevill should be his by hereditary right, but he did not show that he ever had seisin of it nor did he produce any witness or any proof for his words. To those words of Walter's it was replied for the canons that my mother Mabel held all the aforesaid small plot of land for several years freely and quietly in the time of King Henry the elder as her own possession and all that year in which King Henry died and for several years after his death. Thereafter, however, she wanted for the salvation of her soul and that of all those who belonged to her to give this land for God to the church of Plympton in quit alms and free of all secular service and all custom, except danegeld and murder, and I have granted the donation to the said church in completely free alms and I have confirmed it with my charter. This response which was given for the canons was acclaimed by many witnesses and I added to it that I was ready to prove the truth of this response by my body or that of one of my knights and that Walter never had or ought to have any right in the aforesaid land. Judgment was then given, based on Walter's words which he had spoken in the court and on the response of the canons of Plympton and my own, that that land was to remain with the canons in alms, quit and free as it was given to them by my mother and granted and confirmed by me. The following witnesses were present at this judgment: William Bozun, who gave this judgment in that court, and my three

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 487 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

sons Wido, Henry and Baldwin, granting the donation which my mother had made and which I had confirmed with my charter and my seal, and Richard Bozun, at the time my steward, Hugh de Careville, Wido de Bocland and his brother Stephen the cleric and William fitz Stephen.

453 Notification by Roger de Mowbray of the settlement made in his court of the dispute between him and Alan de Ryedale, after a wager of battle, about the moor between Welburn and Bowforth: the parties agree to resort to the oath of twelve lawful knights of the venue. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Roger de Mowbray, greeting. Know you all that all the controversy, which went on between me and Alan de Ryedale concerning the moor which lies between Welburn and Bowforth stretching as far as Cowldyke and which is common to the three vills of Welburn, Hoveton and Bowforth, was terminated in the following way and settled forever before me and my court and numerous neighbours of mine and the king's ministers, David the lardiner, Odo de Newsham, William Dod and several others on the part of the sheriff. Alan himself came to my court and declared that the aforesaid moor and the exit of the monks of Rievaulx, which he had blocked there, were his by right and pertained to his demesne and that he was ready to pledge his faith on this by judicial combat. I on the contrary maintained that it ought to be common to the aforesaid three vills, that the monks ought to have the aforesaid exit free, as my father and my mother and I myself had most freely had it, and that the said Alan had blocked the said exit unjustly, and I appointed one of my free men against him who was ready to defend my assertion and the right of my almoign. Finally after many assaults and blows they came together and, under pressure of his friends, Alan quitclaimed in the very place of battle, before all those who were present, the aforesaid exit to be free forever as my almoign to the church and the monks of St. Mary of Rievaulx and he also quitclaimed to them whatever is contained between the boundaries which are named in the charters, which I gave to the aforesaid monks concerning my donation of Welburn and Hoveton, in the wood as well as in the plain and in all other things except the aforesaid moor, so that this same Alan and his heirs will never again claim anything inside the aforesaid boundaries. As to the aforesaid moor, however, I and the aforesaid Alan have spontaneously agreed to elect twelve lawful knights from our neighbours and to hold for valid and unbreakable whatever they should declare under oath concerning that moor, and we agreed on a day for this. On the appointed day I and my court and many of our neighbours gathered on the aforesaid moor and there it was found and proved by twelve lawful and sworn knights, elected by both parties, that this whole moor had

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 488 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

so far been common and ought by right to belong forever to the aforesaid three vills of Welburn, Hoveton and Bowforth and Alan gave his consent to this, and whatever he had constructed previously in that moor remained there by sentence of the judges and so the whole controversy was ended by fine of duel. Those are the knights who swore for the aforesaid moor: William de Stonegrave, Drew de Harome, Peter de Surdeval, Odo de Newsham, Robert de Benefeld, William de Balliol, Robert de Stonegrave, brother of William de Stonegrave, Bartholomew de Thoreni, William son of Engelram, Hugh de Howthorpe, Stephen de Kilham and Turold de Neville. I therefore have decided to have this action put in writing and signed with my seal so that the truth of the matter shall be known to the present and the future, and the aforesaid Alan or his heirs shall not be able to put before the courts again what has been ended forever according to the judicial order and by fine of duel. The following were witnesses among the royal ministers sent by the sheriff: David the king's lardiner, Geoffrey Fossard, Odo de Newsham, William Dod and Ivo de Boltby. The following came from among our neighbours: Richard de Wassand and his brother William, Jukel de Allerton, Peter de Surdeval, William de Maunby, Robert de Sproxton, Simon de Stonegrave and his brother Henry; and from my court: Robert the chaplain, my sons Nigel and Robert, Robert de Daiville, Hugh Malebisse, Ralph de Belvoir and his brother Robert, Thomas de Coleville, Robert de Buscy, Nicholas de Bellun and many others.'

454 Nigel de Mowbray confirms the grant by his father Roger de Mowbray of four bovates of land in Hoveton (lost, now in Welburn) to Rievaulx Abbey: he explains that his father purchased the land from Samson de Cornwall, who quitclaimed it in the purchaser's court and repeated his quitclaim in the chapter of York and again in the presence of Ranulf de Glanvill, sheriff of Yorkshire. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Nigel de Mowbray, greeting. Know that my father bought with his own money, i.e. 20 marks of silver, the 4 bovates of land with its appurtenances, which Samson de Cornwall held in Hoveton, from this same Samson and his wife, and they have quitclaimed them to us in the court of my father for the aforesaid sum of money without any demand or challenge in the future for themselves and their heirs, and they have confirmed by their own hand in the hand of Ralph de Belvoir that they would keep this without any malice and forever before numerous witnesses, and afterwards they recognized this same confirmation in the chapter of St. Peter at York and before Ranulf the sheriff, i.e. 453 1 o[V.H. Galbraith, "The death of a champion (1287)", Studies in medieval history presented to F.M. Powicke, Oxford (1948), 290; RIEVAULX Cart., p. 111, note 3; Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 75.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 489 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

that they would never personally or through someone else make any demand or claim to the aforesaid land. After my father had bought this land and held it in his hand quit and without any claim, he gave it in perpetual alms to the monks of Rievaulx with all the other land of Hoveton, confirming this by his charter. And all this I similarly have granted to them and confirmed by this my present charter, as my father Roger de Mowbray gave it to the aforesaid monks and confirmed it by his charter, free and quit of all customs and aids and assizes and all worldly service, except that they shall pay to Robert Beler 2 marks of silver per year for all worldly service. And if the aforesaid Samson or his wife or somebody else should make any claim concerning this almoign during my lifetime or that of my heirs, we shall be between them and all men and we shall make them free and warrant all this to them in pure and perpetual alms. Witnesses: Roger abbot of Byland and Walter prior of the same place, Landric the cellarer [of Byland], Robert the chaplain [of Roger de Mowbray], Robert de Daiville, Roger de Flamville, Hugh Malebisse, Ralph [de] Belvoir and his brother Robert, Robert de Buscy and Baldwin the clerk [of Roger de Mowbray].

455 Confirmation by Nigel de Mowbray to the abbey of Rievaulx of Welburn with its boundaries as perambulated and recognized under oath by the men of Roger de Mowbray, his father. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Nigel de Mowbray, greeting. Know that I have granted and by my present charter confirmed to God and the church of St. Mary of Rievaulx and the monks who serve God there, for the soul of my father Roger' and my mother, in perpetual alms the donation of my aforesaid father, i.e. Welburn with all its appurtenances, in the wood and the plain, the marsh and the meadows, the waters and the pastures, with the roads, paths and boundaries which are here named. From the west, i.e. from Welburn as the Fragateruns under Lund as far as the road of Wombleton and thence as that same road leads between the wood of Wombleton and of Lund as far as Tunge and thence following the boundaries between Wombleton and Welburn as far as Mapelbusch and Loccu and Sleights and thence following the boundaries as far as Langaran and thence to Apalgard and the boundaries of Cleveland and Middlehead; from east of Welburn the boundary follows the Redover down Bloworth where it has its origin, from the eastern part of Middlehead to Hallewat and from Bloworth also to the boundaries of Cleveland; from the south following the road between Wombleton and Welburn to Midelhirstand from the southern part of Midelhirstas the valley forms 455 ' [Nigel de Mowbray is repeatedly found issuing charters relating to the English honor of Mowbray as if heshared lordship with his father, see MowBRAY Charters, p. xxix.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 490 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the boundary between some land and a marsh to Stodfald and thence in a straight line towards Holm as far as Hole Beck and the common pasture of the moor which lies before Bowforth and which is common to those three vills, Welburn, Hoveton and Bowforth, as far as Cowldyke. The boundaries have been perambulated by my father's men in his presence and they recognized under oath that they were the rightful boundaries between Welburn and the vills surrounding it. All this I grant and confirm to them, free and quit of all customs, aids, gelds and assizes and worldly service. And if anyone should claim anything from this my father's and my own almoign or the aforesaid boundaries against them during my lifetime or that of my heirs or even deraign it by a plea, I and my heirs will stand between them and all men and settle any claims, and warrant all this to them in pure and perpetual alms ... so that this our almoign shall always and forever remain freely and fully with the house of Rievaulx. I have promised to hold this donation and agreement with my own hand in the hand of Robert [de Botevilein], dean [of York], in the presence of the lord Roger, archbishop and the whole chapter of York and I have made that same church of York the witness and guarantor of all this between me and the monks, so that if I or my heirs were ever to deviate from this agreement, that church should by applying ecclesiastical discipline recall us to duty to fulfil all this. Witnesses: Abbot Roger of Byland, Walter prior of the same place, Richard prior of Newborough, Landric the cellarer [of Byland], Robert the chaplain [of Roger de Mowbray], Robert de Daiville, Roger de Flamville, Ralph de Belvoir and his brother Robert, Robert de Buscy, Roger Barr', Walter de la Rivere, Robert de Beauchamp, William de Tickhill, Robert the chamberlain [of Roger de Mowbray] and Baldwin the clerk [of Roger de Mowbray]. 456 Notification by William son of Amfrid that he has given in alms to the Gilbertine priory of Ormsby a quarter of the church and vill of Fotherby, which he had deraigned by duel in the king's court against Hugh de Twit. To all the faithful of Christ William son of Amfrid of Haugh sends greeting. Know that I have given and by this charter confirmed in pure and perpetual alms to God and Blessed Mary and the convent of Ormsby the fourth part of the church of Fotherby, which I deraigned by duel in the court of the lord king against Hugh de Twit the deforciant, with common pasture belonging to the fourth part of the said vill for their plough beasts, with other appurtenances belonging to the said portion of the church. And I William and my heirs will warrant, acquit and defend all the aforenamed things to the said convent against all men on all matters and

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 491 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

demands for ever.' Witnesses: Robert de Ormsby, Thomas de Louth, Gilbert de Norfolk, Robert son of Fulk, Picot de Wyham, Hugh fitz Baldre and others.

457 Gilbert of Sempringham, accused before royal judges of helping Thomas Becket against the king, refuses to swear a purgatory oath.

So when almost all England had conspired to cause the downfall of the Church and of St. Thomas and the latter could find no place where his foot could rest, and people were making joint and insidious efforts to capture him and to hand him over to the king's will, he was peacefully received in the monasteries and dwellings of father Gilbert and given companions and servants from among the latter's brethren who arranged his travels and hiding with circumspection. But after the said holy archbishop had fled to King Louis of the French as an exile from England in times of growing wickedness, the lord Gilbert and his people were accused of having sent a considerable sum of money overseas after the [archbishop's] banishment and having supplied him against the king's order with whatever he needed. Since this, although false, was believed by the king's lieges and ministers, they were forced, viz. [Gilbert] himself and all the heads and overseers of his monasteries, to stand trial before the king's judges so that, if convicted, they would all similarly suffer exile. Since, however, the judges who all knew his sanctity took pity, they offered him to pledge under oath that the accusation was false, so that he could return home with his people unharmed. This the very holy and wise man, who could have done it in complete faith and in accordance with the truth, refused to do, because it would have caused injury to the Church, saying that he would rather undergo exile than swear such an oath. He believed indeed that although the truth of the matter was different from what they thought and it does not hurt to swear the truth if one is compelled and although the evil is rather with him who demands an oath than him who swears it, he would nevertheless seem to be acting against the just demands of faith and piety if he swore and he would set a bad example to future and present people, as if it were impious and sacrilegious to help the pastor and the church in such a case, whereas it is more profane in this circumstance not to defend the Church as best one can. Likewise under the Maccabees the old man Eleazar refused to eat pork for fear of death, nor would he simulate eating it for love of life and for old friendship's sake in order to avoid as an old man to set a sad example to the living, as one who had violated the ancestral laws out of fear. Thus our old man refused to leave the 456 ' '[Translation to this point, from

GILBERTINE

HousEs Charters, no. 10, p. 43.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 492 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Church defenceless while he could leave it or to feign that he had left it, so as to avoid discouraging others by losing his nerve amongst men and by so doing incurring God's wrath. Thus the lord [king]'s judgment being suspended because [Gilbert] would not consent to purge himself in that way and the judges being fearful to condemn him, he stayed in London with his followers waiting for the tribunal's decision and always ready for everything, standing by the truth. During this expectancy all his followers were discouraged by great fear and even on the point of leaving family and fatherland, some of them being ready to swear that oath and to leave the places of their profession because they thought that they could certainly have sworn, but considered it impious. But he was so oblivious of earthly fear that, sitting in his court with all the deserving members of his household, he bought some spinning tops offered by a child, for no other use or purpose than to have fun with his companions and to show how little he was worried by the cause of their sadness. In his main dwelling also he joyfully made fun during that wait and during the liturgical solemnities he amazed the people by the sweet harmony of his spiritual choir: having fallen upon various troubles he esteemed every joy. On the last day, when all were fearful that a bad hearing would cause them without delay or avoidance to go into the expected exile, royal messengers arrived from overseas before the judges telling them on the king's behalf to postpone the case of Master Gilbert and his people until the king himself had more fully studied the case. He was at once dismissed in peace and allowed to return home with all his followers. Then, free from all demand and pressure and having no need to deny or confess anything, he clearly said to the judges, but without touching or looking at sacred objects and not in the course of a trial, yet with words which they would well believe, that he was completely innocent of the falsity of which he was accused. Hence they all admired the constancy of the man who, even in such harshness of threats and in dangerous circumstances for himself and his people, had refused to do under pressure what he so safely could do and which afterwards he did spontaneously.

458 Litigation in the king's court, initiated by royal writ, between Battle Abbey and Alan de Belfou, parson, concerning the rights of the abbey in the churches of Mendlesham, Brantham and Branford. After sessions at Windsor (where a temporary agreement was reached), Canterbury and London, the production of (false) charters and the amercement of Alan, a final concord is established at the exchequer.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 493 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the mean time the abbot's messengers returned from beyond the sea, bringing a royal mandate to the justices of the realm, ordering that full justice be done to the abbot of Battle in the matter of Mendlesham church. By royal authority a day and place were set at Winchester for the abbot and Alan, so that a fuller inquiry into the truth might be made at the one's prosecution and the other's defence. This was done by the royal authority but nevertheless it was not to the detriment of any ecclesiastical right or privilege, since the royal court regarded its inquiry as touching on one point only: at whose presentation this Alan had been instituted into Mendlesham church, located in a royal manor, given and confirmed to Battle Abbey by the predecessors of the lord king and by the king himself. I For it was clear that he ought not have been instituted at the presentation of anyone save either the lord king as lord of the manor or the monks of Battle, to whom the church had been assigned by the royal generosity, as was well known. Robert 'the philosopher', whom we have mentioned earlier, was still alive then; on that day he represented the abbot in court against Alan who again came in person. He argued the right of Battle Abbey before the justices and entered a complaint against the intrusion of Alan. Alan replied, offering charters which, as we have mentioned, had the name of Abbot Warner on them, and he claimed to have been admitted there with the consent of the abbot while he was still living. Now although it was plain to those who studied them carefully that those charters bore the mark of forgery, none the less it was the unanimous counsel and opinion of all present that the thing would be better done by compromise than by litigation. Both parties assented to the advice and wishes of these prompters and the compromise was worked out by arbitrators in this form: Alan was freely to renounce all right he claimed in the church of Mendlesham and was to resign the charters from which he had argued his defence into the abbot's hands. For this he was to have the abbot's favour. He was to hold, from Battle Abbey and for life, only the church of Brantham, which, as we have said above, he had acquired uncanonically, and for which the pension under the old custom was 10 s. But he was to pay annually to Battle the pension of one gold piece.' And thus the entire quarrel and disagreement would settle down. Everyone approved this form of compromise, and since the parties assented to it, a day and place were fixed at Canterbury in which the abbot, in person, and Alan were to meet before the justices to confirm the agreement. On the day and at the place fixed the abbot appeared before the justices, but Alan 458 ' The action of darreinpresentment in an early form. See Van Caenegem, Writs, pp. 330-335. 2 There were no English gold coins at this time. The gold coin most in circulation was the bezant or nomisma of Byzantium. R.S. Lopez, "The Dollar of the Middle Ages", Journalof Economic Histor', xi (1951), 212-213. Any gold coin seems to have been called a bezant, but generally under Henry II the exchequer accepted twenty or twenty-four silver pence for one bezant. P.D.A. Harvey, "The English Inflation of 1180-1220", Past and Present, lxi (1973), 28-29, and G.C. Brooke, English Coins (3rd edn., London, 1950), pp. 68, 107, 110. Such an exchange rate implies that the payment was very likely little more than a token of lordship and not the old rent of 10 s.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 494 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

neither appeared nor sent an excuse. He was therefore unanimously adjudged in the king's mercy; and later a day and place were again set in London for the parties to meet and confirm the compromise. Finally they came on the day and to the place set. The course of the quarrel and the form of the compromise were fully explained before the justices of the lord king and many other witnesses. Alan resigned the charters into the abbot's hand and so received the abbot's charter giving the single church of Brantham to him to hold from the monastery of Battle for the payment of one gold piece annually. When all this was done and the whole quarrel was thought settled thereby, unexpectedly this Alan, beginning what seemed a new dispute, maintained that the church of Bramford was his by right. But he began his process with veiled language, wishing, unless I am mistaken, to test whether he could find some way into the church. But he found that no one would take up his cause. Indeed he roused indignation against himself in the whole royal court, to the point that it seemed to be everyone's opinion that the recent compromise should not at all be held to: instead, he should be given back his charters, and the case should be started again from scratch, with proceedings not by peaceful compromise, but by lawsuit and judgment. He was therefore considerably hemmed in, and when he realized that the affair had turned out hardly according to his wishes, he approached the abbot through Richard, archdeacon of Poitiers.3 He offered to renounce all rights whatever in all the churches assigned to Battle Abbey as its dower, if the abbot would agree to the institution of his brother Roger de Belfou in the single church of Brantham, to hold for life from Battle for the same pension he and the abbot had recently agreed upon. The abbot, once more guided by the counsel of his friends, decided to yield to Alan's petition in this respect, this being, as was thought, an opportunity to separate Alan totally from everything belonging to St. Martin's of Battle. Therefore he consented, but he did it prudently, not as one who did it entirely of his own volition, but as one who would do it as a favour to the mediating archdeacon. In the presence and hearing of all the lord king's justices, as well as the barons and many others there in the exchequer, Alan publicly gave up the churches of Brantham, Mendlesham, Bramford and all the other dower churches for ever. On his side the abbot granted the single church of Brantham to Roger de Belfou for a pension of one gold piece payable to Battle annually. But lest he should seem to have done anything in this without his convent's consent, he set a day for Roger to come to Battle and receive the church and a charter of confirmation with the convent's consent. After taking an oath to serve faithfully and to pay the pension fully, he would then be sent to the bishop of Norwich to be instituted at the presentation of the abbot and convent. Everything was properly completed as required, and it was thought that everything had been peacefully concluded, when suddenly Roger died, leaving the church vacant. Alan Richard of lichester, one of Henry II's household administrators and close advisers, appears from 1163 as archdeacon of Poitiers. He was consecrated bishop of Winchester in 1174. C. Duggan, "'Richardof Ilchester, royal servant and bishop", TRHS 5th Ser. xvi (1966), 1-21.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 495 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

de Belfou, the dead man's brother, did not long leave it vacant; without consulting the abbot and convent of Battle he dared to appropriate it illicitly. When the abbot heard this, he could not take it calmly. He determined to complain again in the king's court about this sort of intrusion. This frightened Alan a good deal, and he approached the abbot through certain men of influential name, praying pardon and forbearance. These great men intervened pressingly for him and promised a fitting satisfaction for his presumption. They overcame the abbot with their importunities and he dropped his complaint for the time, wishing to satisfy in part the prayers of the intermediaries and to test Alan's promised satisfaction. However, since the time of his calling was imminent, when he must give up the present life, he proceeded no further in the business. As a result Alan made no satisfaction. For many years after the abbot's death he held Brantham church under his independent authority and took all its profits.4 459 Robert Cappe and Simon his brother, who brought an action against William de Ridware in the court of Robert de Stafford concerning land in Ridware, give up their claim. The case is reopened before royal justices in eyre (also concerning land in Edingale), where William de Ridware wins his case; thereupon a royal writ orders Robert de Stafford to see to it that William de

Ridware holds his land in Ridware and Edingale in peace. A. Notification by Robert II de Stafford that Robert Cappe and his brother Simon have in his court given up their claim on Ridware to William de Ridware and his heir. Robert de Stafford, to all his men, French and English, greeting. Let it be known to you that Robert Cappe and his younger brother Simon have spontaneously appeared in my court and have there, before me and before my court, given up to William de Ridware and his heirs the claim which they had on Ridware for themselves and their heirs, and this they have confirmed by their faith. And for the aforesaid claim the aforesaid William gave to the aforesaid Robert 1 mark of silver and William, the son and heir of the aforesaid William, gave to the aforesaid Robert one of his riding horses with a saddle and a rein and with its cloak tied to the saddle, and to the aforesaid Simon he gave his coat and his shirt, and all this because of the aforesaid claim, to him and his heirs from them and both their heirs, and by this my grant and that of my wife Avice and of my son Robert and my heirs. And I Robert de Stafford am witness to this, and also my wife Avice, my son

4 0[Translation taken from BATTLE Chron., 245-251.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 496 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Robert, Walter de Somerville, Peter de Birmingham, Hervey de Stratton, Thomas fitz Richard, Hervey Bagot and his sons Hervey and Roger, William Bagot, Robert Bagot, William and Richard sons of John Bagot, Robert de Blore, Geoffrey Bras, Helias de Coppenhall, Geoffrey de Wasteneis, Helgot fitz Wido, William fitz Ralph, Robert de Standon, Robert fitz Alan, Horm de Norton, William and Robert sons of William de Wasteneis, Robert fitz Hamo, Roger de Hampton, Hugh de Ridware and his son Roger and Robert de Sallow; and the whole court of Robert de Stafford was also witness.

B. Writ by King Henry II to Robert II de Stafford, ordering that William de Ridware shall hold his land in Ridware and Edingale, as he deraigned it at Lichfield before the king's justices in eyre. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Robert de Stafford, greeting. I order that William de Ridware shall hold well, in peace and justly his land of Ridware and Edingale, as he deraigned it at Lichfield before my justices in eyre. And unless you do it, my sheriff of Staffordshire shall do it, so that I hear no complaint thereof for lack of right. Witness: Geoffrey, archdeacon of Canterbury. At Kentford.

460 Notification and confirmation by Reginald, earl of Cornwall, of a recognition which established that Robert Giffard and his son Walter had given the church of Lamerton to Tavistock Abbey. Reginald fitz Roy, earl of Cornwall,' to Bishop Bartholomew and the chapter of Exeter, greeting. It was recognized before Robert fitz Geoffrey, who has the heir of Walter Giffard in his guardianship, by the nearest relations and kinsmen of that heir and by lawful neighbours from the region of Tavistock, clerics and laymen, that Robert Giffard and his son Walter after him have given the church of

460 ' The honour of Plympton (see note on xiv supra) was at this period in Earl Reginald's hands by reason of the minority of Baldwin (II) de Redvers (Round, art. Reginald, earl of Cornwall, D.N.B.).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 497 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Lamerton to the church of Tavistock in perpetual alms. And I grant and by my charter confirm that same church to the monastery of Tavistock for the love of God and for the souls of the said barons.

461 A young man called Wido is kept in custody in Stafford under suspicion of manslaughter. Having drunk water brought to him by a pilgrim from the place of Becket's martyrdom, he is freed of his fetters. Although at first suspected of black magic, notably by King Henry II, he is finally set free. Around that time some young man called Wido was accused of manslaughter and held in custody in the town of Stafford. On the holy day of Pentecost it happened that a pilgrim arrived there who carried the signs of his pilgrimage to St. Thomas, a flask and water. Having drunk from it, the fettered man received what he had not asked for, for whereas he prayed to be and stay in good health, he also obtained the undoing of his fetters. Oh wonder, the iron felt the effect of the drink and the pin [of his fetters] came undone and released the drinking man, but the guards intervened and his chains were fastened again. After a while a choir of clerics passed by, duly celebrating the holy day, and his fetters were unlocked again, and again fastened. When, however, the pin that holds the chains came undone for the third time opposite the altar, the priest took the chains and gratefully hung them up in the church and wanted to retain the prisoner, but this was forbidden: the man was taken away, put in custody in prison and attached to a beam with a chain that ran round his middle, since what was the work of divine virtue, was ascribed to sorcery and incantations. But this importune custody was of no avail nor was the dark cavern or the heavy weight of the iron, for whom the Son of God wants to liberate shall truly be free. The fettered man was told in a vision: "Awake, why are you drowsy and depressed? Address yourself to the Blessed Thomas so that he may intervene for you" This was repeated three times. Aroused, he at once saw the iron fall down and he reported his heavenly visit and produced the indications of that visit. The king was told that it was impossible to keep Wido in custody in prison and he ordered him to be brought before him and said to him: "Your sorcery loosens our fetters and breaks our bolts" ".Ohlord", he said "there are no bad deeds of mine there, but the good deeds of the Blessed Thomas are great". Thus the king, showing royal clemency rather than applying judicial severity, said having heard the name of the martyr: "If Thomas liberated

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 498 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

him, let no one henceforth molest him: he shall go in peace". The martyr, we believe, could have freed the fettered man from prison secretly, but it was more fitting to secure through a salutary miracle the goodwill of the king, who could absolve the culprit and not subject the guards to an inquiry.

462 Final concord in the county court of Cambridge between the abbot of Eynsham and Elias fitz Avicia concerning land which Alfric Gric held in Histon in fee from the abbot: Elias, his mother and his brother Walter quitclaim the land and return the royal writ, by which they have pleaded, to the sheriff. Be it known to all present and future that the suit that was between the abbot of Eynsham and Elias the son of Avicia concerning the land which Alfric held in Histon of the fee of the abbot of Eynsham, was terminated in the county of Cambridge in the following way. Elias, his mother Avicia and his brother Walter came to the county court and there forswore and gave up the aforesaid land and quitclaimed it forever to the church of St. Mary of Eynsham and they placed the king's writ, by which they pleaded, back into the sheriff's hand and swore that neither would they ever make any claim to it, nor any of their heirs nor anyone under their influence, or anyone else whom they might disturb. For this concord the abbot and convent gave Elias 20 s. and 6 s. per year for his clothing and to his mother Avicia 4 d. and one leather garment worth 2 s. and to Elias' brother Walter 20 d. This suit came to an end on St. Catherine's day after the first voyage to Ireland of King Henry, before me Everard de Beche and Warin de Bassingbourn, sheriffs of Cambridgeshire. In testimony of this fine and concord I Everard, by the counsel of the county, gave the abbot and the convent of the monastery of Eynsham my seal hanging on this writing. Witnesses: Hamo Peche, Geoffrey de Farnellis, William de Scal', Oliver Le Moigne and Ralph the sheriff.'

462 1 0[This might be Ralph fitz Stephen who was sheriff of Gloucestershire from 1171 to 1175.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 499 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

463 A man accused of robbery is victorious in judicial combat thanks to Thomas Becket's intervention.

A dealer went to Richmond to sell the stud which he had and, as he walked around in the fair, another man came to him and asked him to sell him a foal which he thought was in fine shape. The dealer set a price, the buyer made a lower estimate and was adamant that the price should be fixed with competent moderation, but the other man stuck to his own estimate and they came to no agreement. As the buyer insisted for a longish time without making the seller change his mind even by using bold words, he decided to resort to cunning. As he was a very big man, robust and muscular, he shouted in a horrifying way: "Ho there, where are you from? This foal is mine, how is it with you? If you deny, the strength of my body and the vigour of justice will support me in exposing your dishonesty and recovering this stolen object which I have long been looking for and have now found with you". To which the other man replied: "What is mine cannot be mine in any higher degree, for the animal which you presume to vindicate with the slyness of a calumniator is mine and the mare that produced it is kept at my home. What you cannot obtain by paying the price, you attempt thus to get hold of, because of the vicious greed that has corrupted your heart". To this his adversary replied: "It is not yours, but mine". As they were thus quarrelling, they were arrested by the burgesses and it was ordered that the man who was accused of robbery should purge his innocence through combat or undergo the penalty for robbery and that the other man should start a prosecution for robbery and convict the guilty man. Hence the accused man, although he was innocent, was fearful of the machinations of the evil-minded, gave pledge to return to the judges and went back to the place whence he had come, as he was far from the consolation of his friends. Having settled his business, he took his brother with him and after a long trip arrived at the place of the duel. As soon as he got there he obtained a delay of three days and learned as much as he could of the art of fighting. As the day fixed for the combat arrived, one brother said to the other: "Brother, do in the meantime what you can. Promise to visit the site where the memory of the Blessed Thomas is kept alive and go the first nine steps of that trip: after you have gained victory you shall complete your pilgrimage, for on the intervention of the Blessed Thomas the Lord will preserve your innocence". After this had been done, they started fighting. The accuser attacks and with a middling stick hits his adversary who, protected by the support of the martyr and the shield of faith, did not feel the blows and, as if he were an expert in the art of duelling, inflicted such wounds on the head and the right arm of his accuser that, a beaten man, he was compelled lying at the feet of the judges to ask for forgiveness.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 500 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

464 An accusation of adultery leads to the arrest of a man and a woman in Canterbury by the local magistrate. The case is investigated by the dean, who condemns the couple after hearing an accusatory oath against which the accused man had protested, claiming to be entitled to a purgatory oath. A man from the territory of Exeter came to Canterbury with his wife to pray. As she was having a drink at the house of one Ralph, a citizen of Canterbury, a certain Romeus was present and asked for a drink and she poured into his goblet what was left in hers. Indignant because she had given him this in a despicable way, he poured it out again partly in her cup, and partly in her lap, exclaiming: "It would be better for you to be somewhere else with Colman, your husband, than here with another man". As her husband heard this insult he threw the man, who had uttered it, out of the house. Uttering threats, the man left and went to the leaders of the town and told them that unlawfully wedded and incestuous people had entered the town under cover of pilgrimage. Eager to profit, they summoned them under the accusation of adultery and, having inspected their goods and placed them in safe keeping, they took the accuser into custody until the accusation could be examined. The following day, as this sort of question belongs to the church courts, the dean transferred them to a chapel and examined them separately. To the woman he said: "How many children have you had from this man?" To which she replied: "Four" After she had been taken away he interrogated the man about the number of his children, who answered: "Two", remembering the two who had survived and not the two who had died. So the dean judged that they were convicted. As the accuser offered to maintain under oath that he had seen that woman joined to another man two years before, the accused on his part claimed that the oath should by law not be left to the accuser but to the defendant. Nevertheless the judge put them in chains and locked them up in the house inside the court of the archdeacon.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 501 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

465 Quitclaim in the court of the abbot of Westminster by Hugh fitz Warner, who brought a royal writ, of land in Sunbury and Teddington to Laurence, abbot of Westminster. For this quitclaim the abbot enfeoffed the plaintiff with three virgates of land in Teddington, which used to belong to Hamond. The following were present in the court of Westminster when Hugh fitz Warner gave up his claim on all the land which he claimed in Sunbury and Teddington and for this quitclaim Abbot Laurence granted him in fee and heredity 3 virgates of land which used to belong to Hamond in Teddington, so that the said Hugh surrendered the king's writ concerning this claim into the abbot's hand and pledged in the hand of Alan the steward to keep this agreement to the end. Archdeacon Baldric of Leicestershire, Archdeacon Hugh of Lisieux, Alfred the cleric of Wheathampstead, Master Maurice, Simon the cleric, Gervase de Cornhill, Alan, Ralph de Septfonteines, Henry de Camville, Gralent de Tany, Roger fitz William of Wheathampstead, Walter le Hare, Robert de Bosco, Ailmer de Wandsworth and Gilbert, Robert de Deerhurst, Geoffrey fitz Godfrey, on his side, and Pain and Ralph de Imber, Hugh de Weston, Hamond the cleric of Kingston and many others.

466 Agreement in the hallmoot of Cold Norton between the churches of Osney and Cold Norton concerning tithes in Norton.

Be it known that the controversy which was carried on between the church of Osney and the church of Norton concerning the tithes of the demesne of Walkelin Hareng of Norton was settled as follows. It was agreed between them that the church of Osney shall have two thirds of the tithes of grain of the whole demesne of the aforesaid Walkelin, whoever should cultivate the demesne or at whatever time, either the lord of the land or somebody else. The same applies to the land which was added to the hide held by Eustace de Frescheville, as was recognized by the men of the hallmoot of Norton, concerning 49 acres in one field and 35 acres in another field. The church of Norton on the other hand shall have [the tithe of] the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 502 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

other third of the aforesaid demesne and of the whole land that was added to it. And the church shall also receive the whole tithe of the whole villeinage, whoever cultivates it, either the lord of the land or another, and also of the other lands which are not of the demesne. Also the tithe of ... shall be shared equally between the church of Osney and the church of Norton, but the church of Osney shall have two thirds of all the tithes of the demesne meadows in Norton and the church of Norton the other third, saving the question of the wool, cheese and fruit. This agreement was made in the presence of Robert archdeacon of Oxford in the chapter of Black Bourton.

467 Concord made between Payne, abbot of Sawtry and Herbert, prior of St. Neots concerning the mills at Paxton, on the basis of a sworn verdict by twelve lawful men of the venue. This is the concord made between Payne, the lord abbot of Sawtry, and Herbert, prior of St. Neots, concerning the mills at Paxton. Twelve lawful men from the venue, six millers and six others, were elected who seemed wise enough to settle this quarrel. They swore on the Holy Gospel that without any subterfuge they would say the truth on the measure of the watercourse which is sufficient for the mills of the abbot without detriment and damage to the mills and the meadows of the prior. And after they had sworn their oath and given their verdict, they placed signs on the locks and fulling-mill showing how high the water could rise, being sufficient for the abbot without causing damage to the prior. They also placed their clearly visible marks, which have lasted till this day, to avoid the destruction of the sign of peace and the testimony of truth. In order to ensure abundant security for truth and peace, it was decided that both of them, i.e. the lord abbot and the prior, should have separate rods of one and the same measure marked with the same sign and mark, which would be placed on the fulling-mill as far as the right measure of water, as it was sworn, and if any disagreement arose, it would be settled by the testimony and the measure of their sticks. And if by chance it became necessary to renew or repair something in the locks or the mills, whatever has been damaged will be set right, under the control of the prior or those whom he will delegate there, in order fully to preserve the forementioned peace. The monks, the lay brethren or any other guardians whom the lord abbot shall appoint to guard the mills shall faithfully and lawfully have the peace and preserve it, and if

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 503 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

some quarrel arises which needs to be settled, the lord abbot of Sawtry shall strive to find an appropriate settlement. And if something arises on the part of the prior and because of his action causing damage to the abbot, the prior shall see to it that it is put right as is fitting. The lord abbot of Sawtry also paid three marks of silver to the lord Herbert, prior of St. Neots to sweeten that peace and to repair the damage of which the prior strongly complained. This was done in the year of the Lord 1173 at Ramsey on 18 July, the Wednesday in the octave of St. Benedict, in the presence of the lord William, abbot of Ramsey and the lord Hugh, abbot of Wardon, in whose presence this pact was concluded and confirmed.

468 Miraculous vengeance wrought by St. Cuthbert in a case of perjury and judicial combat.

It was decided by a secular judgment in the region of Norham that a man was to undergo the hardship of battle thereby, as it were, purifying himself of a criminal accusation. On the point to prove his innocence by oath, according to the custom which had been observed until now in other cases, he went to the altar of St. Cuthbert, and well knowing that he was guilty, he perjured himself on a crucifix which had been placed under his hand. This crucifix was cut out of the wood of the table, at which during his lifetime St. Cuthbert used to have his meals, wherefore everyone of that province who has to swear is in the habit of doing it on that crucifix. As he stretched his arm and touched the crucifix, not afraid to defile himself with the sacrilege of perjury before such a sanctuary, his right eye, suddenly torn out by divine judgment, fell on the ground and he limped away. As he reached the place called Midhope where the judicial combat took place under competent supervision, he could not see his adversary because divine vengeance had already demonstrated that he had perjured himself. His opponent pierced him with the very sharp point of his lance and did not give him a second wound, since he died from the first blow. Seeing this the people of that province dispersed in great fear and discovered through this horrible miracle how terrible St. Cuthbert had been in this vengeful judgment. This was seen by Swain' the priest, who told us and maintained that several people were still alive who had been present at these events.

2

468 1 This person occurs in charters of the period as priest of Fishwick on the opposite side of the Tweed. 2 '[See Scammell, Hugh du Puiset, 222.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 504 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

469 Christian, moneyer in Durham and farmer of the episcopal mines, throws into an episcopal prison somebody who is said to have found treasure, and tries to extort his secret; the prisoner is frightened at the prospect of ajudicial combat and is rescued by the intervention of St. Cuthbert. And even if we cannot be heard by others, we should not keep silent about the glory of St. Cuthbert, for we hope to receive a reward through his merits, even if we cannot obtain the attention of others by the sweetness of our speech. St. Cuthbert has sometimes saved guilty people from an accusation and its misery and freed innocent people from the snare of perdition. If we carefully study his works we can gain a good deal of information about his deeds. There was at that time in Durham a certain Christian, a moneyer who had farmed the episcopal mines. By chance he found some miserable man about whom rumour had it that he had discovered some treasure and had hidden and kept it for himself. He arrested him and put him in chains and as he could not extort from him what he wanted, he shut him up in the episcopal prison. This sort of torture could not be hidden nor could it remain unnoticed for any length of time. And once his misdeed had been discovered he could be accused not so much of making a profit himself, but of causing a loss of possible revenue, for in that town the dignity of royal might belonged to the bishop's powerful jurisdiction. Therefore the profit of such an acquisition which pertained to the royal as well as to the episcopal dignity could no longer remain hidden. Therefore he took him to the bishop's prison and disclosed the cause to the sheriff and to the bishop's officers. Hoping for considerable gain and profit, they locked him up and kept him very severely in fetters, binding him very closely with foot-irons, cruel and heavy weights and chains. Suffering for a long time indescribable miseries and torments and seeing that nobody would have any faith in his disculpation, he feared a most uncertain outcome of thejudicial ordeal which they had threatened to make him undergo to prove his innocence. Consequently he never stopped invoking the name of St. Cuthbert day and night and put all his hope and faith in whatever he would undertake, for he hoped that St. Cuthbert could free him from this misfortune and lead him to eternity, after his life had been taken, or come and free him from all his miseries. Nor had he hoped in vain, for during one night, as he was imploring St. Cuthbert's help anxiously and even more avidly than usual, he suddenly felt that the iron chains which had been attached around his legs crumbled away and he noticed that they spontaneously dropped off his feet. He at once thanked St. Cuthbert, took away the very heavy foot-irons from his feet and continued to offer promises and prayers to be released from the squalor of the prison. Full of the trust in St. Cuthbert which previously he had lost in his blindness, he reached the door and by some wonderful luck found that the beam in the centre was loose. He pulled it away, proceeded with great exaltation to

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 505 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the gates of the castle and found them closed and locked. Full of trust and hope in St. Cuthbert he marched audaciously towards the closed gates and with a slight blow and the movement of one finger he removed from the beams of the gates and the door-posts the remarkably strong locks, with all the nails, which had long ago been driven into them. Thereupon he left with marvellous exaltation and carrying the chains of the foot-irons on his shoulders and the nails with the iron locks and fetters in his hands, he took them to the tomb of St. Cuthbert. The guards who had kept the nightwatch in dark obscurity by the door of the prison and by the guardroom above the gates and on the surrounding walls had noticed nothing of his escape and disappearance. It is most amazing that a gate which could not have been torn away or broken up with many swords or axes and was divided in two halves by a beam, was cut up and in spite of being fortified with iron, scattered to bits with a slight blow and the movement of one finger, at St. Cuthbert's command, for it was surrounded and covered with such numerous iron bands that it could not be easily damaged even if one hit it with hammers. The locks of the doors were so heavy, strong, solid and terrible to see that one needed all the strength of one's hand to lift one of them and that they could without any damage bear the heaviest blows of axes, to the utmost horror of all those who saw them. The foot-irons would have sufficed to tame even lions, causing the utmost discomfort by their excessive weight. All this was smashed by the power of St. Cuthbert as if it were a spider's web and the prayers of a poor man in need and tribulation were not despised. That all this happened we learnt from the account of the man himself and we obtained proof of it by the declaration of the officers of the castle, who were at that time guarding the gates and the prison, and of the servants of the church of Durham who had seen and heard it, and we were also told by our monks who truthfully bore witness.'

470 Richard de Clare, earl of Hertford, tells his men, who had been ordered to swear that they had seen Stephen de Dammartin seised of the land of Pitley as of fee, not to swear, since Stephen de Dammartin occupied the land by violence, as the earl learned from his older men. Richard de Clare, earl of Hertford, to his beloved men Ralph de Chaureth, William fitz Godfrey, William Lencroe, Gervase de Samford, Godfrey de Higham and David de Samford, greeting. I have been told that you have been ordered by the king's justices to swear that you have seen Stephen de Dammartin seised of the 469 1 °[Scammell, Hugh du Puiset, 217.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 506 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

land of Pitley' as of his fee and inheritance and I am worried by this, since I do not want you to incur the wrath and curse of God for perjury and I notify you all that, while he had the stewardship and the administration of all the land of Earl Gilbert [de Clare], the said Stephen unjustly and against reason occupied the land of Pitley which belonged to William the reeve of Bardfield and his heirs, and that he even caused one of the sons of the aforesaid William to be cruelly and unjustly killed because he knew and understood that he was nearer to the inheritance of his father for possessing that land. And since this is the truth of the matter, as my older men confirmed to me, I forbid you as my faithful men to swear concerning the fee and inheritance of the said Stephen, since he had in the said land neither fee nor inheritance, but only as was shown unjust and violent occupation.2

471 Ailward, a peasant in the royal manor of Westoning, is accused of theft by Fulk, but argues that he took away the latter's property by way of distraint, in order to obtain payment of his wages. Having been held in custody at Bedford for some time, he invokes the help of Thomas Becket. The court, having to pronounce a proof-judgment, hesitates between judicial combat and the ordeal of hot iron or cold water, and decides in favour of the latter. Ailward fails, is condemned by the court and mutilated, while his goods are confiscated. A. The version of this incident in William of Canterbury's Miracula, written shortly after 1172 (Bibliotheca HagiographicaLatina, no. 8185). The burgesses of Bedford to the convent of Canterbury and all faithful in Christ, greeting. Let all the convent of Canterbury and all Catholics know that God has through the merits of St. Thomas the martyr worked a marvellous and remarkable miracle in Bedford. A rustic from Westoning called Ailward happened to be arrested for a theft amounting to only one penny and was brought before the sheriff of Bedford and the knights of the county, who publicly condemned him so that outside the town of Bedford he lost his eyes and testicles, in the presence of clerics, laymen and women. Of this John, the chaplain of St. John of Bedford,' is also witness, to whom the aforesaid rustic made his confession, and his host, called Ailbricht, who afterwards accommodated him, also testifies that when he first gave him shelter he was completely without eyes and testicles. Afterwards this man, 470

' Now represented by Pitley farm, in Great Bardfield, Essex. 2

471A

There seems no means at present of fixing the date of this letter, but it was probably written not long after Earl Richard's succession in 1173. "'[St. John's was one of the five ancient parishes of the town of Bedford, situated together with St. Mary's on the south of the river Ouse, whereas St. Paul's, St. Peter's and St. Cuthbert's were to the north of the river.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 507 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

who often invoked the merits of St. Thomas the martyr, was restored to health in a glorious and marvellous way by the apparition of the said martyr. We think it useful to elucidate the course of events so as to confirm posterity in the faith. Indeed, this Ailward was entitled to the coin from a neighbour, who was requested to pay and refused, so that Ailward, moved by anger, broke into the house of his debtor who, before going to a tavern, had fastened it with a padlock hanging outside; Ailward took away the padlock as a pawn and having taken at the same time a whetstone that was placed on the roof of the house, he made off with a bore and gloves. Some children, however, who were playing inside the house, went and told the father that the house had been broken into, that some household effects had been taken away and that the burglar had escaped. He pursued and caught him, wrung the whetstone from the hand of the bearer and injured him in the head. He drew his knife, pierced his arm, bound him and took him back to the house which he had broken into, as a thief caught in the act with the stolen goods. A crowd gathered together with Fulk the reeve who, since the theft of goods worth one penny does not justify mutilation, suggested to augment the importance of the theft by pretending that more goods had been stolen. This was done and a package was placed beside the fettered man containing hides, wool, linen cloth and a garment and also an iron instrument which the people call a pruning knife. 2 The following day he was brought to the cognizance of Sheriff Richard 3 and the knights of the county with the aforesaid package hanging round his neck, but to avoid an overhasty judgment in a dubious case, judgment was suspended and the man held in public custody at Bedford for the duration of a month. In the meantime he confessed to Payn,4 a priest who had been secretly called, all his excesses committed from childhood onwards and was exhorted to beg and implore the support of St. Mary and all saints and particularly St. Thomas, whom the Lord had deigned to glorify with the indications of virtues and signs. He was also advised to remove from his soul all anger and the incentive of hatred, not to despair of God's mercy and to undergo with equanimity and for the forgiveness of his sins whatever he was forced to suffer, all the more so since, regenerated as a child on Whitsun eve, he could not, according to popular opinion, go under in the water or be burned by the fire if he had to undergo either ordeal. He also gave him a rod to discipline himself five times a day, thus obtaining God's mercy. Gladly listening to these exhortations, he wore a cord around his middle, dedicated himself to the martyr, promised to mend his life and, fearing that he would be robbed of his clothes, burned the sign of the cross in his right shoulder with a hot iron. And so it happened that as there was a meeting of judges at Leighton 2 Probably the bisacutaof the corresponding story in Benedict of Peterborough, p. 186. 0

[This name creates a problem, since in the period under review no Richard was sheriff of Bedfordshire. It is possible that William fitz Richard is meant who was indeed sheriff of Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire from 1170 to 1178.] ° 4 0[I t appears in version B that he is the priest of the church of St. John's in Bedford.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 508 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Buzzard, he was taken there as if a guilty man. There he asked either to fight a judicial combat with his accuser Fulk or to undergo the ordeal of fire, but according to the wish of Fulk the reeve, who had received an ox to that purpose, it was adjudged that he should undergo the ordeal of water and thus have no way of escape. Thence he was taken back to Bedford and kept in prison for a month. As the judges met there and he was examined by the ordeal of water, he accepted the sad sentence of his condemnation, was led away to the place of execution and mutilated by having his eyes put out and his testicles cut off, which were buried in the soil in the sight of a numerous crowd. During his punishment he never stopped imploring God's help and invoking St. Thomas, forgiving his torturers what they cruelly did to him. Having undergone his torment, he was taken to the town and given shelter by a certain Ailbricht, where ten days later one evening, before the end of the first part of the night, he saw in a dream St. Thomas, whom he had assiduously invoked, dressed in white and impressing the sign of the cross between his eye-lids with his pastoral staff and repeating this again before dawn, saying: "Oh good man, are you asleep? Wake up, tomorrow you shall keep watch at the altar of St. Mary with an oil-lamp. Behold, Thomas comes to you and your sight will be restored". After sunrise a maid said: "Ailward, I have seen in my dreams that you recovered your sight". To which he replied: "This is possible for the Lord, as everything is" Towards the end of the day, as his left eye was itching, he scratched and removed with his fingernail the wax and the emollient which had been applied to eliminate the pus. Seeing a sunray on the wall he exclaimed: "God be adored, I see" To which his stupefied host said: "What is this? You are delirious" and holding his hand before his eyes he asked: "Do you see what I do?" To which he replied: "I see a hand move" Thus, after the dean 5 of that town had been called and a crowd gathered, he was led away and taken to a place of worship, and eyes of extreme smallness began to grow, the right one being utterly black and the left multi-coloured, whereas they used both to be multi-coloured from birth. His testicles however, which he let everybody touch, could be considered smaller than the testicles of a cock. All this we have seen and heard, we declare it and are witness to it, for the man we are talking of was sent to Canterbury and stayed with us for many days, living on the income of the martyr.

B. The narrative of this incident in Benedict of Peterborough's Miracula, written shortly after 1182 (Bibliotheca HagiographicaLatina, no. 8171).

In the royal manor of Westoning in the territory of Bedford there was a man of the people called Ailward, who was the creditor of one of his neighbours called Fulk to the amount of 2 d. for the ploughing of half a measure of land; the latter paid half of this sum and postponed payment of the other half till the following 0

0

5 [He is named Osbern in version B.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 509 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

year, pretending that he could not afford more. So one day after the passion of the holy martyr he happened to go to a tavern -it was the custom of the English on feast-days to indulge in banqueting and getting drunk and to watch their enemies and laugh at their observance of the holy days - and as the other man demanded payment of his debt, he forswore it. As [Ailward] wanted to go and drink beer, he demanded to be paid at least half of the debt: the other half [Fulk] could keep for himself for the same purpose. However, as the debtor refused this, the creditor threatened to take revenge. After they both got drunk at the tavern, the aforesaid Ailward got up, left before his debtor, went to the latter's house, tore off the lock of the door and, an impetuous and drunken burglar, entered the house. He turned over everything in the house to see what he could take away. He hit upon a large whetstone and gloves which the peasants used to wear to protect their hands against the sting of thorns, and, carrying away both objects, that poor robber took what hardly amounted to one penny. The children who were playing in the yard of the house shouted and ran to the tavern calling upon their father to pursue the booty, and pursuing that man, he wrung the whetstone from him and launched it against his head, thus breaking the whetstone on his head and his head with the whetstone. Drawing also the sharp knife that he was carrying, he perforated his arm, got the better of him and took the miserable man in fetters as a thief, robber and burglar to the house into which he had broken. Afterwards he went to see Fulk, the reeve of that vill, and asked him what was to be done. He replied: "The cause for which he was arrested is small and insufficient, but if you can augment the theft and produce him carrying other allegedly stolen objects you can accuse him of a crime involving corporal punishment". To this he agreed, hung round the man's neck a bore, a pruning knife, a net and some clothes together with the whetstone and the gloves and thus produced him the following day before the king's officials. Being taken consequently to Bedford, he was kept in public custody for one month and was visited by Payn, a venerable priest. And as one who was exposed to extreme dangers, he prepared himself for death or rather for life, unveiled all the secrets of his conscience and entrusted to the same ears of the priest whatever he remembered that was detrimental to his salvation. But, placing his hope of bodily liberation on divine mercy, he said: "My dearest lord, if I can escape this immediate peril I shall travel to the land which the Son of God, our Lord Jesus has sanctified by his temporal life as well as by his death, wherefore I ask that the sign of the cross be branded with a white hot iron into my right shoulder, which nobody can take away, even if they rob me of my clothes". That [priest] did as he had been asked and admonished him devoutly to have recourse to the prayers of the saints, particularly the glorious martyr Thomas whom the Lord had exalted with such glorious signs. Moreover the length and width of his body was measured with a rope to offer after his liberation to the holy martyr a candle made [to that measure]. He also gave him a scourge of rods saying: "Take these rods and be your own torturer five times a day before eating, invoking the martyr,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 510 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and do not stop bending your knee to the martyr day and night and invoking him except when, weighed down by the need to sleep, you are forced to restore nature's deficiency". Having thus instructed him most diligently he left, declaring that the judges had forbidden any priest having any further access to him. Nevertheless he several times sent somebody who secretly and through the window was to admonish him when he was negligent or, when he was assiduous, to spur him on to do even more. And also Prior Geoffrey' of the canons of Bedford, whom we have as witness to this marvellous miracle, provided him with food more often than was necessary and visited the imprisoned man quite often and let him breathe the open air for at least an hour, took him out of the prison and let him walk under the open sky. Four weeks had already passed and the beginning of the fifth had come when the miserable man was taken from prison and placed before the council to be judged. The accuser charges him with the crime of theft, but he rejects this criminal accusation with constancy and, throwing away far from him the things that were hanging from his neck, he confesses only concerning the whetstone and the gloves, maintaining that he had taken them as a pawn for a debt, denying the theft or any other sort of crime. After the judgment had been postponed, he was again put in prison and at the end of the fifth week taken again to the council and charged by his adversary concerning the theft of the whetstone and the gloves only. Afraid of having to undergo judicial combat at the request of the accused man, [the accuser] silently rejected all the things with which he had charged him before and, having gained the favour of the sheriff and the judges, he obtained that he would be freed from the necessity of combat and that the other man would be examined by the ordeal of water. It was, however, a Saturday and the examination was postponed till the third day of the following week and he was again put in prison. A vigil in church, to which the piety of the Christian religion entitles those who are about to purge themselves of a crime, was denied him by the cruelty of the guard, but he devoted himself in prison to the nightly worship which had been denied him in church. As he was led to the water, he was met by the aforesaid priest Payn, who admonished him to undergo everything with equanimity for the forgiveness of his sins, not to allow hatred and anger to enter his soul, to forgive cordially everything to his adversaries and not to despair of God's mercy, to which he replied: "Let God's and the martyr Thomas's will be done to me!". He is let down into the water, found to be guilty and the aforesaid reeve, Fulk, grabs him saying: "Hither, you criminal, you shall come hither to me". Whereupon he said: "Thanks be to God and the holy martyr Thomas". He was consequently taken to the place of torment 471B ' '[A prior of the canons of Bedford, called Geoffrey, can be found neither in Knowles, Heads, 177 nor in NEWNHAM Cart., pp. x-xi. In fact the prior of the regular canons at St. Paul's in Bedford (transferred to Newnham in the nearby parish of Goldington shortly after 1178 and at the latest by 1182), from shortly before April/May 1170 and during about twenty years was Auger. It is therefore probable that our text has made a confusion between Gaufridus and Augerus.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 511 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

where he was deprived of his eyes and his testicles mutilated: his left eye was at once gouged entirely, but his right eye, while being hurt and cut, was not really torn out. The organs of which the mutilation had deprived him were put away under a sod of grass and, just as we read about him who fell among thieves, they robbed him, caused him, as is said, injuries and went away leaving him half dead. A not inconsiderable crowd of people had gathered to see the spectacle, either compelled by public authority or moved by curiosity. The mutilation had been performed by his accuser Fulk and by the royal official of the same name, at whose instigation and counsel he is believed to have fallen into such misery, and by two other executioners with them. As they asked his forgiveness, he happily gave it to them for the love of God and St. Thomas the martyr and declared with admirable faith that although he was deprived of his sight, he would still turn to the memory of the martyr and did not despair of the latter's goodness and power, realising that it was more glorious for the martyr to restore eyes that were lost than to preserve those that had not been removed. He had been followed by his only daughter, aged twelve, who had begged for food for the imprisoned man, for after all his possessions had been confiscated, all his friends had turned their backs on him and there was none left of all his beloved to give him consolation. He had lost so much blood from his wounds that the bystanders fearing for his life had called for a priest, to whom he made his confession, but as his loss of blood diminished somewhat, he returned to the town of Bedford at the hand of his little daughter and sitting against the wall of a house, spent the rest of the day without any favour of humanity being shown to him. As night began to fall, a man called Ailbricht took pity upon him, particularly since the inclement weather and the copious rain caused much inconvenience to the man who was out in the open, and gladly took him into his house. He spent ten days in darkness and in vigil and prayer, but in the night of the tenth day in the first hour, having fallen asleep after lamentation, groaning and sighing, [the saint] whom he had invoked appeared to him wearing clothes as white as snow, marking with his pastoral staff the sign of the cross onto his forehead and the sockets of his eyes and afterwards leaving in silence. Having woken up, he attached no importance to the vision, lay down again and fell asleep. But before dawn he, who had cleansed his clothes in the blood of the Lamb, returned in white saying: "Oh good man, are you asleep?" and as he declared to be awake, he added: "Do not sleep but keep awake and keep praying. Do not despair, but put your hope in God and the blessed Virgin Mary and St. Thomas who comes to visit you: if in the coming night in the nearby church of Holy Mary you keep watch before the altar of that Virgin with a wax candle and do not waver in your faith while you are praying, you shall rejoice in the restoration of your eyes". After his sleep that man silently wondered what this vision might portend, i.e. whether the promise of the saint might come true once the bandage was removed. As he was secretly thinking about this, the maid of the house, as the messenger of a favourable

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 512 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

presage, said to him: " Last night, Ailward, I saw in my dreams that you regained the sight of both your eyes". To which he replied: "This could well happen, if it pleases God and his blessed martyr Thomas". When evening came and the day went to its end and the lids of his left eye were itching and he wanted to scratch them with his fingernail, he removed the wax emollient which had been placed there either to extract the pus from the empty sockets or to close the lids themselves: as he opened his eye-lids he had the impression through God's wonderful power that he could see the brightness of light on the opposite wall of the house, which in fact was a sunray, with a red glow produced by the sinking sun. Unaware of the truth of the matter and incredulous, he called the lord of the house and showed him what he thought. To which he replied: "You are mad, Ailward, you are mad. Keep silent, you don't know what you are saying "My lord", he said, "I am not mad at all, but I really seem to see this with my left eye" His doubtful host wanted to obtain certainty and moving his hand before his eyes said to him: "Do you see what I do?" To which he answered: "I believe that you move your hand before my eyes this way and that way" And then starting with the beginning of his first vision, he narrated successively what he had been told and promised. The news of this event spread amongst the neighbours and this novelty of novelties attracted not a small crowd of people. Dean Osbern, the master or rather the minister of the aforesaid church, also rushes hither and, having heard of the man's vision, leads him into the church, puts him before the altar of the Holy Virgin, instructs and comforts him in the faith. Having been given a lamp, he declares that he can clearly see the altar-cloth and afterwards also the image of the Holy Virgin Mary and finally also various smaller objects. The stupor of the people grows with the recovery of the man's sight. Trying to discover where this power of seeing comes from, from new eyes or from the empty sockets without the pupils, they discover two small pupils deeply hidden in the head and hardly as large as those of a small bird and which grow continuously, causing inexpressible and unbelievable amazement amongst all the unlookers by their slow increase. The crowd shouts to heaven, God's praise is duly sung, the bells of the churches are rung, numerous people who have already gone to bed crowd together and with their co-citizen, who has recovered his eye-sight, they wait without any sleep for the sun to rise. In the morning, however, the whole town gathers together as one crowd and, seeing more clearly by daylight, they notice that one of his eyes is multicoloured and the other completely black, whereas from birth they both had been multicoloured. The priest of the church of St. John who had received the confession of the mutilated man arrived also among the others and seeing God's wonderful power said: "Why should he wait for a precept from the apostolic authority? Far from me the idea of waiting any longer. I shall at once start the solemn service for the glorious friend of God, Thomas the most precious martyr, and go through with it till the end. Who doubts that he is a martyr who does so

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 513 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

many great things?" And rushing off to the church he let the bells ring and suited his actions to his words. The man himself, however, no longer bereft of, but I say adorned with his eyesight, who previously had been dragged ignominiously to his punishment through the middle of the town, is now by the same way and surrounded by the glorification and favour of the people led to the church of St. Paul, where he spent the Sunday night without sleeping, leaving it to make the journey to Thomas, the author of his salvation. Wherever he passed he was followed by a large crowd, for his fame preceded him and caused many people to go out to meet him: the gifts which they bestowed on him he distributed amongst the poor for love of the martyr. Having walked about four thousand paces he started to scratch with his hand the itching scrotum of his testicles and discovered that he had recovered those organs which although still very small were growing all the time; nor did he object to anyone wanting to touch them. Upon his arrival in London he was received and congratulated by Bishop Hugh of Durham, who would not let him go until he had sent a messenger to Bedford to enquire the truth diligently and confirm it. He was also received by us and although the testimony of many had preceded him we were not really convinced until we had confirmation of the aforesaid story through the letters and the testimony of the citizens of Bedford, who had sent us a message with the following content. The burgesses of Bedford, to the convent of Canterbury and all faithful in Christ, greeting. Let the convent of Canterbury and all Catholics know that God has worked a wonderful and illustrious miracle in Bedford because of the merits of the most holy martyr Thomas, for it happened that some rustic from Westoning called Ailward was captured and brought before the sheriff of Bedford and before the knights of the county because of some theft valued at only 1 p. and having been publicly condemned by them, lost his eyes and testicles outside the town of Bedford in the presence of clerics, laymen and women. This is also testified by the chaplain of St. John of Bedford, to whom the aforesaid rustic made his confession after his mutilation. And it is also testified by his host called Ailbricht, who afterwards gave him shelter, that when he first took him into his house he was completely deprived of eyes and testicles but afterwards, having often invoked the merits of St. Thomas the martyr, he was gloriously and marvellously restored to health through the apparition of the aforesaid martyr. So far the testimony of the people of Bedford on this miracle.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 514 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

472 Letter of Hugh de Puiset, bishop of Durham, to Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, describing a miracle in Durham ascribed to the intervention of Thomas Becket, in favour of a man called Roger, who had been condemned and mutilated for theft. To his venerable father and friend in Christ the most beloved Richard, by God's grace archbishop of Canterbury and legate of the apostolic see and to his beloved sons the prior and the convent of the said church, Hugh, by the same grace humble minister of the church of Durham, greeting and sincere feeling of love. As we knew that it would greatly please you, we have thought it appropriate to report to you in writing what has recently happened by the merits of the blessed Thomas in our parts. Amongst the many sorts of miracles which are reported by the old fathers or are known to have happened in our own times by the increased devotion of men, a new sort is now granted to our new martyr, the blessed Thomas, by divine munificence: we have been told what he has achieved lately at Bedford' and we know that this had been repeated afterwards in our own city of Durham. And although the resurrection of the dead is considered the greatest amongst the great miracles, this new one was so unheard of that many think that it is not less great. For if we are allowed to say so, it could seem easier to some people and more in accordance with human reason to restore the soul again to a body that is completely constituted than to give new members to those who have suffered a diminution of their members. That such a restoration of limbs has taken place in Durham is known to us and we bear witness to it and we have taken care to put it in writing and conserve it for posterity. In the year of the incarnation of the Lord 1174, on 17 September, a certain Roger, a very simple man, who had confessed at law, had suffered blinding and emasculation as a punishment for a theft which he had committed, and his lost members are known by the many who were present and have seen it, to have been buried, as is customary. After this Roger had been in bed for a few weeks, first in our hospital and afterwards in the house of one of our servants, his eye-sockets were almost dry and his eyelids closed. Forced by poverty he started to walk around with the aid of a stick in our city and to beg from door to door. This we believe to have happened by divine disposition so that he should be manifestly seen to have lost his eyes by all those who would later witness that he had regained them. Nor should it be passed over in silence that he anxiously prayed day and night to the precious martyr Thomas to come to his aid in his calamity and continually implored his help in his prayers, as if no one else could give him any succour.2 472 ' 0'[See our no. 471.10 2 [The text proceeds to narrate at length how Roger was healed.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 515 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

473 Sale in the king's court by Richard fitz Adam to Roger fitz Reinfrid of land at Dunmow, which had been deraigned in the king's court at Oxford by fine of combat. Be it known to those present and future that I, Richard fitz Adam, have sold to Roger fitz Reinfrid and his heirs all my land of Dunmow which I deraigned in the court of the lord king at Oxford as my right and heredity by fine of duel and which my aunts Rohese and Gunnora' gave up and quitclaimed to me in that same court. I have sold the land to the same Roger and his heirs for twenty-four and a half marks of silver, which he gave, to be held from the lords from which I held it and their heirs, free and quit of me and my heirs. I assured him also that I will warrant the aforesaid land for him against all men. This sale was made before Richard de Lucy and other royal justices in the king's court, i.e. Richard the archdeacon of Poitiers, Hugh de Gundeville, Simon fitz Peter and William Basset. Witnesses: Robert Rocel', Thomas de Dunham, William fitz Simon, Jordan the chamberlain, 2 Gervase de Trac.

474

Notification by Hugh, earl of Chester, that he has given to the abbey of Poulton-Dieulacres certain lands on which there had been litigation between the monks and the men of Eaton after lawful men from the venue held a

sworn perambulation at the king's command.

Hugh, earl of Chester, to all his barons and men, French and English, present and future. Know that I have given and by this present charter of mine confirmed to God and St. Mary and the abbot and monks of Poulton, for the salvation of my soul and those of my father and mother and all my ancestors and heirs, in pure and perpetual alms that land around Gorstella and the meadow in the lower part of Kalvismore about which a controversy had arisen between the aforesaid monks of Poulton and the men of Eaton, according to the perambulation carried out by the lawful men of the venue who had sworn, placing their hands on a sacred object at the king's command and with my consent. As follows: starting some way towards Dodleston under Gorstella from that spot where the field of Eccleston and the 473 I '[The name Wimarc for a woman would be very unusual: it might be a corruptelafor Gunnora, a name that occurs in the fitz Walter-family, lords of Little Dunmow (Sanders, English baronies, 129-130; V.C.H. Essex, ii. 151).]o

2 '[See also CLERKENWELL

Cart., nos. 102-105.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 516 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

neighbouring field, that is nearer to Gorstella on the side of Poulton, and the field on the side of Eaton beyond Gorstella towards Chester, meet first and closest under Gorstella; they then arrived by the place called Gorstella, which they left on the right, and perambulated along the furlong on the outside towards Eaton that field around Gorstella as far as the valley into which they descended near a place called Saltpit and swerved between the hill and the meadow downwards towards Eaton as far as the lower part of Kalvismore and thus going straight across the meadow they reached the old ditch in the lower part of Kalvismore, which there flows in the river called Dee, where on the other side of the river almost exactly opposite, the lower part of the wood of Aldford ends by the fishery of Eaton. I also have allowed for the sake of charity and peace to the aforesaid monastery of Poulton and the monks of that place to dig a ditch around their meadow towards the field of Eaton along those boundaries which are indicated in this charter and whatever is contained within them by the gift of Robert Pincerna concerning the abbey of Poulton, so that no one shall in the future in any way be able to harm them. I will and firmly order that the aforesaid monks shall hold and possess forever, freely and quietly, fully and honourably, without any contradiction and without any temporal service and secular exaction whatever belongs to me and my heirs. Witnesses: Alured de Cumbray, William Patrick, Ralph fitz Warin, Richard de Pulford, Hugh fitz Oliver, Roger de Cumbray, Robert fitz Richard of Pulford and others.'

475 Notification by Richard Coffin that his quarrel with Tavistock Abbey about the boundaries between the manors of Abbotsham, Alwington and Cockington was settled on the basis of a sworn inquest and perambulation by twelve lawful men of the neighbourhood. Richard Coffin,' to all present and future lieges whom these letters will reach, greeting. Know that the whole contention held between me and the abbot and abbey of Tavistock on the difference of boundaries between their land of Abbotsham and my land of Alwington and Cockington, which is of my fee, was settled and terminated forever in the following way. The abbot and abbey of Tavistock have given to me and my heir Perinnus similarly after me the full fraternity of their church of Tavistock, to receive the habit of religion there whenever, inspired by God, I want to, and in the meantime I must have the corrody of one monk whenever I go there. Moreover, Walter, abbot of the said place, and 474 475

'

' [Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 79 n. 5.]0 In 1166 Richard "Cofphin" held two knights' fees of Robert the king's son (Red Book of the Exchequer, p. 252).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 517 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

master William who held for his lifetime the aforesaid land of Abbotsham from the said abbot and convent in farm, gave me 2 marks of silver because I reasonably supported the deraignment, by the oath of twelve lawful jurors from four neighbouring book-lands, of the boundaries between Abbotsham and my land, as they are here defined in writing. From the twofold ditch west of Adjavin, 2 which lies between Bideford-land and Abbotsham up along the river to the source of the river and then to the giant's way, from the giant's way north over the hollow hill, from the hollow hill west of the way to the ditch, which lies between Cockington and Abbotsham, from the ditch south to Trundlebeer, from Trundlebeer to Dringwell, from Dringwell to Woolacombe and from Woolacombe out to the sea. In perambulating and deraigning those boundaries I was accompanied by my lord Geoffrey fitz Baldwin 3 and his heir Nicholas, who with their consent have similarly granted and confirmed this with me. And so that what was reasonably granted by us before several knights and lawful men could not in any way be impugned by our posterity, I have confirmed the aforesaid course of events by the attachment of my seal and recognized it before all the county of Exeter. Moreover, I have pledged in the presence of Abbot Baldwin4 to maintain the aforesaid boundaries between my land and Abbotsham, and if anyone during my lifetime should attempt to disregard and transgress them to the detriment of Abbotsham, I have promised under oath that I shall myself or through someone else deraign the said boundaries with God's help. Witnesses: William Deneys, Richard de Bocombe, Jocelin de Lancell, Henry Dauney, Ralph de Canonsleigh, Hamelin de Leigh and Fulk de Veteri Ponte.5

476 Writ of King Henry II about the common pasture between Glinton and Northborough, on which a sworn inquest was held in his court.

Henry, king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his justice, sheriff and ministers of Northamptonshire, greeting. I order you to see to it that the common pasture between Northborough 2 Eggefen in 1238; Hedgefen in the first Ordnance Map; now Adjavin '[Devon.]'

3 In 1086 Alwington was held under the count of Mortain by Hamelin, who was still alive 11031106 (Exon Domesday, f0 210a; Calendar of Documents in France, ed. Round, no. 1210). Hamelin's son Baldwin is mentioned in a confirmation by Archbishop Thomas (Becket) of grants to Tywardreath Priory (Oliver, op. cit., p. 41) '[A.M. Oliver, Monasticon Dioecesis Exoniensis, 1846]°; his grandson Geoffrey fitz Baldwin held ten fees of the earl of Cornwall in 1166 (Red Book of the Exchequer, p. 262). 4 Baldwin was abbot from c. 1174 to 1184. The last five names are supplied by Pole, op. cit., p. 386. O[=W. Pole, Collections towards a Description of the County of Devon, 1791.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 518 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and Glinton is maintained so well, peacefully and justly as it was sworn before us in my court. And I forbid anyone to implead unjustly the abbot or monks of Peterborough thereon. Witness: William fitz Hamo. At Gisors.

477 Final concord in the king's court between the abbey of Wardon and Richard de Farndon and others concerning land in Farndon.

In the 21 st year of the reign of King Henry of England, the son of the empress, the following concord was made before Richard de Lucy, the bishops Bartholomew of Exeter, Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and Robert of Hereford, and Ranulf de Glanvill, Hugh de Cressy, William fitz Ralph, Hugh de Gundeville, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Bertram de Verdun and other justices who on that day were in the king's court at Woodstock, between the monks of Wardon and Richard de Farndon, William fitz Hugh, Ralph the brother of Richard, Henry fitz Jocelin and his brother Robert, William fitz Turstan, Richard the son of the priest, John the son-in-law of Jocelin, Ralph de Harpole, Ernisius, Randulf, Ailmar and his other men of the land of Farndon on which they were pleading in the king's court by order of the lord king, viz. that the monks shall have that land forever in fee farm, i.e. 10 acres of land with a meadow on the Cherwell and from Stertes through Greeneway as far as Wingate in Byfield and thence to the boundaries of Wardon whatever they have within those boundaries. This land the monks shall have forever for 10 s. per year, which they are to pay for all sorts of services on the feast of St. John the Baptist, on the understanding that from those l0 s. Richard and his heirs shall have 6 s. 10 d., William fitz Hugh 12 d., Robert de Buckland 2 s. and Henry de Buckland 2 d. And Richard and his heirs must warrant this land to the monks against all men and acquit every sort of service vis d vis the king and all lords. And in this way Richard de Farndon and his men have forever quitclaimed the aforesaid land to the monks before the justices. At Woodstock in the court of the lord king.

478 After litigation between the abbey of Reading and the canons of St. Augustine's, Bristol, concerning churches in Berkeley Hernesse has been brought before the papal court by way of appeal and committed to papal judges delegate, an agreement is reached in the presence of the king.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 519 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

A. Charter of Bishop Robert of Hereford and Abbot Simon of St. Albans, papal judges delegate. Robert, by the grace of God bishop of Hereford and Simon, abbot of St. Albans, to all sons of Holy Mother Church, present and future, greeting. We want to bring to public notice that, as the lord Pope Alexander III has committed to us to take cognizance of and duly settle the case which the abbot' and the monks of Reading had brought against the abbot2 and canons of St. Augustine's in Bristol concerning the churches of Berkeley Hernesse, the parties appeared before us and reached the following peaceful settlement thanks to the diligent efforts towards peace of King Henry II. The canons will forever possess in the name of the monks of Reading the churches of Berkeley Hernesse with all the appurtenances which the canons or anyone else in their name possessed at the beginning of the compromise, against perpetual payment to the monks for those churches of twenty marks per year, ten at Easter and ten at Michaelmas. As, however, it is with the agreement of both parties that whatever is retained by the monks of Gloucester or others- whether churches or other benefices of Berkeley Hernesse- are justly revoked, the cost of the revocation will be equally shared by both parties. Whatever they can recover by judgment or by agreement, shall be put to common usage by the monks and the canons in equal portions. It should also be known concerning the payment of the said twenty marks that the lord king shall provide as long as Henry, the archdeacon of Exeter, lives that the monks of Reading shall receive them from the aforesaid canons every year without difficulty, and the canons shall be indemnified. This transaction was established in the year of the incarnation 1175 on the feast of St. Luke the evangelist at London. Witnesses: Henry II, king of the English, Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, Gilbert, bishop of London, Richard, bishop of Winchester and many others.

B. Charter of Abbot Richard of St. Augustine's, Bristol. Richard, abbot of St. Augustine at Bristol and the whole convent of that place, to all sons of Holy Church, greeting. We want to bring to public notice that the case between the monks of Reading and us concerning the churches of Berkeley has been settled by the following agreement before the lord Robert, bishop of Hereford, and the lord Simon, abbot of St. Albans, who had been appointed judges delegate in this case by the lord Pope Alexander III, in the presence of the lord King Henry II, who made a considerable effort towards peace, and by the apostolic authority under which the said judges operated. We shall forever possess 478A

0

[Joseph, abbot of Reading from 1173 to c. 1180.]o 2 0[Richard, abbot of St. Augustine's of Bristol 1148-1185.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 520 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

in the name of the monks of Reading the churches of Berkeley Hernesse, i.e. the church of Berkeley, Wotton under Edge, Beverston, Almondsbury, Ashleworth and Cromhall with their appurtenances, against yearly payment to the church of Reading of twenty marks, ten at Easter and ten at Michaelmas. If, however, other possessions which are being held by other persons by some injustice, namely the church of Cam and the church of Arlingham or other ecclesiastical goods belonging to the churches of Berkeley Hernesse, can be revoked to the advantage of the aforesaid monks or ourselves by common counsel, the cost will be carried by them and us in equal parts and what we can recover will be equally divided between them and us. The lord king, moved by the desire for peace, has also added that he will see to it that as long as Henry the archdeacon of Exeter is tenant, the monks will receive from us their yearly pension and we shall suffer no loss. This transaction was established in the year of the incarnation 1175, on the day of St. Luke at London, when the lord Alexander III was pope and Henry II king. Witnesses: Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, Gilbert, bishop of London, Richard, bishop of Winchester, Robert, bishop of Hereford, Bartholomew, bishop of Exeter, Geoffrey, bishop of Ely, Simon, abbot of St. Albans, Maurice of Berkeley and his sons Robert and Richard.

C. Charter of King Henry II. Henry, king of England and duke of the Normans and of the Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his ministers and lieges, French and English, of the whole of England, greeting. Know that I have granted and by the present charter confirmed the agreement and concord which was reasonably made before me and the judges delegate Robert, bishop of Hereford and Simon, abbot of St. Albans and several other persons who were present, between the monks of Reading and the canons of St. Augustine of Bristol concerning the churches of Berkeley Hernesse, as follows. The canons of St. Augustine of Bristol shall forever possess in the name of the monks of Reading the churches of Berkeley Hernesse with everything that pertains to them which the canons or anyone in their name possessed on the day when the concord concerning those churches was made between them, against a yearly payment to the monks for those churches of twenty marks, ten at Easter and ten at Michaelmas. If, however, the monks and the canons can acquire churches or other ecclesiastical possessions belonging to Berkeley Hernesse, they will have to acquire them sharing the cost and dividing them equally. Therefore I will and firmly order that this agreement and concord shall be held firmly and constantly between them as it was made before me and the persons who were present, and mutually granted, and as the charters which they have thereon testify. Witnesses:

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 521 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, Gilbert of London, Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely, Bartholomew of Exeter, John of Norwich, Robert of Hereford, bishops, Simon, abbot of St. Albans, earl William de Mandeville, Richard de Lucy, William fitz Adelm, steward, Reginald de Courtenay, Thomas Basset, William de Stuteville, Hugh de Cressy, Robert fitz Bernard and Thomas, his 1 brother. At Westminster.

479 Having incurred the displeasure of King Henry II, who impleaded him, William of Waterville, abbot of Peterborough, is deposed by the archbishop of Canterbury. In that same year, before Christmas, Archbishop Richard of Canterbury came to the abbey of Peterborough and deposed William of Waterville, the abbot of that house, because he had entered the cloister and the church against the will of his monks, with violence and arms at the head of armed knights, and had taken away saints' relics and an arm of St. Oswald, king and martyr, to give them in gage to Jews for money. And since he and the armed knights whom he had led had caused mortal wounds to the monks and the ministers of that church, who tried to repel them and to defend their relics, the lord king impleaded the aforesaid abbot; and he hated him because he had given shelter to Ralph of Waterville, his brother, who was with the king's enemies at Huntingdon.'

480 Prosecution for offences against the forest-laws of numerous laymen and clerics, the latter being impleaded with the agreement of a papal legate.

478C

479

0

[Richardson and Sayles, The Governance, 316 317; Mayr-Harting, Henry II and the Papacy, 41; Pope Alexander III, who had previously confirmed the possessions of St. Augustine's in Bristol (HOLTZMANN Papsturkunden, i, no. 120, p. 392 (27 June 1175)), confirmed the agreement of 18 October 1175 (HOLTZMANN Papsturkunden,iii, no. 319, p. 434(1176-1181)).]0 '[See on the rebellion and the capitulation of the rebels at Huntingdon, Poole, From Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 332-338.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 522 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

A. The narrative in RALPH DE DICETO.

A general inquest held throughout England involved without any distinction earls, barons and knights and also an endless number of private people. They all were forced by their religious awe of the oaths, which had been administered without due reverence, to make known, either to the king or to the justices, which persons they knew-even by hearsay only-to have laid traps to catch wild animals since the time of the dissension' between the king father and his son, or of which they had only heard. On this pretext also many clerics, whom rumour only accused of having been ensnared in hunting activities, were brought before the secular courts at the command of the sheriffs, without any protest by the archbishop or the bishops. It was heard that some of them offered money to escape the king's indignation.

B. The narrative in the GESTA HENRICI

SECUNDI,

where some chronological

details are given. And from there [King Henry II] arrived at Nottingham on the feast of St. Peter's Chains and spending some days there he impleaded all the barons and knights of that country in conection with his forests and he amerced them all for hunting.... And the lord king impleaded the earls and barons and also the clerics of Yorkshire and those of the church of St. Peter at York because of his forests and the hunting ....

After these events the aforesaid cardinal,' who had come to

England on the strength of a royal mandate, granted and gave to the lord king licence to implead the clerics of his kingdom because of his forests and the hunting. Behold the member of Satan, behold the satellite led by Satan himself, who suddenly turned from shepherd into robber, who, seeing the wolf coming, fled and left the sheep behind who had been entrusted to him by the pope and for whose protection the see of Rome had sent him to England!2

481 William Turpin, the king's chamberlain, brings a writ of right claiming land in Dumbleton against Abingdon Abbey and the case ends in a final concord in the king's court. 480A

480B

'[The dissension between King Henry II and his son Henry the Young was ended by reconciliation in April 1175; the prosecutions for forest offences were started around June of the same year (Eyton, Court Henry II, 189, 191).1 '[Hugh de Pierleone, papal legate in England.]' 0 2 [Foreville, L'Eglise et la Royaut, 433.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 523 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Also in the time of this Abbot Roger a controversy arose between William Turpin, the king's chamberlain, and the house of Abingdon concerning one hide in Dumbleton which he claimed by a writ of right to hold from the house of Abingdon. After this controversy between the aforesaid William Turpin and the house of Abingdon had dragged on for a long time, it was at last settled in the king's court by the following fine, as appears from the text of a charter of King Henry II. Henry, by the grace of God king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs, ministers and all his lieges, French and English, of all England, greeting. Know that I have granted and confirmed by the present charter to William Turpin my chamberlain and his heirs the land of Fencote which Abbot Roger of Abingdon, with the common consent of the whole convent of that abbey, has granted him in my presence to hold for two shillings per year, to be paid on the feast of St. Michael to the chamberlain of the abbot, for all service pertaining to the church of Abingdon, so that the abbot will warrant that land for him. And the aforesaid William Turpin has quit-claimed all the land which he claimed in Dumbleton to the church of Abingdon and will be its warrantor as against his own family and the descendants of Helias, through whom he made his claim, and if he or his people cannot warrant the land, the church of Abingdon will receive back its land of Fencote free and quit from William and his people as is witnessed by the chirograph that was made between them and the charter of the abbot and convent. Therefore I will and firmly command that the same William Turpin and his heirs shall hold the aforesaid land of Fencote in fee and heredity from the church of Abingdon and the abbot and his successors for the aforesaid service, well and in peace, freely and quietly, completely and fully and honourably, in the wood and in the plain, in meadows and pastures, in waters and fisheries, in roads and paths and in all other places and things pertaining thereto and with all their liberties and free customs, as it was granted and agreed before me. Witnesses: John, elect of Norwich, Adam of St. Asaph, bishops, Richard de Lucy, William fitz Adelm, the steward, Ralph fitz Stephen, the chamberlain. At Winchester.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 524 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

482 Quitclaim by Robert Coc of Horton in the court of his lord, William de Percy, to the abbey of Sawley of all his right in Crooks House in the parish of Bracewell. To all those who see or hear this letter, Robert Coc of Horton, greeting. Know that by the counsel of my friends I have abjured and quitclaimed forever in the court of my lord William de Percy to God and St. Mary and the monks of Sawley who serve God there, for the salvation of my soul and of all my ancestors and heirs, all the right and claim which I had on Crooks House with all appurtenances, for which there was a plea between me and the aforesaid monks in the court of my lord William de Percy, for 20 s. which the aforesaid monks gave me. And my lord William de Percy gave me and my heirs 10 bovates of land in Horton in free service in exchange for the aforesaid land of Crooks House. And it should be known that therefore the aforesaid monks have fully granted me forever the benefits of their house and to be buried amongst them at my death if I want to, and to receive the service for my soul as for one of their brethren in all things. Witnesses: Nigel de Stockeld, Baldwin de Bramhope, Peter de Plumpton, Oliver Angevin, William fitz Robert, Elias de Steeton, Peter de Marton, Walter de Halton, Thurstan de Arches, Ketel de Dudland, Nicholas the parson of Tadcaster, Geoffrey de Percy, Malger the parson of Gisburn and many others.'

483 Quitclaim by Hugh the fisherman of Brompton to Geoffrey de Aimunderby of land in Heslerton for which there had been a writ of right and wager of battle in the court of Robert de Meisnil. To all men who see or hear this letter, Hugh the fisherman of Brompton, greeting. Know you all that I have abjured and completely given up forever without malice and fraud for me and my heirs to Geoffrey de Aimunderby and his heirs all right and claim which I ever had and which I claimed in one carrucate of land with all the appurtenances in Heslerton for two marks of silver, which the aforesaid Geoffrey gave me. On that land there was a plea between us in the court of Robert de Meisnil by the lord king's writ of right and battle had been waged by Warin de Malton, who was appellor and by William Westrays, who was defendant, and on which an agreement was made in that same court by fine of duel. Witnesses, etc. 482 1 Cf. no. 450.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 525 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

484 Notification by Aubrey de Vere that Peter, the miller of Colneford, has been convicted of defaulting on his service to Earls Colne Priory and of illegally seizing land, for which he is amerced and subjected to other sanctions. Aubrey, earl of Oxford to all his men present and future, greeting. Know that Peter the miller was convicted before me and many others that he had not done the service owing to the church of St. Mary of Colne, according to the charter which he had for the mill of Colneford and that he had occupied some other tenures against his charter, i.e. a grove and a small field in Chiffin and a meadow by the mill of Colneford, for which he did no service, and he also occupied the land called Mers beyond the bridge of Colneford, which is part of my manor of Colne, and he intended against me and against the right of the church of Colne to assign the mill of Colne to White Colne. And since for this iniquity he should by just judgment have lost all he had, he put himself in the mercy of the church and mine because of his forfeiture, in the hope of finding mercy, and he handed back to the church of Colne the land called Mers and the mill of Colneford and the charter which he had, without claiming anything in return. I therefore will and order, as all this has taken place before me, that my monks of Colne shall hold the mill of Colneford and the other forementioned possessions well and in peace, as my ancestors gave them in free and perpetual alms and confirmed them by their charter. Witnesses: my son Aubrey, Ralph de Vere, William the cleric, Walter de Middleton, Elias the priest, Thomas the steward, William Handsex, Richard Hoche', Ralph the master of Aubrey, Peter the forester, Robert the son of the recluse, Alvered the porter and Peter fitz Par.

485 Concord and quitclaim before royal justices in Lincolnshire between Thomas Bardulf and the monks of Bardney abbey, whom he had impleaded in the king's court by royal writ concerning land in Edlington. A. Letter by Thomas Bardulf to his men notifying the above mentioned quitclaim. Thomas Bardulf to all men, French and English, present and future, greeting. Be it known to you all that I Thomas and my wife Roeis and my heirs remit out of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 526 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

good will the claim which we made against the abbot and monks of Bardney by the king's writ concerning the land of Edlington, which I claimed for my wife and my heirs. And if we had any right in the foresaid land, we have given it up by common counsel and we have claimed that land quit and alone and have agreed faithfully and truthfully to give our aid against all men who molest the aforesaid monks concerning the aforesaid land. The following were witnesses: Earl Simon, Robert Marmiun, Walter the sheriff, etc. This charter was read before the justices of the lord king, namely Hugh de Gundeville and William Basset in the county court at Lincoln.

B. The final concord. This is the concord made between Thomas Bardulf and the monks of Bardney at Lincoln on the Friday when the feast of St. Gregory was first celebrated after the lord Henry II first received the homages of the Scots at York, before Hugh de Gundeville, William fitz Ralph and William Basset, justices, concerning the land of Edlington on which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king. Thomas Bardulf and his wife Roeis gave up the whole claim which they had against the foresaid monks concerning the foresaid land for themselves and their heirs, and they quitclaimed the foresaid land to them and promised to give their aid against all men who molest the foresaid monks concerning the foresaid land. 486 Notification by Gregory, prior of Bridlington, of the settlement reached by Rievaulx Abbey and Alan de Ryedale concerning the moor between Welburn and Bowforth; Prior Gregory and Master Vacarius had been appointed as judges delegate. Gregory, prior of Bridlington, to all sons of Holy Church, greeting. As the case which was going on between the monks of Rievaulx and Alan de Ryedale had been delegated to me and Master Vacarius to be discussed and terminated, and as my aforesaid fellow judge had appointed me to take his place, it was terminated in my presence before honest men by an amicable agreement at Nottingham on 24 March, in such a way that the said Alan and his wife Matilda have given their pledge in my hand and renounced to all claims which they had made until that day

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 527 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

against the said monks and have declared that they would observe in the future all the donations which the illustrious man Roger de Mowbray had conferred upon the aforesaid monks, as contained in the charters of the said Roger and on which a controversy had been carried on for a long time between Alan and the monks, because Roger granted to Alan the land of Bowforth, for which he used to pay 10 s. a year, to be held by hereditary right against the payment of one pound of pepper a year and free of all other services and customs. If, moreover, the monks or Alan should exceed what is legitimate and reasonable in using the pasture in the moor, which lies before Bowforth, according to the size of the tenure of both sides, then he shall make amends for his excess according to my decision and that of the neighbourhood. Nevertheless the aforesaid Alan and his men of Bowforth shall collect peat in the said moor between Cowldyke and the clear boundaries which were established on the 4 th of November before me and the neighbourhood, according to the consideration and decision of myself and the said neighbourhood, and they shall not transgress those boundaries. The monks, however, shall according to my decision and that of the neighbourhood repair the canal of Redover of which the aforesaid Alan has complained, by widening and deepening it as far as their land stretches, and thus the aforesaid case was terminated. This was done in the year of the Lord 1175 before Prior Roger and the monks of Rievaulx and the said Alan and his sons and men. Witnesses: Gilbert and Reginald, canons of Bridlington, Simon de Stonegrave, Robert de Stonegrave, Peter de Surdeval, William de Harum, Bartholomew de Thoreni, William de Balliol, Walchelin Trussevilein, Roger Puldre, Robert fitz Victor, William de Thornton, Ralph de Camera, Robert Joie and Ernald de Bridlington.' 487 King Henry II grants to the abbey of Rievaulx land in Pickering, whose boundaries were sworn by the wapentake of Pickering Lythe in the county

court of Yorkshire before royal justices.

Henry, by the grace of God king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the archbishop, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs, foresters, ministers and all his lieges, French and English, of the whole of England, greeting. Know that I have given and confirmed by my charter to God and St. Mary and the church of Rievaulx and the monks who serve God there for the soul of the glorious King Henry, my grandfather, and for the souls of my father, my mother and my brothers and for the salvation of my soul and those 486

' *[This is apparently the

final stage of litigation published above, no. 453; see also the quitclaim by Alan de Ryedale in YORKSHIRE Charters, ix. no. 160, pp. 241-242.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 528 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

of my children, in free, pure and perpetual alms the whole of my waste land and of my pasture under Pickering with all their appurtenances in meadows and pastures, in waters, fisheries, mills and all other things, along the limits and the boundaries which the wapentake of Pickering swore to belong to my revenue and recognized in the full county court of Yorkshire before my justices. As follows: whatever there is between the Allerston Beck and the Tackriveling in length except the meadow in Edymarsch, with the following boundaries: from the place where the Allerston Beck enters the Derwent and as the Derwent itself runs to the place where the Rye enters the Derwent and thence to the place where the Costa Beck enters the Rye and thence following the Costa Beck as far as the Tackriveling as far as the monks' ditch and thence along that ditch as it goes round Lund and enters the Costa Beck and thence along the Costa Beck towards the north to the place where the Kiptoftissich enters the Costa Beck and thence following the Kiptoftissich to Midsyke, where the Thornton Beck enters the Midsyke and thence along the Thornton Beck to the north as far as the ditch which surrounds the field of Theokmare and thence along that same ditch to Blasta and thence along the stream which is there as far as the Midsyke and thence as the Midsyke flows down into the Allerston Beck and thence as the Allerston Beck flows into the Derwent. All this I gave them with the aforesaid boundaries and similarly granted them so that they shall build within those boundaries houses and sheep-farms and cultivate the land and be completely free to do what they like. Therefore I will and, by royal authority and by the power which God granted me, grant, establish and confirm all this forever in free alms for the said church and monks, well, peacefully, honourably, completely and fully, as King Henry my grandfather held it in his demesne on the day when he was alive and dead, free and quit of all frankpledge and danegeld and all aids, assizes, gelds and all customs and requests and pleas and all worldly service, whichever might pertain to me or my successors. And I forbid anyone to enter within the aforesaid boundaries with his cattle or to dig peat or to intermeddle there in any way without their agreement and permission upon my forfeiture. Witnesses: Archbishop Roger of York,' the bishops Richard of Winchester, 2 Roger of Worcester 3 and Hugh of Durham, 4 Earl Robert of Leicester, Earl Hamelin de Warenne, Earl Simon [III de St. Liz], Richard de Lucy, Reginald de Courtenay and William fitz Aldelm, the steward. At Westminster.

487

Roger of Bishopbridge, archbishop of York, 1154-1181. 2 Richard Toclive, alias More, bishop of Winchester, 1174- 1188.

Roger, son of Robert, earl of Gloucester, bishop of Worcester, 1164-1180 0 [recte: 1179] ' Hugh de Puiset, bishop of Durham, 1153-1194 °[recte: 1195]1 3

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 529 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

488 Agreement between St. Augustine's abbey at Canterbury and the men of Thanet, who claimed that they did not belong to the court of the abbot but to their own hallmoot. After some litigation in 1165, the case is brought by royal writ before the county court of Kent, where the men of Thanet recognise that they belong to the abbot's court. A. Writ of King Henry II ordering the men of Thanet to do justice to the abbot of St. Augustine's Canterbury (this writ is mentioned infra B and C).

Henry, by the grace of God king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the men of the abbot of St. Augustine at Thanet, greeting. I order you justly and without delay to render to the aforesaid abbot, your lord, all services, customs and rights which you owe him because of your fiefs and which you used to render to his predecessors, and unless you do it, Sheriff [Robert fitz Bernard] of Kent shall have it done so that I hear no further complaint of it for lack of right. Witness: Ranulf de Glanvill. At Winchester.

B. The charter of the agreement. In the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1176, in the twenty-second year of the reign of King Henry II in the month of December on the vigil of St. Thomas the Apostle, Roger, the elect of St. Augustine's Canterbury and the men of Thanet, who belong to the tenement of St. Augustine, were pacified in the following way. There had been a great controversy for a long time between the elect and the men of Thanet, who maintained that they were in no way bound to go to the main court of St. Augustine's Canterbury to plead or to undergo judgment, but that they could have all their judgments in their hallmoot in Thanet. Therefore the elect, addressing himself to the royal power, obtained that this controversy should be settled by royal command in the county of Kent. On the appointed day at Canterbury in the said county the men of Thanet, forced by considerations of equity recognised in the presence of the two parties and before John de Cardif, deputising for Sheriff Robert fitz Bernard, that they were obliged to appear at the court of St. Augustine's Canterbury whenever they were summoned and, if the abbot had some claim against them about anything, to plead there and stand trial at his court like the men of another manor, and they recognised that this had already been deraigned against them when Clarembald was elect. Concerning this

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 530 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

rebellion they gave gage in the hand of the abbot and also in the hand of Ralph, his seneschal in view of the whole county. The witnesses of this deed are: John de Cardif, Elias de Shilingham and his brother Daniel, Adam de Charing and his son Ivo, Gervay de Ospringe and his nephew Hervey, William de Ashford and his brother Thomas, Fulk Peisforiere and Richard Peisforiere, William de Cossington, William Velu, Richard fitz Helto, Alan Wischard, William fitz Nigel, Maurice de Wadden Hall, Hugh Butler, Henry de Insula, Alan de Ratling, Ralph Chofin, Simon de Sholden and his son Jordan, William de Norfolk, Simon de Denton, Peter de Betteshanger, William Capel and his nephew Samson, Robert de Dive, Florence de Windgate, Geoffrey de Ashford, Ralph de Fishborne, Geoffrey Turchople, William de Poulton, Walter Morel, Robert de Wye and his brother William, Clemens de Sringlinges, Hamo fitz William fitz Viel, Henry de Cramaville, John de Shalmsford, William de Lillechurch, Ralph de Heslinges, Heilgar de Sturry and his son Adam, Benedict de Fairbourn, Samson de Newland, William Burel, Ralph Waleis, Alan de Westwell, Walter de Hurst and his son Robert, William de Wigheshelle, Geoffrey Malebisse, Hamo de Southford, William de Orlestone and Simon his brother, Robert fitz Thomas de Ashdon, Richard de Poulton, Henry de Shorne, Thierry Fameng, William de Poundhurst, Ralph de Essele, William de Craythorne, Edwin de Northbrook, Roger the cleric, Eilnoth and Adelard de Sovedune, Asketin and Osbert de Sutton, Osbert Franceis, Henry de Marsh, Etard and Wulstan de Wiskebech, Richard Wevere, Robert fitz Heilnoth, Robert and Aelmer de Stoke, Simon de Blean, Hamo and Aldred de Stourmouth, Sired de Combe, Elfwin Guinge the ceorl, Eustace the man of Ralph de Cray, William and Geoffrey de Thelebregge, Elias de Schuthe, Martin the beadle, Augustine de Helstene, Nicholas and William de Oxney, William fitz Kenewold, Wido de Liverton, and from Thanet Adrian the knight, Robert de Westgate, Osbert Belle, Arnold the sheriff, Aelmer the cleric, Geoffrey the cleric, Hugh fitz Swanehild, Seuugel de Dudemettune, Edward de Ladane, Norman de Liedenne, Winedei quint geval, Henry fitz Wichtgar, Jordan de Dumeitune, Daniel de Oldland, Walter the dispenser, Osward fitz Elmer, Flawold, Wlviat prestes ad hun, Odo and Asketin and Aelmer Cliffsend, Godhese de Stone and his brother Brithwold, Godhese the little, Aelniath Kete, Henry de Spina, Edward fitz Brithive, Wulvric fitz Acheman, Godwin fitz Arnold, Osward Wrenge and several others.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 531 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

C. A note in a manuscript of St. Augustine's, Canterbury on the misdeeds of the men of Thanet. The old pride of the men of Thanet, their numerous transgressions and recent conspiracy and inventions of evils are here recorded as a record of what has happened in the past and a warning against future damages. Firstly the men of Thanet rose maliciously against the monastery of St. Augustine around the year of the Lord 1165 in the time of King Henry II and St. Thomas the martyr and the Elect Clarembald who had been forced upon the monastery by the king. They asserted that they were not obliged to follow suit at the court of St. Augustine or to plead there but in their own hallmoot at Minster and this cause was brought before the court of the lord king and at length it was there deraigned that the tenants of Minster must do suit in the court of St. Augustine as often as they are summoned and plead there and stand judgment as the men of another manor. Likewise the same men of Thanet, as appears from old documents, refusing in the year of the Lord 1176 in the twenty-second year of King Henry II to render the tithes of fruits to God and the church of St. Augustine because of the church of Minster, finally promised in the hand of Abbot Roger the first, forced by law and reason, to harvest all their fruits from the vigil of St. Laurence onwards and lawfully and forever to give, they and their heirs, all their tithes, one cop after another, and to deliver the other tithes which they used to give as they ever best gave them from the time of the dedication of the church of Minster. They also gave their loyal pledge and promise to observe the liberties and all the customs of which the abbot found his abbey to be seised and loyally to render to his honour always and without deceit all the services which they rendered to anyone of his predecessors. Of this there are almost one hundred witnesses. Likewise in the aforesaid year of the Lord they rose against the monastery saying that they were not obliged to come to the court at St. Augustine's or to plead there or stand trial, but in their hallmoot at Minster in Thanet. But the abbot, thanks to a royal mandate, obtained that the men of Thanet recognised in full county court at Canterbury that they must come to the court at St. Augustine as often as they were summoned and plead and stand trial there as the men of another manor, and they recognised that this same point had previously been deraigned against them in the time of the then Elect Clarembald. And concerning their rebellion they gave gage in the abbot's hand in view of the whole county court and the names of many men of Thanet and others who were then present are given in the document.

488C ' [See J. Cave-Browne, 'An ancient record concerning St. Augustine's abbey, Canterbury', The Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 1 (1894), 295-302; there was renewed

litigation under King Richard I, see our no. 469.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 532 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

489 Renewal, in the form of an inspeximus, of a charter of William the Conqueror by King Henry II, at the recommendation of the king's court.

About this time it happened that one of the monastery's charters, of King William, the founder of the monastery of Battle, had deteriorated from age. The abbot showed it to the king, who said: "This could do with renewing". To this the abbot replied: "And we pray that, if it please you, you will renew it and confirm it by your royal authority". The king said: "I will not do it except by a judgment of my court". At this the abbot took his leave of the king, and going to the illustrious Richard de Luci he told him of the king's reply. The great man said: "If our judgment is required in the matter, you will find the whole court in unanimous agreement that your petition be granted" I On the great man's advice, the abbot waited a bit for a place and time when the king would shortly be sitting in the midst of his barons. Then he advanced and in view of all presented his charter, decayed with age, and requested that it be renewed by royal authority. The king asked a judgment of the barons about it, whether it should be done or not. "It is proper", said Richard de Luci. "It is proper for you, if it please you, my lord, to renew the charter of the church of Battle. Even if all its charters perished, all of us should be its charters, for by the conquest at Battle we were all enfeoffed. And since you require our judgment whether or not it should be done, we adjudge that you renew the charter and confirm it with your royal authority." The king listened, and then called over Walter of Coutances, then his chancellor, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, and shortly after that archbishop of Rouen. 2 He ordered that a new charter be made in the royal name and sealed with his seal, following the form of the old charter, and specifying that in the new charter it be stated that he had confirmed it for the love of God and at the petition of Abbot Odo, wishing the name and merit of the abbot to be recorded. Now in the charters and muniments given by various persons at different times concerning the same matter, it is the custom that the later documents mention the earlier ones, so that the later seem to require the evidence of the earlier, for example in such words: "as is asserted in the charter, or in the charter of N" But the king would put in no such phrase. He himself dictated another never before employed and, bearing witness in his own person concerning what he had seen, he ordered it to be alluded to in the charter as follows: "Since I have inspected the charter of William my great-grandfather, in 489

To judge from his prominent role in what follows, Richard seems to have advised waiting for one of the exchequer sessions or a specialized session coram rege.

2 Walter of Coutances, archdeacon of Oxford, though not formally chancellor, was acting in that

capacity and as keeper of the seal from 1173-1189. He was elected bishop of Lincoln in May 1183 and translated to Rouen in November 1184. He died in 1207.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 533 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

which were contained the aforesaid liberties and exemptions and free customs given the church by him...". The famous prince even deigned to explain the point of the clause. He said: "If the clause we avoid were to have been put in, the later charter would confer little without the presence of the earlier. But now, since in the later one no mention has been made of the original prototypes, this charter alone would be enough, even if all the other charters of Battle had been lost". 3 After the king had explained this, the abbot asked the chancellor, and received his permission, for three charters to be written for him, all containing exactly the formula that the king had ordered, and for each to be sealed with the royal seal. He provided for his church carefully and prudently in this. For the monastery's estates lie at some distance from the monastery, and if ever for some reason one, or even two, of the three charters were therefore taken elsewhere, one of them at least 4 would now always be at hand in the monastery.

490 Henry, son of King Henry II and himself sometimes styled king after his coronation in 1170, gathers enemies of his father around himself in Poitiers. Adam, a deacon and vice-chancellor of the crown-prince, writes to the king about this, but is arrested and accused of treason in a meeting of the court of the young king. Thanks to the benefit of clergy Adam escapes the death penalty, but is scourged. King Henry II orders him to be brought to England. The young king returned to Poitiers, gathered around himself several knights from France and Normandy, whom his father hated because they were with his son against him during the war, and made friends with them. When Adam, a clerk of Archbishop Roger of York, who acted in the court of the young king as vicechancellor for Geoffrey the provost of Beverley, for whom the aforesaid archbishop of York had bought the chancellorship of England for 11,000 marks of silver, noticed this, he was extremely sorry. And as was fitting and since he was in the debt of the lord king, who had given him a position with his son and to whom he had also sworn fealty against all men, he understood the risk of his own discomfiture and the threat to the kingdom which might result from those aliens. He could not bear it any more nor should he have done, so he took up his pen at 3 Henry's charter exists. It is BL Add. Ch. 70981. It is closely related to the forged charter BL Cotton Ch. xvi. 28, and to the statements of abbey liberties given by the chronicler, above, pp. 70, 84. But, significantly, this inspeximus does not include the clause exempting the abbey from episcopal "domination" It appears, therefore, that Abbot Odo took a genuine charter of William I to Henry II, and thus secured royal confirmation of liberties less compromised by scandal. This suggestion was first made by V.H. Galbraith, 'ANew Charter of Henry II to Battle Abbey', EHR, lii (1937), 67-73, where both charters are printed. 4 °[Translation taken from BATTLE Chron., 309-313.1'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 534 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

once and put down in writing some most wicked data and horrible to hear, exposing the secrets of his lord and hastening to send them to the lord king in England. But before his letter was dispatched his misdeed was discovered and put before the king, his lord. He himself was brought to court and confessed and did not deny. The king then called together his magnates and also the bishop of Poitiers, who was present, and asked them what was to be done in this matter and what he should do with the traitor who, being informed of his secret, wanted to incite his father against him. Some of them judged that he was guilty of the death penalty, some thought he deserved to be hanged, some that he should be flayed alive. But the bishop, who was not supposed to take part in a blood judgment, tried to free him because he was a deacon, maintaining that an ordained cleric could not be judged by a layman. Thereupon the young king understood that because of the bishop, who protected that cleric, he was not allowed to punish him as he would have liked and wondered what torments he could make him suffer without killing him, while waiting for the king, his father, to be notified. So, making up his mind after a long silence, he told his ministers: "Take him out, tie his hands upon his back and whip him, naked, in the squares and streets of the city, proclaiming, so that everyone knows, that he betrayed me, and take him to Normandy and imprison him at Argentan, and whenever you enter a city take him around naked through squares and streets and whip him" They did as they were told and having whipped him locked him up at Argentan. When the lord king heard this, he was indignant and sent four knights of his household to the king, his son, ordering the cleric to be sent to him at once. He obeyed the orders of his father, but he took it ill that that cleric escaped him alive. When he was taken before the lord king in England in chains, the king refused to receive him in fetters because he had handed him over unfettered to the king, his son, but he ordered that he was to be kept in fetters until he had discussed with his council what was to be done with him, and he commited him to the custody of Abbot [Thomas] of Hyde at Winchester.'

490

0 I[Jolliffe, Angevin Kingship, p. 176, n. 3.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 535 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

491 At a great council at Northampton William de Kaines claims to hold his barony directly from the crown and not from Robert III, earl of Leicester. The earl is summoned and submits his case to the royal goodwill. The king confirms him in all his possessions (except the castles of Pasci and Mountsorrel) and particularly the earldom of Leicester and the forest, which the county court has sworn to be his. In this council William de Kaines, who held his barony from Earl Robert of Leicester, told the king that he was entitled to hold it from him in chief. He said this, relying on bad counsel, in order to please the king who hated his lord. As the aforesaid earl of Leicester appeared on the day appointed by the king's summons and had heard everything which had been said against him, he replied that although his ancestors i.e. his great-grandfather, his grandfather and his father' and he himself had charters and privileges of the kings of England, William and Henry I, concerning their lands and specifically that baronage, and although the ancestors of William de Kaines had always held that baronage from his ancestors without any break, he did not want to plead against the king's will neither on this nor on any other tenement, but agreed that this and all his other tenements should be in the king's mercy. As the king heard him speak so piously, he was moved by his piety and fully restored all his tenements to him as he had them a fortnight before the war, 2 retaining, however, in his hand the castle of Mountsorrel and the castle of Pasci, the only ones of all his castles which were left. The king there also restored to him the whole of Leicester and the forest, which were sworn by the common oath of the county to belong to his demesne. The king knew, however, that this had been done out of envy and because of the king's hatred of the earl.

492 Intervention by King Henry II in favour of the monks of Kirkstall Abbey after Hugh Bigod, earl of Norfolk, deraigned the grange of Barnoldswick against them in the king's court and made certain arrangements with them. Meanwhile a dispute arose concerning the grange of Barnoldswick. For the earl of Norfolk, Hugh surnamed Bigod, claimed it for his own domain, won it for 491

'[Hugh de Grandmesnil, Domesday lord of much of the town of Leicester, d. c. 1093-1094 and his lands passed to his son Ivo (t shortly after 1102). Ivo's lands passed to Robert I de Beaumont, who became earl of Leicester c. 1107 and died in 1118; his son, Robert II who died in 1168, was

the father of Robert III of our text, who died in 1190.] °

2 '[See on the great rebellion of 1173- 1174, in which Robert III led an invasion against the king from the Continent: Poole, Domesday Book to Magna Carta,332 and Warren, Henry II, 125.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 536 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

himself in the court of the lord king, and caused the monks to be dispossessed by the judgment of the court through default of warranty. Overwhelmed by the loss of his own possessions the abbot approached the earl and, falling prone at his feet, stirred the man to pity. At length an agreement was made between them that they should by gift of the earl take possession of the grange with its appurtenances to hold it of him and his heirs in perpetual alms on the annual payment of the ancient rent, namely five marks or a palfrey of equal value, and one hawk. But as to this annual rent King Henry of good memory wrought that it be removed, diligently striving and persuading the earl that for the redemption of his sins he should confer the said grange with its appurtenances upon God and the monks in pure and perpetual alms. And this was done as the charter' of the said earl witnesses, and likewise the confirmation of the king that they have relating to it, but on the condition that all his days they should pay him this annual tribute, and after his death be free from all payment and quit for ever. So the abbot returned to his own house with the charter of the earl and the confirmation of the king, and these matters being favourably settled the Lord was blessed in all his gifts.'

493 After reporting a murder case in London in 1177 the Gesta Henrici Secundi recalls a case of robbery there in 1174: one of the robbers was caught and on the basis of his declarations a rich citizen of London, who had failed to purge himself by the ordeal of water, was hanged. During this same meeting at London [9-16 March] a brother of [Robert] de Ferrers, earl [of Derby] was killed at night and secretly within London. When the king heard this he was very sorry and swore to take serious revenge on the citizens of London, for it was said to be the custom in London that a hundred or more sons and relations of the nobles of the city carried out nocturnal raids on the houses of the rich and plundered them, and if they found somebody wandering through the streets they immediately killed him without mercy, so that few dared to walk in the city at night out of fear of them. And thus it happened three years before that sons and nephews of some noble citizens of London gathered at night to enrich themselves, broke into the stone house of some rich Londoner and broke it up with iron bars which they had, introducing themselves through the opening which they had made. But the master of the house knew of their coming and put on his hauberk, gathered around him several nobles and honest servants wearing

492

Hugh Bigod's deed, addressed to Roger archbishop of York, appears in Kirkstall Abbey Coucher 0Book, fP 54. 2 [MONASTICON, V. 526; translation taken from KIRKSTALL Foundation, 180.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 537 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

hauberks and sat with them in a corner of the house. When he saw that one of those robbers, called Andrew Buccuinte, marching in front of the others with a burning torch, carried a pot full of burning coal and hastened to light candles which he carried in his hand, he threw himself on him in a quick attack. As soon as the said Andrew Buccuinte noticed this he drew his knife and hit the master of the house, but without inflicting a wound because the hauberk had caught the blow. He quickly drew his sword, attacked Andrew Buccuinte and cut off his right hand, shouting in a loud voice: "Thieves, thieves" and upon hearing this signal they all fled except the one who had lost his hand and whom the master of the house retained. On the morrow he handed him over to Richard de Lucy, a royal justice, who imprisoned him. This thief, having been promised his life and his limbs, betrayed his accomplices of whom several were caught and many fled. Amongst those, however, who were caught was one of the noblest and richest citizens of London called John le Viel. Having failed to purify himself by the ordeal of water, he offered 500 marks of silver to the lord king for his life, but since he had failed in the ordeal of water he refused to accept those pennies and ordered him to undergo the judgment, and he was hanged.1

494 Arbitration in the court of King Henry II of a dispute between King Alfonso VIII of Castile and King Sancho VI of Navarre concerning various possessions in their respective kingdoms. A. The narrative in "Benedict of Peterborough"'

Moreover, he sent his messengers throughout the island of England and ordered his archbishops, bishops, earls and barons of the whole of England to join him at London on the Sunday at the beginning of Lent [13 March], for he would need their counsel what judgment to give between two kings of Spain, i.e. Alfonso, king of Castile, who had married his daughter Eleanor, and Sancho, king of Navarre, concerning the land and castles of Buron, which the king of Castile had

493

494A

0

o[Round, Commune of London, 112 113.-In

ROGER OF HOVEDEN, ii. 131 this passage is much abbreviated and the two incidents, i.e. the murder of the brother of the earl of Ferrers and the violence committed by the Buccuinte's and their accomplices three years before, are confused.]' '[The Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi, known commonly under the name of Benedict of Peterborough, is now believed to have been Roger of Hoveden's earlier draft for his chronicle, see Gross-Graves, no. 2879.]O

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 538 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

claimed against the king of Navarre as his fee and heredity. As, after many and great wars, they had not been able to agree amongst themselves, they sent their envoys to England to the court of the king of England to obtain a judgment on the controversy which existed between them and they gave sureties on both sides to stand by the judgment of the king of England, as will be explained later. The king of Castile sent to England Bishop [Raimund] of Palencia and Count G6mez and other barons from his land to put forward his claim, and the king of Navarre sent Bishop [Pedro Paris] of Pamplona and many other clerics and laymen from his kingdom to speak for him. Bishop [Juan I Frontin] of Tarazona and the highest master of the Hospitallers of the whole of Spain and Lord Gutierre [P6rez de Reinoso], a templar, also came on behalf of both parties to hear the judgment that would be pronounced about them and to report to them. There were also two very strong men of, it was said, remarkable probity and audacity, one on behalf of the king of Castile and the other on behalf of the king of Navarre, to enter judicial combat in the court of the king of England, if it were ordered by judgment. A little later, at the beginning of Lent, the king arrived at Windsor where the aforesaid envoys of the king of Castile and the king of Navarre met in the presence of the king and handed over to him some chirograph, which had been made on the agreement between the aforesaid kings of Spain and whose text was as follows. This is the pact and agreement made between Alfonso, king of Castile, and his uncle Sancho, king of Navarre, concerning their quarrels, so that they might accept the judgment of the king of England. For this purpose each of the kings has placed three boroughs in trust in order to ensure that he will accept and execute the judgment of Henry, king of England, son of Empress Matilda and father in law of King Alfonso, and that he will stand by King Henry's judgment on pain of losing the following boroughs. King Alfonso places in trust Niijera, the borough of the Christians and the borough of the Jews and Arnedo, the borough of the Christians and the borough of the Jews, and Cellorigo. Similarly Sancho, king of Navarre, places in this trust Estella, the borough which Pedro Rodriguez holds and the borough of the Jews, and Funes and Marafi6n. Also the envoys of both kings are to be in the presence of the king of England on the first day of the present Lent, that is the beginning of Lent, in order to receive that judgment and if envoys of either party are unable to attend because of death or illness or captivity during their travel, the other envoys shall wait for them during the period of 30 days after the appointed day in the court of the king of England, and those who are in good health shall come to the court and accept the judgment and if they are all ill or captured or dead, their king shall lose nothing for that reason, and if all or some envoys, not being retained by one of those three reasons, fail to appear before the king of England on the appointed day, then the king whose envoys they are shall lose those aforesaid boroughs, by good faith and without trickery. And if, which

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 539 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

God forbid, the king of England should die in the meantime, those envoys shall in the aforesaid way proceed to the king of the French to receive his judgment and they shall receive and execute the judgment which he will pronounce, as if he had been the king of England. Therefore Sancho, the king of Navarre, shall receive those three boroughs by his knight and his gatekeeper and he shall give Ndjera and Cellorigo to Pedro Rodriguez, son of Count Rodriguez, and he shall give Arnedo to Diego Jim~nez [de los Cameros] and they shall do him homage for them. Alfonso, king of Castile, shall similarly receive those three boroughs by his knight and his gatekeeper and shall give Ndijera and Cellorigo to Pedro Rodriguez de Azagra and Funes to Sancho Ramirez and Marafi6n to Rodrigo Martin and they shall do him homage for them. And if one of those kings wants to take away these boroughs from the knights who hold them to give them to somebody else, King Sancho of Navarre shall give them to Pedro Rodriguez and G. Vermundi, S. Raimiri, J. Velez, Rodrigo Martin, E. Almoravit, S. Almora, E. de Oriz, P. Ramuri, G. de Oriz or Pedro de Oriz. King Alfonso of Castile shall similarly give them to Count N., Count P., Count G., Count G6mez, R. Gutierre, P. de Arasuri, De. Senez, G. Garcia, Ordofio Garcia, G. Rodriguez de Azagra, P. Gutierre or F Rodriguez de Azagra. But the tenants themselves shall not transfer those boroughs until they who must receive them do homage for them to the other king, as was said before. And generally speaking, King Alfonso can improve with his own possessions what he holds from the king of Navarre as he can and wants to. Similarly King Sancho of Navarre can improve with his own possessions what he holds from King Alphonso as he can and wants to. Four lieges were elected by these kings to hear this judgment, Juan bishop of Tarazona, Pedro Arias, Arnaldo de Torrella and Gutierre Perez de Reinoso, so that two or three or all of them could go with the envoys to the court of the king of England and put the case of both kings before him and after the complaints have been heard, to plead the cause which the king of England will decide to hear first. And it is on the basis of the report of those lieges who have heard the judgment of the king of England that both kings shall respect and execute the aforesaid covenant, as put forward in this charter. And the knights who have done homage for the aforesaid boroughs shall respect this pact according to the report of those lieges vis-d-vis the kings and execute it in good faith and without trickery. Moreover, both the aforesaid kings, each one by his own faith, have confirmed and ordained a good and safe truce for their men, boroughs, lands and all other possessions for the duration of seven years and better to ensure it, King Sancho of Navarre placed Erga in fealty and King Alfonso Calahorra. And if an army of either king should invade, with or without him, the kingdom of the other, the culprit shall lose the aforesaid borough. And if some vassal of those kings should take by open force or in stealth a borough in the kingdom of the other within this truce, the king whose vassal he is shall restore that borough to the other king within forty days, otherwise the knight who holds the borough that was placed in trust shall surrender that borough to the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 540 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

complaining king and hold it in gage until he recovers his borough. And if somebody from those kingdoms, who is not a vassal of those kings, happens to take a borough in the kingdom of the other, both kings shall march against him with their people and besiege him and not leave until they have got hold of him. They also established that all the vassals of both kings who had lost their heredities since the beginning of this war should recover them completely, as they held them on the day when they lost them, and they shall not lose them for the misdeed or the judgment that has so far taken place, nor shall they answer any complaint within those seven years. If afterwards some complaint or judgment should rise again between them, they shall go to a mediating court and give satisfaction, as shall be adjudicated there. And all men of both kingdoms shall travel to and from them in safety, except for known homicides. And if one of those kings refuses to restore the heredities as specified above, he shall surrender the aforesaid borough to the other king and he shall hold it in gage until he recovers the heredities and all he demands from them. And all vassals of both kings shall be within this truce with their men, boroughs, heredities and all other things which they have, in whatever land they be. And all this shall be held and observed in good faith and without trickery. And King Alfonso of Aragon shall be in this truce if it pleases him and if it should not please him to be in it, the truce shall nevertheless firmly be observed between us, the aforesaid kings, as said before. This charter was made between Ndijera and Logrofio in the year 1214 of the [Spanish] era on 25th August. And after the lord king had heard this chirograph and had listened to the allegations of the envoys of both kings and understood them, he ordered them in the presence of his bishops, earls and barons to appear before him without any excuse at London on the following Sunday [13 March 1177] to receive his judgment. On the first Sunday of Lent, the appointed day for the aforesaid envoys of the kings of the Spaniards, the king himself came to London and there, as they had been told, the following bishops came to him: Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, Bishop Geoffrey of Ely, Bishop Gilbert of London, Bishop Reginald of Bath, Bishop Robert of Hereford, Bishop John of Norwich, Bishop Bartholomew of Exeter, Bishop Roger of Worcester and Bishop John of Chichester and from Wales Bishop [Peter de Leia] of St. David's, Bishop [Adam] of St. Asaph and Bishop [Gwion] of Bangor. Also Bishop Hugh of Durham came there and Bishop [Walter] of Rochester and from Galloway Bishop Christian of Whithorn. Archbishop Roger of York could not come because of ill health and Bishop Jocelin of Salisbury and Bishop [Richard Peche] of Chester could not come either. The bishopric of Lincoln was vacant. There were also so many abbots, deacons,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 541 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and archdeacons that it was impossible to count them and there also were innumerable earls and barons of the kingdom. And as they were all gathered in the king's hall in London, three graceful men, and reputed loyal, appeared, whose names are: Juan I [Frontin] of Tarazona, Pedro Arias and Gutierre Perez de Reinoso, who were sent on behalf of both kings, of Castile and Navarre, to hear the judgment about their case and to report it. Moreover the following persons were present on behalf of King Alfonso of Castile: Bishop [Raimund] of Palencia, Count G6mez, Lope Diaz, Gomes Garcia, Garcia Garcias, Pedro Perez and Gutierre Fernandez, and on behalf of King Sancho of Navarre, Bishop [Pedro Paris] of Pamplona, Garcia Berneri, Sancho Ramirez, Espafiol de Taissonal, Pedro Ramirez and Aznar de Chalez. All these had been sent to show the right to which their lords pretended, one against the other. Afterwards, as the earls and barons of England had not understood their speeches, the king ordered them to put their demands, claims and allegations in writing and to put the document before him, so that on the basis of their exposition he should understand their petitions, claims and allegations, and for this he gave them a respite of three days. And three days later they again met there before the king and the earls and barons of his kingdom and they submitted the following written document. King Sancho el Craso begot these three sons: [1]. King Ferdinand [I el Magno] of Castile. This King Ferdinand begot King Alfonso who took Toledo and begot Queen Urraca, who begot Alfonso [VII] el Emperador, who himself begot King Sancho [III], who begot King Alfonso [VIII] who married [Eleanor], the daughter of King Henry [II] of England. [2]. King Ramiro [I]. King Ramiro of Aragon begot King Sancho [- Ramirez], who begot King Pedro [I] and King Alfonso [I el

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 542 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Batallador]. King Pedro died without issue and was succeeded by his brother, King Alfonso, who took Saragossa. [3]. King Garcia [Sanchez III] of Navarre and Ndjera. King Garcia begot King Sancho [IV Garcbs] who afterwards was killed at Pefialkn. He begot Sancho the Child, who died without issue and was succeeded by King Alfonso, the kinsman of his father, in Navarre and Nijera as far as Puente de la Reina and Sangijesa, and he took Toledo, and this child was succeeded by King Sancho of Aragon, a kinsman of his father in Navarre and Pamplona. In the name of the Lord, King Alfonso of Castile and Toledo complains and requests that King Sancho of Navarre, his uncle, restore to him Logrofio, Entrena, Navarrete, which is situated on this side of Ribaroia, Ausejo, Autol, Resa and Alava with its markets, i.e. of Estibaliz and Divina and all its right in the land which is called Durango. All this had been the hereditary possession of King Alfonso of blessed memory, who liberated Toledo from the power of the Saracens, and after his death was possessed by his daughter, Queen Urraca, by the same right and after her death her son the Emperor Alfonso [VII] of blessed memory similarly possessed it by hereditary right and after the emperor's death his son Sancho [III] possessed it without complaint or plea by hereditary right, and after the death of King Sancho [III], his son our lord King Alfonso [VIII] similarly possessed all the aforesaid by hereditary right until the aforesaid king of Navarre robbed the king of Castile, his nephew, a young orphan and the innocent son of his friend and lord, of the aforesaid, without bringing forward a claim, and detains it by violence. He also complains and requests restitution by the aforesaid king of Navarre of Rueda, which he detains unjustly, for the emperor acquired it from the king of the Saracens called Zafadola and left it to his son King Sancho, who after the death of the emperor possessed it in peace during his whole lifetime. After his death our lord Alfonso, his son, possessed it by hereditary right and in peace until it was lost by Sancho Ramirez de Perola, who held it according to the custom of Spain from the hand of Pedro de Ortiz, who himself held it according to that same custom from our lord King Alfonso. He also requests the produce which the aforesaid king of Navarre received of Logrofio and all the other aforesaid possessions from the time of the invasion onwards and the damages which he caused to his land by depredation and burning, whose total sum we estimate at about 100,000 marks of gold. He furthermore requests Puente de la Reina and Sangdesa and all the land between those two towns and the river Ebro: King Alphonso of blessed memory, grandfather of the emperor, had and peacefully possessed it and through him and according to the custom of Spain it was held by his relative, King Sancho of Aragon, and after the latter's death similarly by his son Pedro [I] and after King Pedro's death by King Alfonso [I] of Aragon, as relatives and friends. He also

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 543 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

requests through maternal succession half of Tudela, which Count [Rotron] de la Perche gave to Queen Margaret, his cousin, who was the wife of King Garcia [Ramirez of Navarre] and grandmother of the same King Alfonso, while the aforesaid Tudela in no way pertains to Navarre. And after Bishop [Raimund] of Palencia and Count G6mez and the other envoys of the king of Castile had proffered these and similar matters in writing and by mouth, they concluded their speeches and Bishop Pedro of Pamplona and the other envoys of the king of Navarre rose immediately, contradicted nothing of what their adversaries said, but submitted a document in which their requests, claims and allegations were written down and whose content was as follows. King Sancho of Navarre requests Cudejo, Monasterio, Montes de Oca, the vale of San Vicente, the vale of Ojacastro, Cincovillas, Montenegro and Sierralba as far as Agreda. All this he claims back and whatever is situated within these places towards Navarre and he claims all the revenue of this land from the time of King Sancho [IV] de Pefial~n's death. All this which belongs to his kingdom was peacefully and quietly possessed by the great-great-grandfather of the present King Sancho [VI], i.e. Garcia [Sanchez III], king of Navarre and Ndijera and his great-grandfather was, because of his weakness, violently expelled from this kingdom by Alfonso [I el Batallador], his relative. But in course of time King Garcia [Ramirez IV] of illustrious memory, his nephew and father of the present king, regained by divine will and the loyalty shown by his natural men his kingdom, but not in its entirety, and what is left is now claimed by his son Sancho [VI], the present king of Navarre. He, moreover, claims what the emperor has taken by force from King Garcia [Ramirez IV], his father, i.e. Ndjera, the borough of the Christians and of the Jews, Grafi6n, Pancorbo, Belorado, Cerezo, Monasterio, Cellorigo, Bilibio, Medria, Viguera, Clavijo, Verbea and Lantar6n. All these places he claims, and demands that they shall be restored to him because his father, King Garcia [Ramirez IV], possessed them by hereditary right and was deprived of them by the emperor. He also complains about Belorado, which the emperor had restored to his father, King Garcia, and which after the latter's death the same emperor took from Sancho, the present king of Navarre, who at that time had and peacefully possessed it as his own heredity. Moreover he claims that restitution shall be made to him by King Alfonso of Castile of the possession of the boroughs of which he was lately deprived with the produce received from them and whatever he would have had, if he had not been ejected. The names of the boroughs are the following: Quel, Oc6n, Pazuengos, Grafion, Cerezo, Vallu6rcanes, Treviana, Miriel, Ameyugo, Haiaga, Miranda de Ebro, Santa Gadea, Salinas de Anafia, Portilla, Malvecin, Leguin and the borough held by Godin. These he claims by reason that he had and possessed them as his own and was ejected without judicial process and therefore his complaint must have priority, because it is the ultimate violence and must be purged and the other party has also lost its right, if it had any.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 544 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

King Sancho [VI] of Navarre confident of his good right also submitted the following written agreement. This is the charter of peace and concord made between King Alfonso of Castile and King Sancho of Navarre in the abbey which is called Fitero. It pleased both kings that there should be peace and concord between them for ten years and [peace] was made and it was decided that it should be confirmed by oath and sworn by themselves and their barons on the altar and on the four Gospels that they would hold the aforesaid concord and truce loyally and without trickery or fraud for the duration of ten years; and this truce concerns people, cattle, riches and boroughs, in faith and without fraud or trickery, and if any of the kings or barons breaks this truce and does not make amends within 40 days after a complaint has been lodged, he shall be considered a perjurer and a traitor. This charter was made in the year 1205 of the [Spanish] era in the month October in such a way that the term of the truce will be for ten years from the next feast of St. Martin onwards and that an injured party can make a complaint within the ten years of this written agreement and is entitled within those ten years to take the following boroughs: Quel, Leguin, Malvecin and Portilla. Moreover the king of Navarre claims of the king of Castile restitution of a sum amounting to 100,000 marks of silver, while King Sancho, the present king of Navarre, is prepared to give King Alfonso satisfaction for all his complaints according to the arbitration of the barons of them both or of the most illustrious king of England. We confidently say that these and similar things, committed within this convention and this truce, must be restored first of all and before any other article of the case, for such is the law, such is the custom, such is the canon, such are all laws. The aforesaid things are expressed in writing but they will be more fully and copiously expounded by word of mouth. And after the aforesaid envoys of the king of Navarre had said this and similar things and the envoys of the king of Castile had not contradicted anything that was submitted by the others, the Holy Gospels were produced before all the people and the lord king made the aforesaid envoys of the king of Castile and the king of Navarre swear before judgment was pronounced that their lords, the king of Castile and the king of Navarre, would observe his judgment concerning the restitution as well as the truce and unless they did, they would surrender their bodies into his hand and power. Thereupon the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops of England who were present and the earls and barons of England gave sentence that both parties should restore all the aforesaid things which had been claimed by right. Thus they gave sentence that King Alfonso of Castile should receive back from his uncle King Sancho of Navarre Logrofio, Navarrete, Entrena, Autol and Ausejo with all their appurtenances, which his father had

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 545 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

quietly possessed on the day of his death and he himself during some years afterwards, but of which his uncle, the king of Navarre, had deprived the aforesaid king of Castile unjustly and violently, while he still was a ward and an orphan. They also gave sentence that restitution should be done to Sancho, king of Navarre, by Alfonso, king of Castile, of Leguin and Portilla and the borough which is held by Godin, of which the king of Castile had deprived him by war and unjustly, and afterwards the lord king of England gave them back their document so that they could report to their kings the judgment which is here transcribed. Henry, by God's grace king of England, duke of Normandy and of Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to his most beloved friends Alfonso, king of Castile, and Sancho, king of Navarre, greeting. As we have learnt from the tenor of your letters and the account of your lieges, Bishop John of Tarazona, Pedro Arias and Gutierre Perez de Reinoso and from the assertion of your envoys, Bishop [Raimund] of Palencia, Count Gomez, Lope Diaz, Count Garcia, Garcia Garcia, Pedro Perez, Gutierre Fernandez, Bishop [Pedro Paris] of Pamplona, Garcia Berneri, Sancho Rimiri, Espafiol de Taissonal, Pedro Ramirez and Aznar de Chalez, it has pleased you both to settle the complaints which exist between you concerning certain boroughs and lands and their boundaries and appurtenances by our judgment. Having received your lieges and envoys with suitable veneration, we have taken this task upon us out of regard for divine piety and common utility, considering that peace between you will be very useful to God's honour and the whole of Christianity. Therefore, after you had elected your lieges in common, and your attorneys and advocates of your cases had come forward in our presence and that of our bishops, earls and barons, we have diligently heard and understood the claims and allegations of both parties. Those to whom the case of Alfonso had been entrusted proposed that King Sancho of Navarre had unjustly and violently deprived the aforesaid king of Castile, while he was still a ward and an orphan, of the boroughs and castles of Logrofio, Navarrete, Entrena, Autol and Ausejo with all their boundaries and appurtenances, which his father had quietly possessed on the day of his death, and he himself for several years afterwards, and of which he asks to obtain restitution. On the other hand, those to whom the case of Sancho, king of Navarre, had been entrusted contradicted nothing of what the others put forward, but maintained that the aforesaid King Alfonso of Castile had deprived the aforesaid King Sancho of Navarre of the boroughs of Leguin and Portilla and of the borough which is held by Godin, by war and unjustly, and since the other party in no way contradicted this, they similarly asked for restitution of them to be made to them. It is moreover mentioned in your common document that you have concluded a truce between yourselves for a duration of seven years and that you have pledged your faith, and your envoys have lawfully and publicly confirmed this. After deliberation and with the counsel of our bishops, earls and barons and considering that peace was necessary between you in order to propagate the faith of the Christians and to confound the enemies of Christ and fully convinced

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 546 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

through your writings and the assertions of your envoys that in the confirmation and conservation of peace you will obey our counsel and precept, we order and counsel you through your envoys and we command and order you again by this present writing to confirm the peace between yourselves and to observe it loyally and forever before sentence is given concerning the aforesaid complaints and truce. As far as the aforesaid complaints are concerned about the boroughs and lands with all boundaries and appurtenances, which have been taken violently and unjustly on both sides, we have adjudicated that full restitution is to be made to both parties of the aforesaid possessions which were lawfully claimed, since nothing has been objected against the alleged violence by the other party and nothing has been alleged against making the restitutions that were claimed. On top of this, we have added that the truce, which as mentioned before was faithfully concluded between you, as we have learned from your writing and from the lawful and public confession made by your envoys, shall be observed inviolate until the agreed term. We also will and command for the good of peace that King Alfonso, our beloved son, shall pay at Burgos to his uncle, King Sancho of Navarre, every year during the coming decennium as much as 3,000 maravedis on three dates in the year, i.e. 1,000 maravedis at the end of the first four months after the aforesaid restitution has been made by both sides and another 1,000 maravedis at the end of the following four months and another 1,000 maravedis at the end of the next four months, so that in each of the ten years following on the aforesaid restitution 3,000 maravedis shall be paid on these same dates and at the aforesaid place. Moreover the envoys of both of you have sworn before sentence was pronounced that you shall firmly observe our judgment concerning the restitution as well as the truce and that otherwise they shall place themselves in our hand and power. Witnesses: Archbishop Richard of Canterbury, Bishop Hugh of Durham, Bishop Geoffrey of Ely, Bishop Roger of Worcester, Bishop Bartholomew of Exeter, Bishop Gilbert of London, Bishop Walter of Rochester, Bishop Reginald of Bath, Bishop John of Norwich, Bishop John of Chichester, Bishop Robert of Hereford, Bishop [Peter] of St. David's in Wales, Bishop Adam of St. Asaph's, Bishop [Gwion] of Bangor and Bishop Christian of Whithorn of Galloway and Earl Geoffrey of Brittany, the king's son, Earl William of Albemarle, Earl Robert of Leicester, William de Mandeville, earl of Essex, Earl Robert of Gloucester, Wiliam de Arundel, earl of Sussex, Earl [Hugh] of Chester, Earl [Robert] de Ferrers and, amongst the barons of England, Richard de Lucy, William de Vesci, Odenel de Umfraville, Robert de Vaux, Roger de Mowbray, Robert de Stuteville, Philip de Kyme and Roger Bigod and many other clerics and laymen of the kingdom of England.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 547 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

B. The narrative in Roger of Wendover. In those days' Alfonso, 2 king of Castile and son in law of the king of England, and Sancho 3 king of Navarre, his uncle, were involved in a conflict and sent emissaries to the king of England and swore that they would stand by his arbitration. At Westminster,' in the presence of the king, the bishops, the earls and the barons, the envoys who defended the cause of King Alfonso set forth that King Sancho of Navarre had unjustly and violently deprived the aforesaid King of Castile while he was still a minor and an orphan of the boroughs and lands of Logrofio, Navarrete, Entrena, Autol and Ausejo with their appurtenances, which his father on the day of his death and he himself for some years afterwards had quietly possessed and of which they requested restitution to be made to their lord. Those, however, to whom the cause of King Sancho had been entrusted, without contradicting what the others had put forth, maintained that the aforesaid Alfonso had deprived the aforesaid Sancho by war and unjustly of the boroughs of Leguin and Portilla and the borough held by Godin, and since the other party did not in any way contradict them, they requested with equal emphasis that their lord should receive restitution. Moreover the envoys admitted lawfully and publicly that a seven year truce had been concluded amongst the aforesaid kings who had pledged their faith. The king of the English therefore held counsel with the bishops, earls and barons concerning the forementioned complaints about violent and unjust despoliation and, since nothing was brought forward by either party against the other party's accusation of violence and no reason put forward why the requested restitution should not be made, he gave judgment that full restitution should be made to both parties of those things which they requested at law. He added that the truce which had been faithfully concluded between them was to be observed for the appointed term without any violation. He also gave judgment for the good of peace that King Alfonso was to give liberally to King Sancho ten years long 3,000 maravedis per year, so that in this way they should live in peace and perpetual friendship with each other. In those same days envoys from Manuel, the emperor of Constantinople, Frederick, the Roman emperor, William the archbishop of Trier, Duke [Henry] of Saxony and the Flemish Count Philip arrived to discuss various matters on the 12th of November at the court of the king of the English at Westminster, all at the same time as if it had been arranged. We explain

0 494B 1 Circa dies istos.] the charters connected with this question are printed by Rymer °[Foedera] , i. 2

pp. 43-50.

Aldefonsus.] Alfonso III of Castile had married the princess Eleanora.

3 0Sanccius,] or Sancho VI. 4 [This meeting took place on 12 November 1176 and not 1177, as Roger of Wendover assumes (Eyton, Court Henry II, 208).]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 548 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

these things to make clear to everyone how wise and magnificent King Henry was, 5 before whom the princes brought their doubtful judgments to be discussed.

495 Litigation in the court of King Henry II between the oldest son of the late Hugh Bigod, earl of Norfolk, and his stepmother, the earl's widow, who claims certain parts of the estate for her own son. In the same year before the beginning of Lent [9 March] Earl Hugh Bigod died and Roger Bigod, his heir, and his wife came to the court at Windsor, bidding to offer more to the king in order to obtain the inheritance of the earl. The oldest son and heir of the earl offered the king many and great things to obtain his full inheritance as his father held it on the day when he was alive and dead. The countess however, Roger Bigod's stepmother,' offered the king many and great things so that he might grant to her son the purchases and acquisitions of the earl, maintaining that Earl Hugh Bigod had devised to her son, whom she had by him, all his purchases and acquisitions. Having heard both their claims, the lord king told them to come to London so that he might give them satisfaction there by the counsel of his earls and barons according to the law and the custom of the country. Thereupon the king sent his serjeants and seized all the treasures of the aforesaid 2 earl into his hand.

496 Notification that Prior German of Durham has deraigned land in Blyborough against Hugh de Cauz by fine ofjudicial combat in the county court of Lincoln. Let it be known to all present and future that in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1177 the controversy between the prior of Durham and Hugh de Cauz

0

[See the basic commentary in J. Gonzalez, El Reino de Castilla en laepoca de Alfonso VIII, i:

495

Estudio, Madrid, 1960, pp. 802-813 (Consejo superior de investigaciones cientificas. Escuela de Estudios Medievales. Textos, xxv) (with an excellent map illustrating the dispute, between pp. 802-803). -A very brief reference to this arbitration in RALPH DE DICETO, pp. 415-416, adds nothing to our information.]' ' [Hugh I Bigod married secondly Gundred, daughter of Roger, earl of Warwick (Sanders, English baronies, 47).]

°

2 '[See J.C. Holt, "Politics and property in early medieval England", Past and Present, 57

(November 1972), 48-49.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 549 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

concerning the land of St. Cuthbert in Blyborough, which Hugh had unjustly occupied, was ended as follows, i.e. that the prior has deraigned the land before Walter of Grimsby, who was sheriff at that time and the full county court of Lincoln by fine of combat and that Hugh has quitclaimed the land by fine of combat to St. Cuthbert and the monks of Durham forever.

497 Notification by King Henry II that he has returned to the Tynemouth cell of the abbey of St. Albans the land which he had taken from Edgar Cospatric, a tenant of St. Albans who had participated in the Scottish Revolt of 11731174; a sworn inquest had established that the land belonged to St. Albans. Henry, king of England, duke of Normandy and count of Anjou, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his ministers and lieges of the whole of England, greeting. Know that I have restored and by this my charter confirmed to God and St. Alban and St. Oswin and the abbot and monks of St. Albans who live at Tynemouth that land which I had taken into my hand because of the flight of Edgar to Scotland and the war with the king of Scotland, i.e. Eglingham and Bewick and Lilburn with their appurtenances, which the said Edgar had held from the abbot of St. Albans and his monks of Tynemouth in farm for his lifetime, since it was enquired at my command by freemen of the venue and recognized that it was their escheat and demesne. Moreover, I have granted and by this my charter confirmed that which the abbot and convent of St. Albans have arranged and ordained forever concerning their churches in connection with the aforesaid Eglingham and with Appleton in favour of their guests, as the charter of the abbot and the chapter testifies. Witnesses: the bishops Richard of Winchester and Geoffrey of Ely, Richard de Lucy, William fitz Adelm, the steward, Alvred de St. Martin, Robert Marmion, Hugh de Cressy, Ranulf de Glanvill and Robert de Stuteville. At Geddington.'

497 1 '[We owe many thanks to Professor G.W.S. Barrow for help with certain identifications.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 550 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

498 Prior Geoffrey (1191-1213) and the monks of Christ Church Canterbury make known that in the time of Prior Benedict (1175-1177) a sworn inquest in the hallmoot of Merstham established that the land held from the abbey by William de la Deane was no free tenure. Geoffrey, the prior, and the convent of Christ Church Canterbury to all lieges and friends of that church, greeting. Be it known to those present and future that in the time of Prior Benedict of the church of Canterbury it was inquired in the hallmoot of Merstham by the oath of faithful men that the land which William de la Deane held from us, i.e. that which belonged to Wulfric his father, is no free tenure, but is held by fork and flail, by mowing and reaping and all service, like the other lands in Merstham that are not of free tenure. And since neither William nor his heirs or anyone else can claim any heredity in that land, Nicholas the son of William did so much for us and our church that we concede and confirm to Nicholas and his heirs that same land, i.e. two virgates and also two crofts of twelve acres, to hold from us for eight shillings and four pence per year, from which eight shillings he will pay six shillings and four pence in our court of Merstham and two shillings to the treasurer of our church every year at Pentecost. Furthermore, this same Nicholas and his heirs will do all the services in the court of Merstham, which the aforesaid William used to do previously as for that land which is held by fork and flail. Witnesses: Godfrey de la Deane, Hugh de Doddington, Henry de Shorne, Martin the steward, Robert fitz Richard, Thomas de la Deane, Adam the chamberlain, Elias de Dereham and many others.

499 Final concord in the king's court between the abbeys of Gloucester and Reading concerning the church of Cam after Pope Alexander III has appointed judges delegate. A. Notification by King Henry II of the final concord between the abbeys of Gloucester and Reading.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 551 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Henry, by God's grace king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs, ministers and all his lieges, French and English, of the whole of England, greeting. Know that I have granted and confirmed by my present charter the peace and fine made before Bartholomew and John, bishops of Exeter and Chichester, between the monks and the monastery of Reading and the monastery and monks of Gloucester concerning the controversy and litigation which took place in the presence of the canons of St. Augustine of Bristol and other supporters of the monks of Reading between those monasteries and monks concerning the church of Cam and all its appurtenances. With my consent and that of the forementioned bishops who were appointed by a mandate of the lord Pope Alexander III judges delegate between those monasteries and the monks who serve God there, it was agreed that the monastery of Gloucester for the good of peace, by way of transaction and in order to terminate the aforesaid controversy and claim forever, shall yearly pay six marks of silver to the monastery of Reading, three at Easter and three at Michaelmas, half of which the canons of St. Augustine at Bristol shall receive through the hands of the monks of Reading. The monastery of Gloucester, however, shall hold the church of Cam with all its appurtenances in chief from me as my own alms, save that the monks of Reading shall forever receive and possess those six marks as my own alms. To this composition was added that the monks of Reading, supported by the canons of St. Augustine, shall give counsel and aid to the monks of Gloucester, charitably and sociably, in order to retrieve the appurtenances of the church of Cam of which it had been deprived. Furthermore the monks of Gloucester must receive from the canons of St. Augustine at Bristol a charter of confirmation concerning the loyal and firm observation of the aforesaid agreement as far as they are concerned. Therefore I will and firmly order that this peace, concord and fine made between the aforesaid monasteries and monks concerning the church of Cam and all its appurtenances shall be kept firm and undisturbed. Witnesses: Earl William de Mandeville, Robert earl of Leicester, Fulk Pagnell, Roger de Stuteville, Robert de Stuteville, William de Stuteville, Geoffrey de Perche and William fitz Adelm, the steward. At Woodstock.

B. Notification by Abbot Hamelin of Gloucester of the final concord concluded at Woodstock before King Henry II between his abbey and that of Reading. Hamelin, by God's grace abbot of Gloucester, and the convent of that place, to all the faithful of Holy Mother Church, greeting in the Lord. Know you all that as there arose a controversy between the monastery of Reading and ours -the canons of St. Augustine of Bristol being present and giving their support to the monks of Reading - concerning the church of Cam and all its appurtenances, this

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 552 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

litigation was completely and finally settled forever by the conclusion of the following peace through the intervention of their friends and on the authority and with the consent of the illustrious King Henry II and of the Bishops Bartolomew of Exeter and John of Chichester, who were appointedjudges delegate in the case by a mandate of the lord Pope Alexander III. Our monastery, for the sake of peace, by way of transaction and in order to end the aforesaid claim forever, shall yearly pay to the monastery of Reading six marks of silver, three at Easter and three at Michaelmas, of which the canons of St. Augustine of Bristol shall receive half through the hands of the monks of Reading. Our monastery, however, will hold the church of Cam with all its appurtenances in chief from the king as his own alms, save for the payment by our monastery to the monks of Reading of the aforesaid six marks, in such a way that the monks of Reading shall also receive and possess forever those six marks as the king's own alms. It is also added to the content of the agreement that the monks of Reading, helped by the canons of St. Augustine, shall give us counsel and aid, charitably and sociably, in order to recover for the aforesaid church what has been taken away from it or is being held by anyone. We also must have a charter of confirmation of the aforesaid canons concerning the loyal and firm observation of the aforesaid agreement, as far as it depends on them. This was done at Woodstock in the presence of our lord King Henry II in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1177. Witnesses: our lord King Henry II, Hugh abbot of Muchelney, Guy Extraneus, at that time sheriff of Shropshire, William fitz Ralph, at that time sheriff of Nottingham. The following were present and gave their consent to this transaction: William the prior and William the chamberlain of St. Augustine of Bristol, Edward the prior, Roger the chamberlain and Reginald the bailiff of the abbot of Reading, William de St. Oswald, Alexander the prior of Stanley and Alexander the bailiff of the abbot of Gloucester.' C. Abstract of the final concord in a cartulary of Reading.

Let it be apparent from what follows that the controversy between the monks of Reading and the monks of Gloucester concerning the church of Cam, which was discussed in the presence of the lord King Henry II, was settled by a fine of composition as follows. The monks of Gloucester shall pay to the monks of Reading for the aforesaid church a yearly pension of six marks, three at Michaelmas and three at Easter and shall possess the church with all its appurtenances forever. It was also added to the text of the composition that the 499B ' *[Another, incomplete version occurs in London, B.L., Cotton. Vesp. E. xxv, fo 120-120 v0 .]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 553 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

monks of Reading should charitably and sociably give counsel and aid to the monks of Gloucester in order to recover the appurtenances of the forementioned church which were taken away or are being held by various people. The canons of St. Augustine of Bristol shall yearly receive one half of the forementioned pension on the aforesaid dates through the hands of the monks of Reading, according to the text of a document that was on another occasion established between them concerning the churches of Berkeley Hernesse. Witnesses of this business are: the lord King Henry II etc. Done at Woodstock in the year of the Lord 1177.

D. Confirmation by Bishops Bartholomew of Exeter and John of Chichester of the final concord between the abbeys of Gloucester and Reading. To all sons of Mother Church whom this charter will reach, Bartholomew, by God's grace bishop of Exeter, and John, by the same grace bishop of Chichester, greeting in the Lord. We notify you all that the dispute which was going on between the monasteries of Reading and Gloucester, in which the canons of St. Augustine of Bristol were present and gave their support to the monks of Reading, concerning the church of Cam and all its appurtenances, was delegated to us by our most reverend Pope Alexander III to be examined and duly determined. We were told that thanks to the intervention of friends and on the authority and with the consent of the illustrious King Henry II it was completely and forever settled by the following peace formula. For the sake of good peace, by way of transaction and in order to terminate the aforesaid quarrel forever, the monastery of Gloucester shall pay every year to the monastery of Reading six marks silver, three at Easter and three at Michaelmas, half of which shall be received by the canons of St. Augustine Bristol through the hands of the monks of Reading, but the monastery of Gloucester shall hold the aforesaid church of Cam with all its appurtenances in chief from the king as his own alms, save the aforesaid payment of six marks to be made to the monks of Reading by the monastery of Gloucester, so that the monks of Reading shall also receive and possess forever those six marks as the lord king's own alms. To the text of the composition it was also added that the monks of Reading with the aid of the canons of St. Augustine should give charitably and sociably counsel and aid to the monks of Gloucester in order to recover the appurtenances of the aforesaid church, which had been taken away from it or are being held by anyone. The monks of Gloucester, however, must have a charter of confirmation of the aforesaid canons guaranteeing the loyal and firm respect of the aforesaid composition in so far as it depends on them. This transaction we have confirmed by the apostolic authority which we exercised in this case and have corroborated it by the apposition of our seals. This text of our confirmation on the forementioned composition, made in the presence of the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 554 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

illustrious lord King Henry II at Woodstock, we bestowed on 28 July of the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1177 at Wilton. Witnesses: Reginald, bishop of Bath, Henry, abbot of Waverley, Baldwin, abbot of Forde and many others.'

500 Notification by King Henry II that the monks of Lire have deraigned their right of advowson in the churches of Shinfield and Swallowfield by a recognition in the king's court (cf. no 433). Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to his archbishops, bishops, earls, barons and justices and ministers of England, greeting. Know that it was recognized and deraigned in my court before my barons that the churches of Shinfield and Swallowfield belong to the advowson and donation of the abbot and monks of Lire. Witness: Hugh de Longchamp. At Verneuil.

501 Robert of Banham is incriminated under the Assize of Clarendon or Northampton and is about to undergo the ordeal of water when he is unexpectedly liberated, for which he thanks St. Edmund. By royal command, men who had committed homicide, theft and the like were traced in the various provinces, arrested and brought before judges and royal ministers at St. Edmunds and put in jail, where, to avoid their liberation by some ruse, their names were entered on three lists on the judges' order. Among them was one Robert, nicknamed the Putrid, a shoemaker from Banham, who was certain that he saw and heard himself put in the list. In the midst of his prayers, afflictions, tears and devotions he made a vow to God and St. Edmund that if he saved him from this peril he would give him the best of his four oxen. On the morrow, when they were taken out and their names checked against the written lists, for them to be purified by the ordeal of water, the name of this Robert was found in none. Pleased and full of joy he returned home and, not forgetting his vow, took the ox

499D ' O[H. Mayr-Harting, "'Henry II and the Papacy", Journalof EcclesiasticalHistorY, 16 (1965), 42.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 555 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and offered it to God and St. Edmund with very great devotion and thus continued to live more happily.

502 Victory in judicial combat goes, thanks to St. Thomas Becket, to the man who was visibly the weaker party.

Two men who had been condemned to judicial combat came together, one being much bigger and stronger than the other. The stronger man catches the weaker one, lifts him high up above his head ready to throw him hard on the ground; the smaller man hanging thus in the air lifts up his spirit to heaven and says a short prayer: "Help, holy Thomas martyr". The danger was great and sudden, and the time for prayer short. There are witnesses who were present: the stronger man, as if oppressed by the weight of the holy name, suddenly collapsed under the one he held and was vanquished.

503 Two men are charged with breach of the forest laws and subjected to the ordeal of water; one invokes the help of St. Thomas Becket and escapes, the other fails in the ordeal and is hanged. Two men were accused in connection with the forest of the lord king of the English and with the beasts which they had caught, and were subjected to the examination of water: one of them invoked the martyr with great attention and escaped, whilst the other thief was found to be guilty and hanged.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 556 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

504 A man falsely charged with arson, defeated in judicial combat and emasculated and blinded by his adversary, is miraculously healed at the tomb of St. William at York. Some robust and spiteful rustic, who became ill with jealousy of his neighbour's prosperity, poor because others were rich and unhappy because they were happy, started, driven by jealousy, to make plans against one of his neighbours, a rather feeble man. His internal spite was boiling like fat frying in a pan, bringing together all forms of perfidy and cooking up arguments by which he could engineer his death. Thus his insanity perspired, for he knew no joy until he found something to turn his joy to sorrow and his harp to mourning.' To realize this the servant of malice, the doctor of deceit, mobilized all his evil tricks in order to bring him by way of a criminal process before a royal court charged with the crime of arson, to beat him after he had been brought there and to deform him with irreparable bodily mutilation after he had been beaten. His mendacious iniquity was carried out as his corrupt heart had planned, and so the day of the lugubrious spectacle arrived: "his sad plan materialized" The accuser lent his poisonous tongue to perjury, his wrath leapt forward to administer blows, his jealousy was striving for sadness and his cruelty was after blood: the man, who was not fit to fight, fell in battle, an undefended defendant in combat. In the sight of the multitude, who were standing around, the just man was blinded by the unjust, the pious by the impious, the pure by the impure. Moreover, with bestial ferocity and doing his evil deed with a sharp knife, he forcefully and completely cut off his virile parts and, horrible sight, publicly threw them to the people, together with the pupils of his eyes, so that children and adults were astounded by his rage and the judges filled with horror at this enormity, which they permitted in the exercise of their official duties rather than being in agreement with it. Keeping the pain of so great a torment to himself, he overcame all the bitterness of his suffering thanks to his devotion to St. William, to whose tomb he was led that same day: he poured forth fragrant prayers and they obtained what his confidence had hoped for. Marvellous to say and stupendous to relate, before the memorial of the holy father the mutilated man received new privy parts and fresh little eyes were placed in his head which, however, were different from his previous ones in size and colour.

504 1 [Amos, viii, 10; Job, xxx, 31; James, iv, 9.]O

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 557 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

505 A man called Ralph is accused of breaking the king's peace and is beaten in a duel by his adversary, called Besing, thereby losing an eye. He is condemned and his other eye is torn out. A few days later his eyes are restored at the tomb of St. William at York Minster. A man called Ralph was appealed for breach of the peace of the lord king and beaten in judicial combat and one of his eyes was torn out by his adversary, called Besing; his other eye was torn out afterwards because he had been beaten. He was handed over to the hangman who tore out the other eye, and a servant called Hugh collected the two lost eyes and carried them in his hand. A few days later, Ralph went to the tomb of St. William, fasting and praying, and obtained two other eyes, smaller than the previous ones, and a clear and sharp sight; but his previous eyes were of a different colour, similar to woad.

506 Two women are charged with homicide and imprisoned pending the arrival of royal justices. One dies in prison, the other undergoes the ordeal of hot iron and because of a swelling on her hand is condemned to death. However, after the swelling disappears at the tomb of St. William in York Minster, she is released and the twelve knights appointed to assess the result of the ordeal are amerced for false judgment. Two women accused of homicide were arrested according to the custom of the realm and imprisoned; in course of time one of them died a natural death, while the other woman remained alive in prison, until at long last, at the arrival of thejustices of the lord king, she was produced and accused of the said homicide. As she denied having been present at that homicide, the purgation of hot iron was adjudged, according to the custom of the realm at that time, to ascertain whether she was guilty of homicide or not, and after she had carried it a swelling was discovered on the woman's hand as large as half a walnut, wherefore she was condemned to death by the twelve knights, who had been sent for that purpose, to be burned by fire as guilty of the aforesaid homicide. After the main justices had been told of this, the woman received permission to go and pray at the tomb of St. William and as soon as she entered the enclosure which surrounds the tomb, the swelling disappeared without leaving any trace. As soon as the justices were told, the twelve

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 558 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

knights were sent to inspect the woman's hand and as it apparently showed no lesion or trace of the said swelling or any other infirmity, they reported this to the aforesaid main justices, who judged that woman to be absolved and innocent and let her go in freedom, saying: "As God and St. William have absolved her we do not want to condemn her". And the said knights who had condemned her were adjudged in the king's mercy, because they had borne false testimony and given an iniquitous judgment. That woman carried the hot iron in the cathedral church of York before the altar of St. Michael, and the aforesaid twelve knights who observed her and her hand wanted to drag her from the church as one guilty of homicide, but the priest who guarded the tomb would not let the woman, who had been healed by a miracle of St. William, be brought out.

507 Notification by Prior Ralph of Worcester Cathedral that the controversy between the monks of Worcester and the priory of Westwood concerning the church of Dodderhill was settled in the presence of Bishop Roger of Worcester at the request of King Henry II. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Prior Ralph and the whole convent of the church of Worcester, greeting. Know you all that the controversy which existed between us and the nuns of Westwood concerning the church of St. Augustine of Dodderhill in Droitwich was settled by the following transaction in the presence of the lord Bishop Roger of Worcester at the request of the lord King Henry, and by a written declaration of validity from the abbess of Fontevrault. We have granted forever to the aforesaid nuns the land of Clethale with the meadow and its other appurtenances and the tithes of the land of the nuns which they held at the time when the composition was made in the parish of Dodderhill, viz. the tithes of the land of Westwood and the tithes of the land of Clethale and the tithes of Crutch and the burial rights and offerings from the men who live on the aforesaid lands, excluding all claims by the parson of the church of St. Augustine. This transaction was made in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1178 on the 4th of November. Witnesses: Abbot Simon of Pershore, master Moses, master Silvester, Robert the monk [of Worcester], Gilbert and Alfred, Robert de Upton the bishop's chaplain, Walter the dean, Peter de St. Helen, Jordan the cleric, Richard the chaplain, Walter the cleric, Maurice the cleric, Walter de Upton, Roger the sacrist of Warwick, master Godfrey, master Theobald, Walter de St. Peter, Osbert fitz

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 559 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Hugh, Hugh le Poer, Osbert Abetot, Michael Belet and his brother Geoffrey, Alexander... Haket, Walter de Bromsgrove, Philip de Ombersley, Geoffrey the chamberlain, Geoffrey the dispenser and many others.

508 Litigation between Richard the priest of Wellow and William Rufus, his brother, in the court of Abbot Hamelin of Gloucester concerning land in Aldsworth claimed by William; an agreement is reached. This is the covenant made between Richard the priest of Wellow and his brother William Rufus in the presence of his lord, the venerable Abbot Hamelin, and his convent of Gloucester concerning a hide which Richard held from the abbot in Aldsworth and which William had claimed against Richard. For this claim Richard gave William half a mark a silver.

509 Notification by Robert de Braose that an inquest held in the county court on the church of Harrold by William de Colworth, sheriff of Bedfordshire, by order of King Henry II, established that the church of Harrold had been granted in alms to St. Nicholas of Arrouaise by Sampson le Fort. Robert de Braose to all those who shall receive this writing, greeting. I notify you all that it was inquired by a mandate of the lord King Henry II and recognized in the court of the church of Harrold, by the testimony of many lawful men, clerics as well as laymen, while William de Colworth was sheriff and strictly and carefully inquired the truth on behalf of the lord king, that the church of Harrold was given to the church of St. Nicholas of Arrouaise and the convent in perpetual alms by the donation of Sampson le Fort, because of a certain Hilbert Pelice, a canon of Arrouaise and a relation of the aforesaid Sampson, who first was in charge of the aforesaid church on behalf of the church of Arrouaise. Afterwards Gervaise, abbot of Arrouaise, sent some of his carnal sisters, nuns and B., his lay brother, to dwell at Harrold. And it was recognized that the abbots of Arrouaise without contradiction instituted one after the other the priors in the church of Harrold, for

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 560 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

a long time and until after the death of Guy, the prior, a brother of the aforesaid abbot Gervaise and those priors disposed at will of the nuns and the possessions of the aforesaid church. It was also recognized there that the nuns Gila and Julitta had no right in the aforesaid church, since Gila was a lay sister from Marg~re and Julitta from Boulogne, but they were received in the church of Harrold as guests. It was also recognized that after coming into my inheritance, I gave and granted before Nicholas the archdeacon and the whole chapter the church of Harrold with all its appurtenances to the church of St. Nicholas of Arrouaise and the convent, in perpetual alms for their maintenance and that of the canons and nuns who live at Harrold under their authority. And this is my truth, that I have always understood, that I have given and granted the aforesaid church to the church of St. Nicholas of Arrouaise. Witnesses of this recognition are: I, Robert de Braose, Robert de Bidun, Berenger de Peencurt, Hugh fitz Alan, Robert de Broc, Osbert and Nicholas deans of Bedford, master Robert of Wilshamstead, William and Jordan de Carlton, Thomas de Bromham and many others.'

510 Confirmation by King Henry II of the final concord made before royal justices at York between William de Percy and William fitz Robert. After William de Percy's death the land of Wetherby had been seized by William, earl of Warwick, and Maud his wife, but William fitz Robert had afterwards recovered seisin, presumably by a writ of novel disseisin, in the king's court on the basis of the record of the said final concord. Henry, by God's grace etc. Know that I have granted and by this my present charter confirmed the fine which was made between William de Percy and William fitz Robert at York before Richard de Lucy and my other justices concerning the claim of William fitz Robert, who claimed Wetherby against William de Percy. The following concord was made between them, that the land which William de Percy held in Wetherby should remain his for the rest of his life and that William fitz Robert should have 3 carrucates of land in Stamford Bridge and in Catton and that after the death of William de Percy the land of Wetherby will remain quit of William de Percy and his heirs to William fitz Robert and his heirs and those two carrucates of land which William fitz Robert held in Catton and in Stamford Bridge should remain to the heirs of William de Percy, quit of William fitz Robert and his heirs. However, after William de Percy's death William earl of Warwick and Countess Matilda his wife took into their hand the aforesaid land of Wetherby and afterwards William fitz Robert recovered seisin of that land of Wetherby by a 509 ' '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 66; L. Mills, L'Ordre des chanoines rbguliers d'Arrouaise. Son histoire et ses institutions, Bruges, 1962, i, 290-292.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 561 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

judgment of my court through the recording of the aforesaid fine before me and my justices made at Winchester by Richard de Lucy. Therefore I will and firmly order that William fitz Robert and his heirs after him shall have the aforesaid land of Wetherby according to the aforesaid fine and record, and shall hold it by hereditary right with all its appurtenances well, in peace, freely, quietly, entirely, fully and honourably, in the wood and in the plain, in meadows, pastures, waters, mills, ponds, pools, fisheries, moors, marshes, turbaries, roads and paths and in all other places and things pertaining to it with all their liberties and free customs.'

511 Final concord in the king's court at Oxford between Walter de Cauz and Ralph de Chesney concerning land in East Weld and Aston Bampton claimed by Ralph de Chesney: after a wager of judicial combat the defendant recognizes the claimant's right. This is the final concord made at Oxford in the court of the lord king in the twenty-fifth year of the reign of King Henry II before justices of the lord king, on the fifth day before the feast of St. Mary Magdalen, before Ranulf de Glanvill, John Cumin, Hugh de Gaerst, William de Bendinges and Alan de Furnelles, justices of the lord king who were then present and with the leave of those same justices, between Walter de Cauz and Ralph de Chesney concerning the land of Weld and Aston with all the appurtenances of the fief and the land of Walter de Cauz, which Ralph has claimed against Walter de Cauz and for which duel was waged in the court of the lord king, i.e. that Walter has recognized the right of Ralph de Chesney and fully restored to him the aforesaid lands to hold, without retaining anything, from him and his heirs for himself and his heirs, against the yearly payment of fifteen shillings for all service on two dates, i.e. 7 s. and 6 d. at Easter and 7 s. and 6 d. at Michaelmas and thus every year. And if the lord of the fief should demand any service for the aforesaid lands, the aforesaid Walter and his heirs must pay for them from one of their other fiefs, i.e. Hampstead Marshall and Benson, and Ralph de Chesney became Walter and his heir's man. And for this covenant Ralph gave 5 marks to Walter and 5 marks to his heir and Walter and his heirs must warrant Ralph de Chesney as his man, and his heirs all those lands against all other men.' 510

511

'[The final concord at York can be dated 1165 or 1166; the recordatio by Richard de Lucy before the king and his justices at Winchester can be dated in any of the four years from 1175 to 1178, it is the judgment based on that record which is here confirmed. - See also YORKSHIRE Charters, xi (1963), p. 252.10 I[A shorter version of this document appears in EYNSHAM Cart., i, pp. 129 130, no. 173. See also EYNSHAM Cart., ii, p. lxv.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 562 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

512 Notification by Bishop Roger of Worcester that a sworn inquest made in his presence established that a certain hide of land belonged to the church of Hartlebury, an old possession of the monks of Worcester cathedral: Absalon, who held it, resigned it to Prior Ralph and received it back from him to hold for life. Roger, by the grace of God bishop of Worcester, to all sons of Holy Mother Church, greeting. We want it to be known to those present and future that it was recognized in our presence by the oath of lawful men that a certain hide of land of Hartlebury, which is called Hardwick, is of the demesne of the church of Hartlebury; and Absalon, who had held it, confessed this and restored it free and quit in the hand of our beloved Prior Ralph of Worcester and abjured it forever, adding under oath that he would never, personally or through somebody else, start any litigation against the aforesaid church concerning the aforesaid land, or molest or aggravate it. The prior on the other hand granted the aforesaid land to the aforesaid Absalon against an annual pension of 6 d., payable every year at the Nativity of Holy Mary, and to be held for his lifetime from the church of Hartlebury, and after his death it will freely return to the demesne of the aforesaid church without anyone contradicting. Witnesses: Archdeacon Simon of Worcester,' etc. 513 Walter fitz Daniel having been attainted by duel in the king's court of the murder of his wife, forfeits land and houses in York which, on or just before 29 September 1179, are granted by King Henry II to Ranulfde Glanvill. One of those houses was passed on by the latter to William de Fiskergate and so to St. Peter's Hospital in York, which was confirmed in its possession by a charter of King Henry II (see doc. B). A. Grant by King Henry II to Ranulf de Glanvill of land and houses forfeited by Walter fitz Daniel.

Henry, by the grace of God king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots,

earls, barons, justiciars, sheriffs, ministers and all his lieges, French and English, of all England, greeting. Know that I have given and by this my present charter confirmed to Ranulf de Glanvill the land with the houses which Walter fitz Daniel 512 ' Simon became archdeacon of Worcester in 1167 and Bishop Roger died in 1179.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 563 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

held from me in York for 6 s. per year and which this Walter forfeited for the murder of his wife, of which he was attainted by duel in my court at York. I also have pardoned the said Ranulf those 6 s. per year and have granted the same Ranulf that land with the houses to be held from me and my heirs in fee and heredity for himself and his heirs. I therefore will and firmly order that the aforesaid Ranulf and his heirs after him shall have and hold from me and my heirs the aforesaid land with the houses, well and in peace, freely and quietly, entirely, fully and honourably, with-all their appurtenances and all their liberties and free customs. Witnesses: Bishop Geoffrey of Ely and Bishop John of Norwich, Roger Bigod, Reginald de Courtenay, Thomas Basset, William de Lanval, William de Braose, William de Bendinges, Ralph fitz Stephen the chamberlain and his brother Eustace and Thomas fitz Bernard. At Winchester.

B. Confirmation by King Henry I to St. Peter's Hospital in York of the house in York which was forfeited by Walter fitz Daniel and afterwards granted to Ranulfde Glanvill, from whom it passed to William de Fiskergate and so to the hospital. Henry, by God's grace king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justiciars, sheriffs and all his ministers and lieges, greeting. Know that I have granted and by my present charter confirmed to the hospital of St. Peter in York the donation of the stone house with its appurtenances in York which belonged to Walter [fitz] Daniel and which he lost by felony in my court and which I gave to Ranulf de Glanvill for his service and which the same Ranulf gave to William de Fiskergate and which this William gave to the same hospital. I therefore will and firmly order that the brethren who live in the aforesaid hospital shall have and hold the aforesaid house with its appurtenances in York, well and in peace, freely and quietly, entirely and honourably and fully in pure and perpetual alms in all things, with all its liberties and free customs. Witnesses: Ranulf de Glanvill, Hubert [Walter] dean of York, Hugh de Morwick and Hugh Bardulf, stewards, and William le Vavassur. At Winchester.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 564 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

514 Agreement between Kenilworth Priory and Walter II Brito, who grants to the canons land in Coventry which Walter de Bretford had deraigned in the king's court by fine of battle and given to the priory. This agreement was made between the church of St. Mary of Kenilworth and Walter Brito, i.e. that this Walter Brito has granted for the love of God the gift made by Walter de Bretford to the canons of Kenilworth of land in Coventry, which this Walter de Bretford had deraigned in the court of the lord king at Oxford by fine of battle.

515 Although Roger de Offington claims to be entitled by a final concord in the king's court to hold land in Sibson from Walter the priest (who is himself a tenant of Thorney), he gives up that land except for one virgate, for which he does homage to Walter the priest.

This is the agreement between Walter the priest and Roger de Offington, viz. that Walter the priest gave to Roger de Offington one virgate of land in Sibson from that land which the aforesaid Roger, so he claimed, was entitled to hold through a concord and fine of combat in the king's court at Westminster for himself and his heirs from Walter and his heirs by hereditary right and as freely and quietly as Walter holds it from the abbot of Thorney. And all the rest of this claim remains with Walter and his heirs, free and quit of Roger and all his successors. And for this virgate of land, which he holds, Roger did homage to the aforesaid Walter, and Walter moreover gave Roger five marks of silver for the maintenance of the final peace. Witnesses: Saher de Quinci, Walter Brito, Simon Basset, Richard of Fleet, Oliver le Moigne, Reginald fitz Martin, Andrew Revel etc.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 565 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

516 After the death of his father, William Fossard is placed in the wardship of Count William of Aumale, whose sister he seduces. Upon complaint by the count to King Henry II, the Fossards' family castle at Mount Ferrant is destroyed and William Fossard goes into exile, but returns after the count's death and obtains the king's pardon and his inheritance. Let us see now about the famous lineage of the said William Fossard and his heirs. Nigel Fossard lived before, at and after the conquest and at his death left his son Robert Fossard as his heir, but after Robert's death his son William received the inheritance; it is he who granted us the aforesaid two carrucates of land and left behind his son William Fossard the second, who after his father's death was, because he was a minor of age, in the custody of King Henry II, who gave his wardship to the aforesaid William le Gros, count of Aumale. And while this William Fossard was in the custody of that Count William, he made the sister of that count pregnant. Thereupon William Fossard fled from the sight of the count, who went and complained about this to the king and obtained a favour: at his request and by royal authority William Fossard's capital manor, i.e. the castle of Mount Ferrant in the territory of Birdsall, was completely demolished and destroyed. The timber of this castle which was a wooden construction is said to have been given by Robert de Stuteville, lord of Cottingham, to our monastery and served for the building of several monastic offices. The said William junior, conscious of his wrongdoing and hearing that his castle was completely destroyed, fled the country for fear of the count, but returning to England after the latter's death he regained the king's friendship at the instance of his friends and obtained his inheritance.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 566 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

517 After William the Conqueror has given the manor of Coton to Burton Abbey (Regesta i, no. 223 [1066-1086]), Nicholas, the sheriff of Staffordshire, acquires it unlawfully. Early in the reign of Henry I the monks obtain a royal writ ordering the sheriff of Derbyshire to do right between their Abbot Nigel and Nicholas, the sheriff of Staffordshire who is ordered to reseise the abbey, according to the testimony of the county court (Regesta ii, no. 600 [1101Mich. 1102]) and not long afterwards Nicholas is ordered to appear in the king's court, presumably for failing to comply (Regesta ii, no. 766 [110131 July 1106]). The abbey probably won its case but (under Stephen?) new difficulties arose between it and Stephen de Beauchamp, son of Nicholas, when the monks lost their land. Two writs of Henry II deal with their complaint, one addressed to Robert de Piro, sheriff of Staffordshire, ordering the abbey to be reseised (to be dated 1155-1175 when Reginald, earl of Cornwall occurs and 1160-1174 if the narrative mentioning Abbot Bernard can be believed), the other addressed to the sheriff of Nottingham, ordering the abbey to be reseised "as the king ordered in his other writ" (to be dated 1154-1180 when Richard de Humez, the constable, occurs and 1160-1174, ut supra, in 1180 King Henry left for Normandy c. 15 April). Consequently Stephen de Beauchamp quitclaims the manor of Coton which he has occupied unjustly. These are the arguments of the abbot of Burton-upon-Trent in support of our rights in the manor of Coton-in-the-Elms. William, king of the English, etc. as below. According to this charter, the abbot and convent of Burton were in possession of the said manor of Coton in the time of King William the Conqueror, King William II and King Henry I. In the time of King Henry III a certain Abbot Robert 2 of Burton gave the manor of Coton without the consent of his convent to a certain Nicholas, sheriff of Stafford, for which deed the said abbot was deposed. Afterwards Abbot Bernard,3 who succeeded to Robert, made a complaint against Sheriff Nicholas concerning the manor by the following writs. Henry, king of the English, to Nicholas, sheriff of Stafford, greeting. If you want to deraign the land of Coton against the abbot of Burton, I order you to be at our court on the first day of Lent, if you still want to deraign it, for if you do not want to plead, then let him quietly have that land and I forbid you to take anything

517 ' Sic, but the writs which follow show the suit was commenced in the reign of Henry I. These are 0very interesting and curious specimens of the early writs of right. 2 [The name of Abbot Robert (I 150-dep. 1159) is impossible in this context. The chronicler quotes several names of abbots of the time of Henry II, to whom he mistakenly attributes several writs of Henry I. The real names of the abbots of Burton are Nigel (1094 d. 1114) and Geoffrey (1114 1150).]o 0 [This name also is mistaken. The abbot concerned is in fact Nigel (1094-d. 1114). Bernard was abbot from 1160 till 1174.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 567 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

there beyond fair measure. Witnesses: Waldric the chancellor, Henry, earl of Warwick and W. de.. 4 At King's Cliffe. While the case concerning the said manor, which was started by the said writ, was still undecided, Abbot Bernard died and was succeeded by Abbot Nicholas,5 who obtained a writ and laid claim to the manor. Henry, king of the English, to Richard son of Gotse6 sheriff, greeting. I order and command you to do right without delay between Abbot Nicholas7 and Nicholas, the sheriff of Stafford, concerning the land of Coton, and if Nicholas refuses to come to the plea to deraign the land, then you shall see to it that on forfeiture of ten pounds the abbot shall be seised without dispute or postponement or delay, as the county testifies in favour of the abbot by the writ of my brother, where it appears that the abbot was seised. As I will that the abbot shall suffer no further wrong, see to it that the abbot shall not address himself to me again for lack ofjustice. Witnesses: William Giffard, bishop of Winchester and [Roger] the king's 8 chancellor. At Winchester. Another writ of King Henry II concerning the aforesaid land. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and of Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the sheriff of Nottinghamshire, greeting. I order you to do full right without delay to the abbot of Burton concerning the land of Coton, as I ordered by my other writ, on the basis of the testimony of King William's charter. Unless you do this, my justice will have it done so that I hear no further complaint about it for lack of full right. Witness: Richard de Humez, the constable. At Westminster. Another writ of King Henry II on the aforesaid manor. Henry, king of England and duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to Robert de Piro, sheriff, greeting. I order you firmly to seise the abbot of Burton without delay and justly of his land of Coton, as he has a charter thereon of King Henry, my grandfather, and of King William, so that Stephen de Beauchamp or anyone else shall cause him no further injury or molestation. And unless you do it, my justice shall. Witness: Reginald, earl of Cornwall. At Northampton. In the time of King Ethelred, a certain earl Morcar gave to the monastery of Burton the manor of Coton which at the time of the conquest of England was seised in the hands of the Conqueror. Afterwards King William came to Burton and because of his devotion to the monastery gave the manor to God and Holy Mary in the church of Burton and Andressey, as is contained in the charter of that king, as follows.

I o[W

de-, unidentified, cfr. Regesta ii, no. 766.10 [This should be Nigel (1094-d. 11 14).] 6 '[Richard son of Gotse, sheriff of Derbyshire.]' 7 Probably a mistake for Nigel. This writ is clearly by Henry I. '[William Giffard, bishop of Winchester; Roger le Poer, chancellor 1101-1 I02; Regesta ii, no. 600.] 0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 568 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

William, king of the English, to Henry de Ferrers and Harding the sheriff, greeting. Know that I have given to God and St. Mary in the church of Burton and Andressey the land of Coton, as the mother of earl Morcar best had it, and I want Valdevinus my clerk to hold it from the said church, and Henry de Ferrers and you 9 Harding, see to it that no man does him any wrong. By this charter the abbot and convent of Burton were in possession of the manor of Coton at the time of King William the Conqueror, King William II, King Henry I and King Stephen. At the time of King Henry II ° an abbot of Burton gave the manor of Coton without the consent of his convent to a certain Sheriff Nicholas of Stafford because of his sister, by whom he had had a daughter, and for that deed that abbot was deposed. Thereupon the foresaid sheriff obtained from the lord king to hold that manor from him in chief against the yearly payment of a brachet and a leash. However, at the time of King Henry II, Abbot Bernard laid claim to the manor in the king's court by the above writ, but that abbot died before the case was terminated. He was succeeded by Abbot Roger who similarly laid claim to the manor in the court of the lord king and a moment was reached when combat was waged, but then the deforcer of the manor died leaving his son, Stephen de Beauchamp, I I who was under age. This Stephen made a charter of quitclaim of the manor to the church of Burton before he died, as follows. To all, etc. Stephen de Beauchamp, greeting, that I have restored etc. to God and St. Mary and St. Modwen the Virgin of Burton and to the monks etc. the manor of Coton with all its appurtenances, which I unjustly occupied. Witnesses: John de Caen, Geoffrey de Denston, Hugh a cleric of Derby, Michael the serjeant 12 of Tutbury and many others.

9'[Regesta i, no. 223.]0 1o

Sic, but this must be the Abbot Geoffrey de Malaterra who was deposed

A.D.

1094, according to

the Chronicle. The original error of the monks in ascribing the writ of Henry I to Henry II runs through the whole account. This seems to establish the identity of Nicholas the sheriff f Staffordshire temp. Henry I. He was Nicholas de Beauchamp. 12" [The narrative and the documents in the Burton cartulary are of very unequal value. Since the author attributes wrongly certain writs of Henry I to Henry II, he gets the names of the abbots in the narrative wrong. Fortunately the writs and charters allow us to reconstruct a general outline. The paragraph on this problem in V.C.H. Staffordshire, iii, 201-202 is very brief and fails to go into all the problems and aspects of the litigation concerning Coton. Cfr. V.C.H. Derbyshire, i,

298-299.1°

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 569 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

518 Final concord in the king's court at the exchequer between Ralph Murdac and Hugh de Bourton concerning the advowson of the church of Black Bourton, for which a recognition of darrein presentment was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the exchequer on the Wednesday before the feast of St. George in the 2 6th year of the reign of King Henry II before the Bishops Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich and Ranulf de Glanvill, Richard the treasurer, Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Rufus, Robert Mantel, William Basset, Ralph de Worcester and other justiciars and barons of the lord king who were then present there, between Ralph Murdac and Hugh de Bourton concerning the advowson of the church of Bourton, for which a recognition on the presentation of the parson who last died there was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that Ralph and Hugh gave and granted to God and the church of St. Mary of Osney and the canons who serve God there in free, pure and perpetual alms, for the salvation of their souls and those of their fathers and all their friends and relations, the advowson of the aforesaid church and all the right which they had in it. And the aforesaid Ralph and Hugh will offer all the help which they can reasonably muster to free the aforesaid church in favour of those canons of those two clerics who hold it now or to attorn those clerics to them by the yearly payment of some pension.' 519 Notification by Albold Pulcin that, after making an unjust claim by royal writ, he has confessed in the court of Bury St. Edmunds that he has no right in land in Manhall, Saffron Walden, and that he has handed over the writ to the abbot. To all his lords and lieges and all other sons of the Church, Albold Pulcin, greeting. Know you all that I have unjustly moved a claim against the church of St. Edmund concerning the land of Manhall, in which I had no right. Afterwards, led by repentance, I went to the court of St. Edmund and publicly and by my free will confessed that I never had had any right in the aforesaid Manhall or any of its appurtenances, and before the lord Abbot Hugh I pledged in the hand of his brother Henry for me and my heirs that we shall never move a claim against the aforesaid church or its abbots concerning the aforesaid Manhall or its appurtenances. And for this the aforesaid Abbot Hugh gave me 8 marks of silver and I 518

'

'[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 82 n. 3.]O

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 570 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

handed over to him the king's writ by which I had unjustly impleaded him. Witnesses: master Geoffrey, William, William Tuneir and others.

520 Archdeacon Osbert of Richmond is accused by Symphorian. a chaplain of Archbishop William of York (ob. 8 June 1154), of poisoning the latter. The case is first brought before King Stephen, where the accuser is ready to undergo trial by ordeal, but Osbert demands an ecclesiastical trial. Early in the reign of King Henry II Archbishop Theobald succeeds in withdrawing the case from the royal jurisdiction. As Symphorian cannot produce the necessary witnesses, Osbert is granted a purgatory oath with oath-helpers, but he fails and appeals to Rome (1156), where the case is set to be heard on 13 January 1157. It comes first before Pope Adrian IV and then before Pope Alexander III, where Osbert claims to have been acquitted by Pope Adrian IV. The truth of this claim cannot be ascertained, but it is known that in or soon after 1157 Osbert was removed from his archdeaconry of Richmond and retired to secular life. C. 1175 1180 Pope Alexander III appoints judges delegate, but their verdict is unknown. A. Letter of Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury to Pope Adrian IV giving an account of the case. On 8 June 1154 Archbishop William of York has died after a short illness and Symphorian, a clerk of his household, charges Osbert, archdeacon of Richmond in the diocese of York, of poisoning the archbishop. The charge is denied and King Stephen declares his court competent. Later the case is transferred to a church court and the archdeacon ordered to purge himself, but he appeals to the Roman curia. One Symphorian, a clerk of the household of William of happy memory, archbishop of York, in the presence of King Stephen and the bishops and barons of England at a solemn council, cited Osbert, archdeacon of York,' on a charge of poisoning: he alleged that the archbishop aforesaid was slain by poison which the archdeacon gave him to drink at the Lord's Table; and he promised steadfastly that he would prove this by the ordeal of white-hot iron or of boiling water or of single combat 2 or any other form of trial. Osbert however most steadfastly denied the charge and replied that by privilege of his dignity and order he was not subject to lay jurisdiction, but only to that of the Church, and that he was ready, come what might, to abide by its judgment. So both parties gave security that they would pursue their quarrel according to the custom of our nation in the king's hand, who, despite the resistance and opposition of ourselves and our brethren, said that it came under his jurisdiction, owing to the atrocity of the crime and to the fact that 520A I For his title cf. Appendix III and no. 78, n. 1.'[JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, p. 261, n. 4.] 2 The three methods of proof by ordeal; in the event it was the defendant who was put on trial, and by the alternative method of oath by a number of his colleagues (compurgation).

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 571 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the case was initiated in his presence; thereupon the dispute was postponed till the octave of Epiphany. Meanwhile King Stephen was succeeded by our most serene lord, King Henry, from whose hands we just and only just succeeded in recalling the case to the judgment of the Church, with much difficulty and by strong pressure, to the indignation of the king and all his nobles. Thanks to many postponements the trial had of necessity dragged on for a long time, and the accuser, Symphorian, was unable to carry through his accusation owing to the subtlety of the laws and canons. And so, since word of this was spread abroad throughout the island, after inspecting the sacred canons and by the advice of our venerable brothers, Richard bishop of London, Hilary bishop of Chichester, Jocelin bishop of Salisbury, Robert bishop of Exeter and other wise men who were present, we ordered the archdeacon to purge himself of the charge by oath of three archdeacons, who were to choose four others, all deacons, to assist them; and we appointed a day for his purgation. But when the day drew near, the archdeacon came to us and said that he preferred to prove his innocence before the Roman Church, to which news of the affair by chance had come; and he placed himself and all that was his under your protection, and in the name of the pope forbade any one to make any decision to his hurt. He added that he will appear before you on the octave of Epiphany. We therefore, as was our duty, deferring to your apostolic majesty have reserved the settlement of the matter for your holiness.3

B. Letter by Gilbert Foliot, bishop of Hereford, to Pope Adrian IV asking him not to accept Symphorian's accusation too easily.

To his father and lord Pope Adrian, brother Gilbert, minister of the church of Hereford, all due humility and obedient subjection. Whereas it behoves a judge to attend carefully the cases of all individuals, he should give special attention to those where the innocence of his sons is threatened by a criminal accusation. We should not listen to the nefarious voices and claims of those who threaten the life and reputation of innocent people without proving their guilt, but try to inflict punishment on them out of spite and malice. The beginning, the prosecution and the end through an appeal of the case between Archdeacon Osbert of York and Symphorian the clerk can be truthfully known to your sublimity through a letter of your legate, the lord archbishop of Canterbury. We have carefully inspected that letter and plainly testify that all the articles of that case have proceeded in the way indicated in the letter. For if he accused the aforesaid archdeacon of causing Archbishop William's death through poison and of some other crimes, he has

I

'[Translation taken from

JOHN OF SALISBURY

° Letters, no. 16, pp. 26-27.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 572 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

refused to undertake the procedure of the inscription' against him and to bring the case before an ecclesiastical judge. And while he stood alone in such a great multitude of the parents and friends of the deceased archbishop and without basing his words on any testimony, he offered to carry the hot iron against the aforesaid archdeacon all the more safely as he did not at all expect God's church to admit this sort of proof. He accused him with the more confidence in the king's court since he understood that this proof could not be administered lawfully before any judge. Since no judge should be inflamed against anyone in anything that cannot be proved, we send our prayers to your sublimity in favour of the said archdeacon so that he may not incur your wrath whom much liberality .... 2

C. John of Salisbury writes to Pope Adrian IV on various matters and includes the statement that Archdeacon Osbert has failed in his compurgation. Osbert, archdeacon of York, has failed in his purgation. If anyone suggests the contrary to you, do not believe him. D. Letter by Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury to Pope Adrian IV on various matters, including the request to suspend the case of Archdeacon Osbert until certain messengers arrive in Rome. We were filled with great joy, sweetest father, by our hope that, as was reported, we might be refreshed by the solace of your presence on this side of the 520B

'[The inscriptiowas the technical term for the document which accompanied the accusation and by which the accuser offered to give proof. See R. Naz, Dictionnairede droit canonique, v, Paris, 1953, 1426-1427.10 2 The case between Osbert, archdeacon of (Richmond) (he is given the title of the diocese, York, in the letter, as was normal at the time; he was almost certainly archdeacon of Richmond. On this case and on Osbert see D. Knowles, Cambridge Historicaljournal, v, 175 f. (1936), reprinted in Historian and Character,pp. 92 ff.; Morey, Cambridge HistoricalJournal, x, 352-353 (1952); Sir Charles Clay, Yorks. Arch. Journal, xxxvi (1944-1947, 277-279; JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, i, 261-262) and the clerk Symphorian has gone to the pope on appeal: Gilbert asks him not to accept the accusation that Osbert had poisoned William archbishop (of York) too easily, and to give him a fair hearing (incomplete). Archdeacon Osbert, a nephew of Thurstan, a former archbishop of York, was accused of having poisoned his archbishop, William FitzHerbert, on 8 June 1154. After King Stephen's death, the case was taken into the ecclesiastical courts, and a bench presided over by Archbishop Theobald gave judgment that Osbert was to establish his innocence by compurgation. Against this decision Osbert appealed, and his appeal elicited a statement of the case from the archbishop (John of Salisbury, Ep. 16), which can be dated to 1156 (JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, i, 261-262, cf. 257 and G. Constable, EHR, lxix (1954), 67 ff.). This is the letter referred to by Gilbert (Gilbert follows it quite closely, though his account of the case is briefer), and so Gilbert's letter may be dated to the same year. Osbert subsequently claimed to have been acquitted by Adrian IV, but he was certainly relieved of his archdeaconry, and retired to be a layman and the holder of knights' fees.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 573 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Alps. But our harp is turned to mourning and joy has been changed into heaviness,' ever since we knew with certainty that Rome, grudging your beatitude to the dwellers on this side of the Alps, preferred itself to be illuminated by the glory of your name. Since therefore we cannot visit the summit on which your apostolate is throned in accordance with our wish, we will in the meantime, as far as in us lies, make good the default of the homage paid on our customary visit to Rome by sending our messengers thither with all speed. May it please your highness to suspend the case of the monks of St. Bertin and that of Osbert, archdeacon of York, and any business that concerns us or the realm of England, until those messengers arrive, since they will inform your majesty on all these matters, and after hearing them you will be able to proceed, God helping you, with greater security and profit.2

E. The decretal 'Cum essent in presentia nostra', by which Pope Alexander III appoints three judges delegate to decide Osbert's case; the latter maintained that he had purged himself before Pope Adrian IV, but had run into trouble upon his return to York.

When our beloved son Osbert, archdeacon of the church of York, and messengers of our venerable brother, the archbishop of York and legate of the apostolic see,' had appeared before us, the aforesaid Osbert alleged in a punctilious and firm report before us and our brethren that he had at some time in the past performed the canonical purgation in the presence of our predecessor Pope Adrian of blessed memory concerning the benefice of the predecessor of the aforesaid archbishop, on which he had been impleaded, and that he had obtained from our predecessor a letter on the purgation which he had performed, addressed to the aforesaid archbishop; he had also obtained a letter of immunity from him granting him by way of prerogative the liberty that he could no more be compelled on any matter to stand trial before that archbishop or anyone else, unless it be in the presence of the Roman pontiff or a legate appointed by him. But when the archdeacon had returned home, so he maintains, a deacon of his, whom he had summoned to pay a debt of twenty marks of silver, maintained that he had been freed by the aforesaid archbishop from the payment of this debt and that he had been freed from the pledge by which he was held, being in the possession of a letter from the archbishop addressed to the clergy of his archdiaconate ordering them not to consider him any more as archdeacon. The aforesaid archdeacon also added that when he returned from the Roman church and presented the letter of our 520D ' cf. Job, xxx, 31, and James, iv. 9. '[See also Amos, viii, 10.]o 0 2 [For a similarly worded request of the same date see JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 26, p. 43. Translation taken from JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, no. 25, p. 42.]o 520E ' '[According to Dom Morey, infra, 353, Roger of York was then papal legate.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 574 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

predecessor to the aforesaid archbishop, who was then staying outside his province, the archbishop refused to accept or to listen to it, promising that he would accept it within his own province, but after returning to his church he excommunicated him without any conviction or confession. Although the archbishop absolved the archdeacon of this sentence of excommunication at the request of our dearest son in Christ, Henry the illustrious king of the English, and promised to restore what had been taken away, he forgot all about his promise and not only refused to restore what had been taken away, but excommunicated him again. After a while, however, the archdeacon recited the letter about the performance of the purgation and his immunity to the archbishop in full synod, but as the archbishop maintained that he would not believe this unless he saw the letter himself, so, at the request of the synod, a messenger of the archbishop handed the letter over to him on the promise that it would immediately be returned, but neither on that occasion nor on the second or third day of this synod or afterwards could he obtain it back. Therefore the archdeacon who was excommunicated and deprived of his archdiaconate in an extraordinary and unjust way, fearing even greater danger, renounced his archdiaconate, however unwillingly, because otherwise he could not be absolved of the excommunication, in spite of the fact that he had been excommunicated incautiously and, if it be so, could not even be excommunicated by that archbishop. The messengers of the archbishop on the contrary proposed in our audience that he had renounced his archdiaconate spontaneously and of his free will, which seems incredible, and they pledged that he had not retained his archdiaconate. But the aforesaid archdeacon Osbert constantly maintained again, as before, that he had not left his archdiaconate spontaneously, but forced by the violence and oppression which we have mentioned. And although the archbishop had promised to pay to the son of the archdeacon a yearly sum of thirty marks until he would grant him a prebend of the same revenue, he stopped utterly paying this money and did nothing about the grant of the prebend. If the facts which the archdeacon has put before us are true, he not unrightly complains about being grieved, as the archbishop has no right to grieve him in such a manifest way if he had obtained the liberty of having to stand trial and it would cause grave injury and contempt to the Roman church if anyone - and particularly an archbishop, who is particularly linked to the Roman church - should not be obliged to comply. Therefore, relying on your honesty and providence, we commit this case to your experience, 2 ordering you by the authority of this letter to convoke both parties before you and to admonish the archbishop on our behalf and to see to it that within twenty days of your having received this letter he shall restore to the archdeacon the aforesaid letter of liberty, if it is still extant, and hand it over peacefully and quietly, together with the revenues that have been received. If, however, he refuses to consent to your admonitions and 0

2 [The decretal was addressed to the abbots of Ford, Evesham and St. Albans, as appears in the

Collectio Wigorniensis, see Morey, infra, 353.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 575 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

exhortations, you shall diligently inquire the truth of the matter within sixty days and if you are convinced through legitimate proof that the aforesaid Osbert has purged himself in the presence of our predecessor and has obtained a letter of liberty that no one was allowed to excommunicate, suspend or judge him, except the Roman pontiff or a legate appointed by him, and that nevertheless the archbishop has excommunicated him, deprived him of his archdiaconate and presumed to withhold that letter from him against his will, then you shall not delay the restitution of the archdiaconate to the archdeacon, on the basis of the apostolic authority and without any postponement, pretext or appeal, compelling the archbishop on our authority to restore the letter which we have mentioned, if it is still extant, and to give him compensation for the revenue that has been received. Afterwards, however, if the archbishop wants to plead against him concerning the archdiaconate, maintaining that he renounced it freely and spontaneously or that he should not keep it by law, he can act against him through the ordinary judicial process before us or our successor, for we do not want him to be deprived of the prerogative of liberty which he says he received from our predecessor, if he proves that he has obtained such a letter. If you can not pursue this matter personally, two of your etc. See to it that you admonish the witnesses whose names Osbert has given us and make them say the truth; and if you should see that, knowing the truth of this matter, they refrain from testifying in favour of the archdeacon for love or fear of the archbishop, we order you by the virtue of obedience to compel them without appeal and by ecclesiastical strictures to bear witness to the truth. And if you judge after receiving proof that the archdiaconate should be restored to Osbert, you shall firmly and strictly order the clerics of that archdiaconate to accept him again as their archdeacon and to show him due reverence and obedience, without any appeal or any considerations of fear or love; if they do not do this, you shall suspend them in their office by our authority and in spite of any appeal. And you will inform us by letter, under that compulsion by which you are held to God and the Church, of all your findings on this matter; and if any letters should be obtained, we forbid that they should in any way go against our present letter. If, however, the foresaid Osbert should fail in his proof, you shall absolve the archbishop of the complaint and you shall impose utter and perpetual silence on him, without any appeal. If, furthermore, the archbishop, after being lawfully summoned, should refuse to appear before you personally or through some responsible person and to obey your judgment, you shall give Osbert possession of his archdiaconate without any appeal.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 576 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

F. William of Newburgh, writing in the final years of the twelfth century, gives some details concerning the alleged poisoning of Archbishop William of York. He was met outside the city, not in a peaceful way, by Robert, the dean of the church of York,' and Archdeacon Osbert who had brought forward various arguments and strenuously fought his appointment, 2 but proceeded nevertheless and was received solemnly and under enormous applause by clergy and people. However, his aforesaid adversaries quickly went to Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury, 3 who then represented the apostolic see in England, and availed themselves of his favour and support. But Archbishop William ruled his church, which he received not long after Low Sunday [11 April 1154], with fitting moderation and out of natural leniency refrained from aggrieving anyone, until a few days after Pentecost he fell victim to a fever and was taken from this life, leaving behind amongst clerics and laymen an immense sorrow for the loss of their most kind pastor. The suddenness of his death led many to believe that he was killed by poison and to maintain that he had drunk with the drink of life a drink of death from the sacred chalice, infected - it is horrible to report - by someone who had been sent by his adversaries or had decided thus to act for them. This was only the opinion of some people who, however, spread it actively amongst the people as if it were the obvious truth. Some time afterwards, when this rumour became more intense, I undertook to interrogate a man of importance and great age, a monk of the monastery of Rievaulx, an invalid close to death, who at the time had been a canon of the church of York and a familiar of the aforesaid archbishop, adjuring him to tell the truth. He constantly replied that this was a most mendacious fable originating with a story that had been invented by certain people and that he was present and assisting the archbishop at the moment of the alleged crime and could not think of any criminal person amongst the most loyal bystanders, capable of such a deed. It is false also, what some people say, that in spite of the urging of his friends he refused to take an antidote out of fear that their hostility was leading them to undertake some malice against him: to confirm their opinion and

520F 1 '[Robert de Botevilein, dean of York, who died in 1186.] ° 2 '[William fitz Herbert had been archbishop of York from 1141 until his deprivation in 1147, but had been reinstated in October 1153 and is here returning to his see.] ° I 0[Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, 1138-1161.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 577 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

commentary, they report him as saying that he would not add a human antidote to the celestial one. But since he was a wise man and had learned from divine authority that God was not to be tempted, it is unbelievable that he should have spoken or acted in this way. I have heard Symphorian, his familiar clerk who spent a long time in his service and assisted him as a devoted servant in his illness, say that he did take an antidote at the behest of his friends, and we ought to believe that wise men have done this. From that same man I have heard that his friends who were present were particularly inclined to believe that he had drunk something mortal because his teeth, which had been white, began to turn black during his final illness, but the physicians laugh at this, since the teeth of a dying man always tend to go black. After news of the death of the archbishop of York was received, Robert the dean and Osbert the archdeacon, with the support and cooperation of the archbishop of Canterbury and legate of the apostolic see, elected Roger, 4 his archdeacon, to the see of the church of York and managed with 5 great promises and threats to obtain the consent of the chapter.

521 Notification by William fitz Geoffrey that, prompted by a royal writ, he has granted various lands to the monks of Thame abbey in the place of three messuages which they claimed as part of their holding in Moreton. Let it be known to all that I, William fitz Geoffrey of Moreton, have restored at the command of the lord king, by his writ, to the monks of Thame one half of my court and the messuage of my sister Livia and one half of Garscroft, for the 3 messuages which they claimed were missing from their tenement, which they hold from my father and me in Moreton. Afterwards with the consent of my wife Eve and my heirs I sold them 6 acres, viz. 1 large acre in Wowefurlong and 4 acres in Churchfurlong and I acre in Stanidelfurlong, the nearest to the source except for I towards Moreton, for 15 s. 7 d. and 1 heifer worth 6 s. and 1 cloak worth 3 s., free and quit of all service and secular exaction, except the service to the lord king in connection with the 6 acres and 3 d. payable every year to me and my heirs at Michaelmas. Witnesses: Robert de Stanford, Thomas de Tadmarton, Roger de Besthorpe, William the forester, Roger fitz Reginald and others. 0

4 [Roger de Pont l'Ev~que, archbishop of York, 1154-1181.10

'[D. Knowles, 'The Case of St William of York', CambridgeHistoricalJournal,v (1936), 175 ff., reprinted in Historian and Character, 1963, 92-94; C.T. Clay, 'Notes on the Early Archdeacons in the Church of York', Yorks. Arch. Journal, xxxvi (1944-47), 277-279; A. Morey, 'Canonist Evidence in the Case of St. William of York', CambridgeHistoricalJournal, x (1952), 352-353; JOHN OF SALISBURY Letters, Appendix iii, 261-262; Richardson and Sayles, The Governance, 288, 291-292.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 578 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

522 Final concord in the king's court between Prior German and the monks of Durham and Robert Beneit concerning half the church of Blyborough, for which a recognition was held. This is the final concord made at York, on the Tuesday after the Conversion of St. Paul in the twenty-seventh year of the reign of King Henry II before Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord king and other barons and lieges of the lord king, namely John Cumin, William Mauduit, William de Stuteville, Roger de Stuteville, William de Vesci and Ranulf de Gedding, between the prior of Durham and the convent which serves God there and Robert Beneit concerning half the church of Blyborough, on which a recognition was held between them in the court of the lord king, namely that Robert Beneit has granted, given and confirmed by his charter to the prior and convent freely and quietly whatever right he had in the church of Blyborough in pure and perpetual alms.'

523 Settlement in the king's court of the dispute between Theobald, abbot of Cluny, and Hamelin, earl of Warenne, concerning the substitution of the prior of Lewes. Let all those whom the present writing will reach know that the controversy which existed between Abbot Theobald of Cluny and Earl Hamelin of Warenne concerning the substitution of the prior in the monastery of St. Pancras of Lewes was settled as follows in the presence of the lord King Henry of England in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1182 (sic) at Nottingham on the feastday of St. Bartholomew, in the presence of the Bishops Hugh of Durham, Geoffrey of Ely, John of Norwich and Seffrid of Chichester and John elect of Evreux and master Walter [de Coutances] archdeacon of Oxford, Ranulfde Glanvill, Earl Richard de Clare, Reginald de Courtenay and Gilbert Pipard, viz. that the convent of Lewes

522 ' '[See BLYBOROUGH Charters, 203.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 579 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and the aforesaid earl will send their messengers to the abbot and convent of Cluny in order to have a prior and that the abbot and convent will send a suitable prior who will be received into the aforesaid monastery without contradiction or molestation. However, if the earl wants to bring an action within five years concerning the dignity which he claims in the aforesaid monastery, the abbot will stand trial thereon, but if that same earl does not want to put this to the test with the abbot, he and the abbot will put themselves on ten of the more lawful monks of Lewes who are not suspect in this matter and on ten of the more lawful monks of Cluny, and whatever they, having been adjured on the peril of their order and under threat of anathema, will say, will be observed by both parties and the new prior who will be appointed in the monastery of St. Pancras of Lewes will not be dismissed unless a just and reasonable cause intervenes. 1

524 Final concord in the king's court between Robert de Curson and Roger fitz William of Huntingfield concerning land in Fishtoft, for which an assize was summoned.

This is the final concord made on the Wednesday after the feast of St. Luke at Westminster in the twenty-seventh year of the reign of King Henry II before Bishops Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich and Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciars of the lord king and the other barons of the king who were then present, between Robert de Curson and Roger fitz William of Huntingfield concerning two bovates of land in Toft for which an assize was summoned in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid Robert quitclaims the aforesaid bovates of land in Toft with all their appurtenances to the aforesaid Roger fitz William and his heirs for himself and his heirs forever. And for this quitclaim Roger gave Robert half a bovate of land in Donington for himself and his heirs to hold from him and his heirs for the service of twelve pence per year, payable on two dates, six pence at Christmas and six pence at the feast of St. John, for all services except the forensic service. And if anyone should make a claim against the aforesaid Roger or his heirs concerning the aforesaid two bovates of land in Toft, Robert or his heirs will warrant it to them through that half bovate of land in Donington that remains theirs. This half bovate is held and will be held from the 523 ' It is clear that the date 1182 is a mistake, for in August of that year the king was out of England. It isrecorded that he sailed from Cherbourg to Portsmouth on 26 July 118 1,and before crossing gave the bishopric of Evreux to John son of Luke, his clerk; and that before September he was at Nottingham, where there were present Hugh bishop of Durham, John bishop of Norwich, Geoffrey bishop of Ely, and Seffrid bishop of Chichester (Gesta Henrici,i, pp. 277-278, 280; and cf. Eyton, Itinerary,p. 241). It can be assumed, therefore, that the correct date is 24 August I 181.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 580 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

aforesaid Robert de Curson and his heirs by Robert the cleric of Donington and his heirs, for the annual service of five shillings for all services except the forensic service.

525 Confirmation by King Henry II of a fine between Abbot Henry of Winchcombe and John of Windrush, who quitclaims land which he had bought of Manechin and William his heir, and surrenders the writ which he had concerning the said land. Henry, by God's grace king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his ministers and lieges of all England, greeting. Know that I have granted and by the present charter confirmed the reasonable fine which was made between Henry, abbot of the church of Winchcombe and John of Windrush concerning half a hide of land, viz. that the aforesaid John, with the assent and consent of his son and heir Andrew, gave up the claim which he had against the church of St. Mary and the blessed Kenelm of Winchcombe and the aforesaid abbot of the aforesaid church, concerning the aforesaid half hide of land which he had bought from Manechin and his heir William. In such a way that when he gave up that claim he surrendered the writ which he had concerning that land to the justice and gave up all his right in it. For the remission of this claim and of all his right and for the surrender of his writ the said abbot gave John of Windrush himself 20 s. and William, Manechin's heir, 12 d. for the grant. Therefore I will and firmly order that this fine shall remain stable and be held unshaken between them as John of Windrush's charter indicates and testifies. Witnesses: Humphrey de Bohun the constable, Ranulf de Glanvill, Robert de Stuteville, Gerard de Camville, Ralph de Verdun, Thomas fitz Bernard and Robert le Poer. At Woodstock.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 581 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

526 Hamo son of Wynoch notifies Roger, archbishop of York, that he has given to Easby Abbey land in Brompton-on-Swale, half of which he had obtained by an agreement reached after judicial combat had been adjudicated. To Roger, by God's grace archbishop of York, and all the sons of Holy Church etc., Hamo son of Wynoch, greeting. Know that I have given, granted and by this my charter confirmed to God and the church of St. Agatha1 and the canons who serve God there one carrucate of land in Brompton, i.e. the half which my mother Agnes held and the other half which was given me by way of the composition of the duel at Croft, so that they shall have this carrucate fully and hold it from me and my heirs in pure and perpetual alms for the salvation of my soul free and unfettered and quit of all service and aid and secular exaction, in tofts and crofts, in the vill and outside, in meadows and pastures, in cultivated and uncultivated places and in everything that belongs to that carrucate. If anyone from my own people or strangers should infirm or diminish this my almoign, let him incur the malediction of Almighty God and of St. Agatha and my own. Witnesses.

527 Agreement between Abbot Elias of Rufford and Ralph de Hereford in the court of Simon III de St. Liz, earl of Northampton and Huntingdon, about land in Eakring; some time afterwards the abbey's possession of this land is confirmed. A. The agreement made in the court of the earl of Northampton and Huntingdon.

Know all those present and future that in the presence of the earl's court Ralph de Hereford has recognized and restored to the church of Rufford in the hand of Abbot Elias the almoign of Earl Gilbert [de Ghent],1 about which there had been a controversy for a long time between them, i.e. the ploughland called Littlehage and Cottrehage and half of Brail. Of this same ploughland the abbot keeps in his hand 20 acres and a wood called Brail, and the other part of the land he grants to Ralph de Hereford to be held from him during his lifetime, and if his wife survives him she will hold half the land from the church and the wood called Cottrehage 526 527A

0 [Easby, an abbey of Premonstratensian canons, was dedicated to St. Agatha.]' '[This is Gilbert II de Ghent (d. 1156), founder of Rufford abbey in 1146.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 582 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

during her lifetime, and after they are both dead this whole almoign shall remain free and quit to the abbey of Rufford in perpetual possession. Witnesses: Abbot Walter of Bardney, Abbot Philip of Revesby, William fitz Hacon, Gilbert de Nov', Herbert fitz Alard, Hugh de Muskham, Geoffrey de Lefremunt, Robert fitz Simon, William fitz Simon, Peter de Scremby, William de Barkston, Hugh fitz Ralph, Jocelin de Brandon, William de Skendleby, Philip the dean, Ralph the dean of Scremby and Thomas Pilatus. This agreement was made before Philip the steward, at Skendleby.

B. Charter of Simon III de St. Liz, earl of Northampton and Huntingdon, directing that Rufford Abbey shall retain possession of certain lands in Eakring in accordance with the agreement between Rufford and Ralph de Hereford (our text A). To all sons of Holy Church, Earl Simon, greeting. Know that I have granted and by the present charter confirmed to God and St. Mary and the monks of Rufford, for the salvation of my soul and that of my wife and for the soul of Earl Gi[lbert de Ghent] and of all my ancestors, the whole agreement which was formerly concluded between them and Ralph de Hereford in my court concerning some land in the territory of Eakring which is called Littlehage, the cultivated part as well as the other, and some wood which is called Cottrehage, which were adjudged to the said monks before Philip de Kyme, the steward, and the other barons of my court, to be possessed as the written document that was established between them testifies on all points. Therefore I will and order that the monks shall possess freely, quietly and without any contradiction the aforesaid land and the aforesaid wood with all their appurtenances and liberties as the proper almoign of Earl G[ilbert] and myself, belonging to the demesne of Rufford after Ralph's death forever. Witnesses: Prior Gregory of Bridlington, Baldwin de Ghent and his kinsman Walter, Julian the chaplain, Philip de Kyme, Robert de Tattershal and his brother Roger, Peter de Scremby, Andrew de Muskham, Walter de Colton and Safrid Chamberlain.'

0

527B ' [RUFFORD Charters, ii. 405.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 583 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

528 Writ of King Henry II allowing the abbot of Abingdon to send a representation to the pleas of the royal justices in whose bailiwicks Abingdon has lands. Henry, by the grace of God king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, to his justices in whose bailiwicks the abbot of Abingdon has lands, greeting. I allow the abbot of Abingdon to send his steward or somebody else in his place to your assizes and pleas and therefore I order you to accept his steward or someone else, whom he will send to you, in his place. Witness: Richard Brito, the cleric. At Woodstock.

529 Final concord in the London husting between Westminster Abbey and Peter de Sutton and his wife Margaret concerning land in the ward of Dowgate, which had belonged to Serman. This is the final concord made between the monks of Westminster and Peter de Sutton and his wife Margaret at London in the husting during the shrievalty of William fitz Isabel and Reginald le Viel and under the presidency of the other barons of London concerning one land in Dowgate which had been Serman's and where Robert de Marlborough lived and for which the said monks used of old to receive 8 s. per year, viz. that Mirable, who was the daughter of Oger the steward, shall hold that land all her life free and without rent and that after that Mirable's death or if she entered a nunnery or if she lost that land in any way, the aforesaid Peter and his wife and their heirs or whoever shall hold the land shall every year pay forever for that part of the land which they hold 4 s. into the chamber of the aforesaid monks in alms, viz. 2 s. at Easter and 2 s. at Michaelmas. Nor can the monks claim from Peter and his wife or their heirs anything else than those 4 s. per year, but John de Tregoz and his wife Anne and their heirs shall pay another 4 s. to the monks as their chirograph testifies. And this was done by the counsel and with

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 584 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the assent of Margaret, the aforesaid Peter's wife, who is heir to that land. Witnesses: Gilbert the constable of the Tower of London, John Buccuinte, Edward Blund, Henry fitz Ailwin, Ralph Brand, Roger fitz Alan, Richard fitz Reiner, Andrew Bucherell, William fitz Isabel, John de Congham, William de Haverhill, Waleran, John le Burguignun, Ralph Brito, Peter and John, the sheriff's clerks, and the whole husting. 1

530 Final concord in the London husting between Westminster Abbey and John de Tregoz and his wife Anne concerning land in the ward of Dowgate, which had belonged to Serman. This is the final concord made between the monks of Westminster and John de Tregoz and his wife Anne at London in the husting during the shrievalty of William fitz Isabel and Reginald le Viel and under the presidency of the other barons of London concerning one land in Dowgate which had been Serman's and where Robert de Marlborough lived and for which the said monks used of old to receive 8 s. per year, viz. that Mirable, who was the daughter of Oger the steward, shall hold that land all her life free and without rent and that after that Mirable's death or if she entered a nunnery or if she lost that land in any way, the aforesaid John and his wife and their heirs or whoever shall hold the land shall every year pay forever for that part of the land which they hold 4 s. into the chamber of the aforesaid monks in alms, viz. 2 s. at Easter and 2 s. at Michaelmas. Nor can the monks claim from John and his wife or their heirs anything else than those 4 s. per year, but Peter de Sutton and his wife Margaret and their heirs shall pay another 4 s. to the monks as their chirograph testifies. And this was done by the counsel and with the assent of Anne the aforesaid John's wife, who is heir to that land. Witnesses: Gilbert the constable of the Tower of London, John Buccuinte, Edward Blund, Henry fitz Ailwin, Ralph Brand, Roger fitz Alan, Richard fitz Reiner, Andrew Bucherell, William fitz Isabel, John de Congham, William de Haverhill, Waleran, John le Burguignun, Ralph Brito, Peter and John, the sheriff's clerks, and the whole husting.'

529 '[See our no. 530.10 530 *[See our no. 529.] 0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 585 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

531 Thomas de Hastings claims the stewardship of Bury St. Edmunds for his nephew Henry. Samson the new abbot is prepared to accept him and to grant him the full steward's maintenance, if he serves in person, otherwise his substitute will only receive part of the maintenance. The abbot eventually accepts a substitute, but disclaims any responsibility for possible shortcomings in the exercise of the king's justice caused by the substitute's ignorance. A general summons having been issued, all the barons and knights and free men came to do homage to him on the fourth day of Easter. And lo and behold, Thomas de Hastings came with a great multitude of knights, bringing with him Henry his nephew, who was not yet a knight, and claiming the stewardship on his behalf together with all the customs as stated in his charter. To this the abbot at once made answer: "Henry's right I neither deny, nor wish to deny it. If he was able to serve me in person, I would give him all that is needful for the maintenance of ten men and eight horses in my court, as is stated in his charter. If you should present to me as his substitute a steward who knows how to perform the duties of stewardship, I would accept him on the same terms as my predecessor' granted to his steward on the day whereon he, the abbot, was alive and dead, to wit, four horses and their appurtenances. But if you will not agree thereto, I place my plea before the king or chiefjustice". 2 This said, the matter was postponed. Afterwards there was presented to him a simple and ignorant steward, Gilbert by name, but before he accepted him, he said to his friends: "If there is any default in the king's justice through the ignorance of the steward, it is he not I that will be accountable to the king, since he claims the stewardship by hereditary right, and therefore I prefer to accept him for the time being rather than take one who may be more skilled to deceive me. God helping, I will be my own steward". 3

532 Fine made in the king's court between William son of Ralph de Wye and the cathedral priory of Rochester concerning land in Elham.

This is the fine made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on a Saturday on the feast of the apostles Philip and James in the 2 8 th year of the reign of King Henry II before the Bishops Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and John of 531

'[Hugh I, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds 1157-1180.10 0

2 [Ranulf de Glanvill 1179- 1189.]O 0 3 [Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron. 27.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 586 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Norwich, Ranulf de Glanvill justiciar of the lord king, Richard treasurer of the lord king, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Thomas fitz Bernard, William Torel, William de Alberville, Walter fitz Robert, Gervase de Cornhill and other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between Prior Richard and the convent of Rochester and William son of Ralph de Wye concerning land of the aforesaid monks in Elham, which they had sold to him for 20 marks and confirmed by their charter, i.e. that the aforesaid William has quitclaimed all the aforesaid land to the aforesaid prior and convent for himself and his heirs forever. And since he had lost the charter of the aforesaid monks, which he had had concerning that land, he promised before the aforesaid barons that if he could find that charter he would hand it over to them, and the charter of confirmation of the lord king, which he had on this, he gave back to them. And for this quitclaim the prior and convent gave to this William 30 marks of silver.

533 Notification by two aldermen of Oxford that Robert son of Junguin has given seisin of his land to Waleran de Cricklade. Be it known to those future as well as to those present that Robert son of Junguin has granted and delivered to Waleran de Cricklade all his land which is in Oxford between the house of Edwin the partner of Wiard and the house which used to belong to Fulk Dagun, to be held from him and his heirs for himself and his heirs for ten shillings per year for all service, through the concession of Pulcela his mother, Matilda his wife and Robert Barator and the latter's son. And for this concession the aforesaid Waleran gave to the forementioned Robert son of Junguin 18 marks of silver. This agreement and the seisin of this land were made by Robert son of Junguin in favour of Waleran de Cricklade with a rod before Robert de Wheatfield, who then was sheriff of Oxfordshire and before Amfrid and Lambert, who were then aldermen of Oxford, in a full plea of the lord king before the inhabitants of that same vill. And we, aldermen, have confirmed this with our seals on the advice of John Kepeharm, Thomas fitz Ailric, Hugh Kepeharm, William the reeve and other honest men of Oxford, who were then present.

533 1 With two circular seals, each 1- inches in diameter: on the left, a duck with expanded wings, SIGI[LL]VM LAMBERTI OX[ ]; on the right, a pattern, perhaps meant for a turtle, SIGILLVM ANFRIDI FILII RICARDI. '[See also SALTER Oxford Muniments, no. 89.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 587 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

534 Final concord in the king's court by which Richard de Newby quitclaims land in Dalton le Moor to Agnes de Percy, for which a recognition had been summoned: Richard shall receive a rent of 12 s. from Fountains Abbey out of the farm they owe Agnes for the grange of Marton le Moor. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at York on the Monday before the feast of St. Margaret in the 2 8th year of the reign of King Henry II before Thomas fitz Bernard, Alan de Furnellis and Robert de Wheatfield, then justices of the lord king, and before the other barons who were then present there, between Richard de Newby and Agnes de Percy concerning half a carrucate of land in Dalton, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, viz. that the aforesaid Richard has given up to Agnes de Percy and her heirs the aforesaid half carrucate of land in Dalton with the appurtenances, quit and free from her and her heirs for 12 s., which the monks of Fountains shall pay him and his heirs on behalf of Agnes de Percy, and the aforesaid Richard de Newby shall warrant the aforesaid half carrucate of land in Dalton with all appurtenances to Agnes de Percy and her heirs against all claims, and the aforesaid Agnes de Percy shall warrant the aforesaid 12 s. to the aforesaid Richard and his heirs against all claims, and the aforesaid Richard shall do the forinsecal service pertaining to the half carrucate of land where 12 carrucates of land make up the service of one knight's fee, and the aforesaid monks of Fountains shall pay the aforesaid 12 s. to the aforesaid Richard and his heirs out of the farm which they owe Agnes de Percy for the grange of Marton.

535 Final concord in the king's court at York between the monks of Fountains Abbey and John son of Fulk concerning a dike at Hammerton, after a recognition was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at York on St. Margaret's day in the eighteenth year of the reign of King Henry II before Thomas

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 588 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

fitz Bernard, Alan de Furnellis and Robert de Wheatfield, then justiciars of the lord king and before the other barons who were then present, between the monks of Fountains and John son of Fulk concerning a dike which he had built before the gate of the grange of Hammerton, and the land which he had ploughed between the gate of that grange and the road, for which a recognition had been summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid John has demolished the aforesaid dike and that the moor where he had ploughed the land between the aforesaid grange and the road shall forever remain common pasture and the road which he had obstructed shall remain as wide as it used to be in the past.

536 Final concord in the king's court between the abbot of Winchcombe and William Durvassal concerning land between Great Alne and Spernall for which an assize was summoned. This is the final concord made at Coventry on the Monday before Michaelmas in the 2 81h year of the reign of King Henry II before Thomas fitz Bernard, Robert de Wheatfield and Alan de Furnellis, justices of the lord king, and other barons of the lord king, who were then present there, between the abbot of Winchcombe and William Durvassal concerning land between Great Alne and Spernall, for which an assize was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, viz. that William has recognized that land to be the right of the abbot and has restored it forever to the abbot free and quit for himself and his heirs, i.e. from Warwick's way to Salter's oak and from the oak against the mountain to the top of the hill which is called Rugeberg and from that spot to the oven and thence to Vivemere. And for this grant and concord the aforesaid abbot gave the aforesaid William 20 s. sterling.

535 ' The same chartulary [= London, B.L. Add. Ms. 18276]0 (f. 88) contains notitiae of other grants in Hammerton made to Fountains Abbey by John, son of Fulk, in Priestholme, &c., by Nigel son of Gospatric de Hamerton, Robert son of Hugh son of Beale, and Adam son of Hugh Blundus. Peter Mauleverer granted the monks 6 acres in Hwaitcroft. Alan son of Alexander, Richard son of Gilbert, Robert son of Beatrice, Richard son of Osbert, Hugh son of Beale and Geoffrey Lane consented to the monks making a dike per medium Poland enclosing their land in Priestholme.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 589 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

537 Final concord in the king's court at Norwich between Samson, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds, and Peter Walter concerning the advowson of the church of Fressingfield, for which a recognition of darrein presentment was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Norwich on the Saturday after Michaelmas in the 2 8 th year of the reign of King Henry II before Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Rufus and Michael Belet, justices of the lord king, between Abbot Samson of St. Edmunds and the convent of that place and Peter Walter concerning half the advowson of the church of Fressingfield, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king which patron presented to the half of that church the last parson who died, i.e. that the aforesaid Peter has quitclaimed to the aforesaid abbot and convent that moiety which he claimed against them.

538 Final concord in the king's court between the canons of Bridlington who had put themselves on the (grand) assize of Windsor and Thomas de Alost concerning the vill of Speeton. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the exchequer of St. Michael in the twenty-eighth year of the reign of King Henry II on the Saturday after the feast of St. Luke the Evangelist before the Bishops Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich, and Ranulf de Glanvill, Richard the treasurer, Godfrey de Lucy, William Mauduit, William Basset, Alan de Furnellis, Robert de Wheatfield, Ranulf de Gedding and other justices and lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between the canons of Bridlington and Thomas de Alost concerning the vill of Speeton, for which the canons put themselves on the assize of Windsor whether they or Thomas had the greater right in that land. Thomas quitclaimed the vill for himself and his heirs forever to the canons for one carrucate of land in Fraisthorpe, which Thomas and his heirs will hold from the canons against a yearly payment of two shillings of silver, and for this concord the canons gave Thomas twenty marks of silver.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 590 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

539 Final concord in the king's court at the Michaelmas exchequer between Abbot Simon and the convent of St. Albans and their tenant Adam Aignel concerning the common in Horwood, for which a recognition had been summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the exchequer of St. Michael in the 2 8th year of the reign of King Henry II on the day following the feast of the apostles Simon and Jude, before the Bishops Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich, and Ranulf de Glanvill, Richard the treasurer, Godfrey de Lucy, Thomas fitz Bernard, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Michael Belet, Alan de Furnellis, Ranulf de Gedding, Gervase de Cornhill and other justices and lieges of the lord king, who were then present there, between the abbot of St. Albans and the convent of that place and Adam Aignel, their man, through Peter the monk and Geoffrey de Gorron, whom the abbot had appointed as his attorneys to gain or lose, concerning some common in the wood of Horwood which the aforesaid Adam claimed against the aforesaid abbot and for which a recognition had been summoned in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid Adam gave up and quitclaimed to the abbot and convent and church of St. Albans forever for himself...

540 William Marshal is accused of being the lover of Margaret, wife of the young King Henry (son of King Henry II), to whose court he is attached. As King Henry II holds his court at Caen, William Marshal offers to prove his innocence by judicial combat, but this is not accepted and he obtains permission to leave Normandy. As the Marshal found what they had accused him of to the king, the father, in treason and bitter falsehood and that what those false and unloyal people had invented was spread everywhere,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 591 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

he wanted to be put on trial so that all would know if it was true or false. Determined to prove his innocence and full of wrath and anger, he appeared before his lord the [young] king and said: "My lord, listen to me if you are willing to give me your attention. They have tried to convince you that I committed ugly and bitter treason. Here are present my lord your father and barons, earls, vassals, castellans and sheriffs who are capable of a reasonable judgment, before them all I am ready to establish that I committed no misdeed, felony or treason towards you, whatever they have suggested to you. Hear how I want to defend myself: let your spokesmen come forward, I am confident that if they want to try me, I am with God's help ready to defend myself against them, alone against three of the best. Let the combat last for three days and if I cannot defend myself against the first let me be hanged at once, but if I vanquish the first I want to have to fight the second. If I do not defend myself let me be hanged at once and if I cannot defend myself against the third let me be drawn and hanged". The king replied: "Marshal, I assure you that I do not care for your battle and do not accept your defence" "Sire, those who have told you this

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 592 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and have proffered those words are here: how is it that none speaks up? They have clearly heard what I have said. So Sire, hear another proposal. As I see that we are not advancing otherwise, let a finger which you will choose be cut from my right hand and let the strongest of those [spokesmen] appoint himself to convict me of this matter and if he can establish my falsehood, treat me at the outcome of the combat as a proven traitor. But you can well see, fair Sire, that wicked tongues dare say what they do not dare to prove: If I can find no mercy although I offer more than is reasonable, it seems to me that you are looking for a pretext to get rid of me. In the presence of all this assembled baronage I will have to take my leave from you and I do not intend to wait any longer." Thereupon turning to King Henry the father he said: "Sire, I now beg you to show in my case the great sincerity with which you are credited and to grant me safe-conduct to the frontiers of your land. I do not want to ask for more now, since you make it quite clear to me that your court is hostile to me, against reason and the law of the land. I shall have to go and look for another and better place where I can live if I cannot be freed here from the blame of which I am falsely accused. None of those who accuse me dares to lift his head here: all this is accepted here in order to aggrieve me.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 593 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

And I appreciate the fact that my right in such an assembly is publicly violated". The old king then realized that he spoke quite clearly and without any equivocation and attempted by all means to save him from harm, gladly giving him a safe-conduct which took him and his company to Mortagne in Perche. He left - let God guard him -

but did not look like a man who takes to flight or is afraid of another knight. Various people hit and strike out at him who are of no consequence at all, but one day they will be ashamed. It is rightful, as they have chased him away, that one day they will be repaid for what they have done.'

541 In a plea between Ernald de Montbegon and the abbey of Meaux concerning land in Dunnington, which Ernald had given to Inet, a woman of Dunnington, it is decided to settle the case by the sworn testimony of three free tenants. Ernald, however, gives up his claim and after his death Inet claims the land with the support of Thornton Abbey, whereupon an agreement is reached between all the parties concerned. Isaac de Skeffling, a wise cleric and a man of great authority, gave to our monastery twelve bovates of land, i.e. one and a half carrucates of land in Dunnington of the fee of Ernald de Montbegon with all their appurtenances, except that he held for himself and his heirs all the tofts within the vill belonging to the said one and a half carrucates of land to do forensic service for that land, and we should be quit of all land-services except for the yearly payment of 18 d. for the

540 1 0[This translation is based on P. Meyer, L'Histoire de Guillaume le Mar&hal, vol. ii, 70-73. We like to thank dr. H. van Deyck-Bauwens for her precious help in connexion with certain difficult passages.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 594 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

aforesaid half carrucate of land. Afterward Ernald deprived us of the said half carrucate of land and gave it to Inet, a woman of Dunnington by whom he had previously had a son, so while litigation was going on between us and Ernald on that half carrucate of land, the following solution was at last accepted that, if we could prove by the testimony and the oath of three free tenants that this was the same half carrucate of land which had previously been granted to us at the said Isaac's behest by the said Ernald's seisin, this land should continue to serve the abbey free and quit of all claims. At Hedon on the third day following, which had been appointed for the taking of the aforesaid proof on that half carrucate of land, Ernald saw that the knights were ready to swear on oath, for which the book had been brought forward, and gave up that land to us, as if he had received an oath which had really been sworn. Thereupon we gave him ten shillings and Ernald confirmed to us the aforesaid one and a half carrucates of land which we had through the donation of the aforesaid Isaac, his man, with the understanding, however, that his and his heirs' right to the service of Isaac and his heirs for all the aforesaid land should remain undiminished. That land was confirmed to us by the brethren of the knightly order of the Temple, who in the past had some right in it as follows: in Beeford there were 12 carrucates and in Dunnington 6 carrucates of land of the count of Aumale, who gave to the knights of the Temple the service of the aforesaid Ernald de Montbegon for 6 carrucates of land in Beeford and 6 carrucates of land in Dunnington, who at first held the aforesaid 12 carrucates of land from the said count. But this Ernald, who objected to the dominance of the Templars and did not give in to their exactions, left those 6 carrucates of land in Beeford quit to them on the condition, however, that for the remaining six carrucates of land in Dunnington no service at all should be due to anyone by him or his heirs. It is from those 6 carrucates of land in Dunnington that, as we have already explained, we have those aforesaid one and a half carrucates of land. In the meantime, however, Ernald gave us together with his body a small plot of land in Dunnington, but how large it was and to whom it was eventually to go is unknown. After his death the aforesaid Inet by whom Ernald had a son claimed the aforesaid half carrucate of land, maintaining that Ernald had given it to her and her son, and

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 595 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the abbot and canons of Thornton supported this woman in this case, mainly because she promised them half her acquisition if they agreed to take and raise her son. But after we had made peace with that woman and undertaken to raise her son, and they both had abjured their right in that half carrucate of land, we agreed to pay the aforesaid 18 d. every year to the abbot and canons of Thornton.'

542 William de Barthorpe deraigns a pasture in Thornland against the abbey of Meaux by writ of novel disseisin. William Fossard, who has failed to warrant the monks, gives them two bovates of land in exchange. Afterwards William de Barthorpe who, as appears from the charter of the aforesaid William Fossard, had common rights in the pasture of Thornland for eight animals only, deraigned against us by a writ of novel disseisin a greater right of pasture in Thornland than was specified by the charter of the aforesaid William Fossard. Therefore William Fossard gave us two bovates of land there in exchange for that portion of the pasture of Thornland which he had not been able to warrant to us against the said William de Barthorpe.1

543 Agreement in the king's court in Staffordshire between Ivetta Bagot and William de Ridware concerning thirty acres of land in Ridware: Ivetta, who had disseised William (as we learn from the Pipe Rolls), recognizes his good right. Half of the land which is in her demesne she restores at once, and she promises to support his claim to the other half. This is the agreement between Ivetta, with the consent and according to the will of her heir William Bagot and her other heirs, and William de Ridware concerning the 30 acres in Ridware for which the aforesaid William pleaded in the court of the lord king in the county of Stafford against the aforesaid Ivetta, i.e. that Ivetta has

541 1 '[See MEAUX Chron., xxiv-xxv.]0 542 1 O[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 293.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 596 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

recognized William de Ridware's right in the aforesaid 30 acres and has restored to him one half of those 30 acres which she had in her demesne quietly and which she must warrant against everyone, and Ivetta must give her lawful assistance to William for the purchase of the other half of the 30 acres, and that same Ivetta must stand by William, as her man, as far as lawfully possible, for the purchase of the other lands in the same vill of which the aforesaid Ivetta had been deprived. And William and his heirs shall hold this land in fee and heredity from Ivetta and her heirs freely and quietly, in the wood and in the plain, with all the easements of the said vill, against the yearly payment of one pound of pepper to the aforesaid Ivetta or her heirs on the eve of the feast of St. Thomas the apostle for all service. And for this land Ivetta received the homage of the aforesaid William and the agreement was loyally confirmed by both sides in the county of Stafford. Witnesses: Alured de Cannock, Henry de Swinfen, Adam de Wrottesley, Hervey Bagot, Alan de Hadleigh, William Urse, Roger Bagot and many others.

544 Fine made between Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds and Thomas Noel concerning the advowson of the church of Hawstead and Nowton for which a recognition of darrein presentment was summoned in the king's court. This is the fine made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on the Monday after the feast of St. Mark the Evangelist before Bishop Richard of Winchester and Ranulf de Glanvill, justices of the lord king, and Richard the treasurer, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Osbert de Glanvill, Alan de Furnellis, William Basset, Gilbert de Coleville, Ranulf de Gedding, Gervase de Cornhill and other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between Abbot Samson and the convent of St. Edmunds and Thomas Noel concerning the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 597 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

advowsons of the churches of Hawstead and Nowton, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king on the last presentation of a parson who died in them, i.e. that the aforesaid Thomas quitclaimed the advowson of the church of Nowton to the said abbot and convent forever for himself and his heirs, while the said abbot and convent quitclaimed to the said Thomas and his heirs forever the advowson of the church of Hawstead.

545 Final concord in the king's court between Simon de Hempstead and his son Hamo and Henry de Marisco concerning the advowson of the church of Hempstead after a recognition of darrein presentment was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Northampton on the Saturday after the octave of St. John the Baptist in the 29 th year of the reign of King Henry II before Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord king, Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Basset, William Mauduit, the king's chamberlain, Michael Belet, Gervase de Cornhill, Ranulf de Gedding, Richard Malebisse and other barons and lieges who were there present, between Simon de Hempstead and his son Hamo and Henry de Marisco concerning the advowson of the church of Hempstead, which this Henry claimed against the aforesaid Simon and Hamo and for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king concerning the presentment of the last parson who died in that same church, i.e. that the aforesaid Simon and Hamo have quitclaimed their whole claim which they had in the advowson of the said church to the said Henry and his heirs forever. And for this quitclaim this Henry gave the aforesaid Simon and Hamo six marks of silver.

546 Final concord in the king's court before William Basset and Nigel fitz Alexander, whom the court had sent to hear the plea between Maurice de Craon and Roger fitz William of Huntingfield, concerning the advowson of the church of Toft and various manors, tenures and services. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Northampton on the Thursday after the octave of St. John the Baptist in the 2 9 th year of the reign of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 598 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

King Henry II before Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord king, Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Basset, William Mauduit, Michael Belet, Gervase de Cornhill, Ranulf de Gedding, Richard Malebisse and other barons of the lord king and his lieges who were then present, between Maurice de Craon and Roger fitz William of Huntingfield through Guy, Maurice's son and heir and his steward Alexander, whom Maurice had given power of attorney in his place to gain or to lose this claim, and particularly before William Basset and Nigel fitz Alexander whom the justices of the lord king had sent from the chief court of the lord king to Maurice for a hearing. This fine was made and recorded before them and granted by Maurice concerning the advowson of the church of Toft and the vill of Frieston and the whole tenement of Maurice in the vill of St. Botolph [i.e. Boston] and the vill of South Warnborough and the service of William de Longevin of Whaplode and of the service of Alan de Roches of Frieston and the service of Walter fitz Matfried of Frieston and on all other claims and incomes from lands and services, for which they quarrelled then and before and for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king. Maurice granted to Roger and his heirs in his own name and that of his heirs the vill of Toft with its appurtenances except for the advowson of the church of Toft, which remained forever to Maurice and his heirs. He also granted to Roger and his heirs all his fee in Frampton with its appurtenances except for the service of Hugh de Boby in Donington, which remained to Maurice and his heirs. Maurice also granted to Roger the service of Thomas de Moulton for the whole tenement which he held from him and the service of Walter fitz Matfried for the tenement which he held from them in Pinchbeck and the service of Walter Malregard for the tenement which he held from him in Toynton, the services of which tenements were given by Alan de Craon to William, father of the present Roger. Maurice also granted to Roger the manor of Southorpe with its appurtenances in exchange for the manor of South Warnborough, which he claimed by the gift of Maurice. Maurice also gave to Roger in the fair of St. Botolph some land close to the land of Herbert the cleric towards the north from the land of John Cook as far as the road and on the other side of the road towards the north some land twelve feet wide and stretching from the road before the house of Richard fitz Guse as far as the road, and some land alongside of Walter le Neucomen towards the south, which is 60 feet long and stretches in width from the road to the water, without retaining anything. Maurice also granted to Roger and his heirs the service of one knight and one quarter of a knight's service out of the service of four knights, which Roger owed to Maurice. And for all those tenements which were granted and given to Roger in lands and services, Roger and his heirs shall render to Maurice and his heirs the service of two knights and three quarters of one knight for all service. And for this grant and donation Roger has quitclaimed for himself and his heirs to Maurice and his heirs the advowson of the church of Toft and all the claims for lands or services for which there was and had been a controversy between them.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 599 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

547 Final concord in the king's court between the cathedral priory of Rochester and Juliana, daughter of Fulk de Newnham, and Robert de Champains, her son, concerning the advowson of the church of Norton, for which a recognition was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the exchequer on the feast of St. Michael in the 2 9 th year of the reign of King Henry II on the Sunday before the feast of All Saints before the Bishops Richard of Winchester, Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich, Godfrey de Lucy, Richard the treasurer, Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Basset, Ranulf de Gedding, Robert de Wheatfield, Michael Belet and other barons of the lord king, who were then present there, between the prior and the monks of Rochester and Juliana, daughter of Fulk de Newnham, and Robert de Champains, son of that same Juliana, concerning the advowson of the church of Norton, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid Juliana and her son Robert have given and granted to the aforesaid prior and the monks the advowson of the aforesaid church of Norton and they have granted the gift which Fulk, the father of the aforesaid Juliana, has made to them of the aforesaid church.

548 Notification by William, earl of Gloucester, that the abbot of Tewkesbury deraigned in his court the advowson of the church of Pentridge against Hamo fitz Geoffrey. Charter of William, earl of Gloucester, directed to his kinsman Jocelin, bishop of Salisbury, testifying that the abbot of Tewkesbury pleaded in his court concerning the advowson of the church of Pentridge, which Hamo fitz Geoffrey claimed to be his on the basis of a donation by Earl Robert, the father of Earl William. It was recognized there in the court of the barons of the said earl that the church and the monks of Tewkesbury have held the church of Pentridge ever since the days of [Earl] Robert and by his gift and that [Earl William's] father, [Earl] Robert, has given away no right of advowson in the said church when he gave that manor to the aforesaid Hamo. He, [Earl William], has requested that, since his

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 600 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

court has recognized this truthfully, he, [Bishop Jocelin], should not permit the church of Tewkesbury to be vexed any further because of the claim of the foresaid Hamo and that he should cause entire restitution to be made by the rigour of justice of whatever belongs to the abbot.

549 Quitclaim and agreement concerning land at Aylworth in the court of William, earl of Gloucester, between Hawisa, widow of Philip de Caillewey and her heirs on one hand, and William de la Mare on the other. William, earl of Gloucester, to his steward and all his men, French, English and Welsh, greeting. Know that Hawisa, who was Philip de Caillewey's wife, and her heirs have quitclaimed in my court the whole land of Aylworth, which is of my fee and which William de la Mare claimed against them, to the aforesaid William de la Mare and his heirs for themselves and their heirs and have abjured the aforesaid land before me and my court. And William gave Hawisa twelve marks of silver and also four marks of silver as a dowry for her daughter and a rent of eight shillings to Philip, Hawisa's son. And by this present charter I have confirmed this agreement which was made in my court and granted on both sides. Witnesses: Hawisa, countess of Gloucester, Henry de Montfort, Gilbert de Aumari and others.

550 Notification by John Buccuinte and his wife that they renounce the plea which they have moved against the canons of St. Paul's, London, before the king's justices concerning certain rights in the churches of St. Martin and St. Botolph in London. Let all those present and future know that I, John Buccuinte and I, Dionisia his wife have spontaneously renounced the whole claim which we have moved against the canons of St. Paul's in London before the justiciars of the lord king concerning the churches of St. Martin of Candlewick Street and St. Botolph of Billingsgate and that we have forever quitclaimed the right which we demanded in those churches, after having discovered the truth about our right by the inspection of a charter of the canons which Orgar and his sons and Christina the mother of my

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 601 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

wife Dionisia have had concerning the aforesaid churches. We have restored that same charter to the aforesaid canons, having bodily sworn never to make any claim to those churches and that if anyone should claim them, we shall help them as far as possible with our authority and defence. The aforesaid canons on the other hand have promised to enter our obit in their book of obits and faithfully to celebrate every year the anniversary of our death and that of Orgar, by whose donation they have had the aforesaid churches. And lest our renunciation and abjuration should in the future be invalidated or questioned, I, John Buccuinte and I, Dionisia have taken care to corroborate it with the present charter and the apposition of our seals. All this was enacted in full husting by the grant and the permission of the lord Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord king, before the following witnesses: Osbert de Glanvill, warden of the Tower of London, William fitz Isabel, the sheriff, Henry fitz Lefstan, Roger fitz Alan, Richard fitz Reiner, Robert the chamberlain, Geoffrey Buccuinte, William fitz Sabeline, John Buccuinte, Ralph Brand, John fitz Herlicon, Ralph Brito the clerk, Alulf fitz Fromund, Roger le Duc, William de Haverhill and many other burgesses.

551 William Basset, sheriff of Lincolnshire, notifies Benedict, abbot of Peterborough, that he has received a letter from three royal justices ordering him to organize a perambulation by sworn men of lands in dispute between the abbeys of Peterborough and Barlings and to summon Philip de Kyme and the keepers of the pleas of the crown to be present. The sheriff requests Abbot Benedict's presence at the said perambulation. To his beloved friend Abbot Benedict of Peterborough, William Basset, greeting. I have received a writ from justices as follows. Thomas fitz Bernard, Alan de Furnellis and Robert de Wheatfield, to the sheriff of Lincoln, greeting. Know that the abbots of Peterborough and Barlings have agreed before us at Lincoln that the boundaries of their lands and the pasture of Fiskerton should be perambulated by twelve free and lawful men of the venue and that as they perambulate them by their oath, so it shall firmly stand in peace hereafter on both sides and they have promised to hold it truthfully and therefore we have ordered that a thirteenth person should be added to make this perambulation, so that in case of discord the majority be followed. Therefore it is that we order you on behalf of the lord king to let both abbots be summoned at a

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 602 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

certain day and that perambulation to be made by the oath of twelve free men and the thirteenth who is added on our behalf and that you shall see to it that what they perambulate stands firm and unshaken and that you shall have Philip de Kyme there and the keepers of the pleas of the crown and register the names of those who carry out the perambulation. I therefore order you to be at Fiskerton on the Friday after the Beheading of St. John the Baptist so that we can be on the aforesaid boundaries on the following Saturday and carry out that perambulation. Farewell.'

552 In a controversy between William de Eynsford and Archbishop Richard of Canterbury concerning the revenues of Eynsford, it is decided before King Henry II that the verdict of old monks of Christ Church shall be decisive. This verdict having been heard in the presence of royal officials in the chapter house in Canterbury, William de Eynsford confirms the grant of his grandfather. William de Eynsford,' to those present and future who will receive this letter, greeting. Know that I, William de Eynsford, grandson of William fitz Ralph through his son William, hold for firm and valid the donation of the church of Eynsford with all its appurtenances, which my grandfather William fitz Ralph made to the convent of Christ Church, Canterbury, for his soul and the souls of his ancestors and the salvation of his successors, when he became a monk in the church of Canterbury. This church of Eynsford, however, was assigned to the sustenance of the poor and the sick, and the archbishops gave it freely to their clerics in spite of the protests of the monks. For that reason my father and I have repeatedly brought a claim concerning that church against the archbishops and against the clerics to whom they gave the church. Finally it was agreed before our lord Henry, king of the English, the son of Empress Matilda, between the lord Archbishop Richard and Prior Alan and the convent of Christ Church Canterbury and myself that we should stand by the verdict of old brethren of the church of Canterbury who lived in the church of Canterbury at the time when the church of Eynsford was given by my grandfather, as well concerning the church of Eynsford and its appurtenances as concerning a manor called Ruckinge, which was also restored to Christ Church Canterbury by my grandfather at that time. It was indeed suggested to me that this manor was restored on condition that it should revert to the heirs of my grandfather when the church of Eynsford became vacant 551 552

0

[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 79.] ° '[William III de Eynsford, son of William II, who was himself a son of William I, son of Ralph; William III himself had a son William IV: cf. CANTERBURY CHRIST CHURCH Domesday Monachorum, 47.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 603 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and be assigned to the poor, as was said before, for at that time it was not vacant. As the king's messengers, who had been sent with me and my son and heir William and many others, were present in the chapter of Canterbury, the lord Richard, the archbishop, after the candles were lit, publicly pronounced a sentence of excommunication, as was agreed between us, against all those who knowingly and deceitfully hid the truth of this matter, whereupon the older brethren proclaimed that the church of Eynsford with its appurtenances had been given to Christ Church Canterbury by my grandfather, as was said before, without any condition concerning the manor of Ruckinge. Therefore I, William and my son and heir William have yielded to the right reason of the monks of Christ Church Canterbury and prefer to maintain and defend the donation and alms of our ancestors rather than let the archbishops of Canterbury go on giving it to their clerics as they used to. However, as a cleric named Gentilis, a nephew of the lord Pope Alexander, held the church at that time I forbore temporarily out of reverence for the lord pope, but after Gentilis' death, when the church of Eynsford returned entirely with its appurtenances to the almonry of Christ Church Canterbury, destined for the poor and the sick according to my grandfather's assignation, I hold my grandfather's donation for valid and confirm it, with the consent and according to the will of the lord Archbishop Richard of Canterbury, as it was proved in the chapter at Canterbury through the intervention of the messengers of the lord king, as was said before. Furthermore I add that the church of Eynsford shall have those possessions and rights on my land forever, without any claim by myself or my heirs, which it had on the day when the aforesaid Gentilis was alive and dead. I also quitclaim in my own name and that of my heirs some assarts and the land in which part of the apple orchard of the church is situated and a certain road and the land beside the cemetery, which were said to be of my fee at the time when Gentilis died, I give in perpetual alms to the church because I not only want to protect and defend the alms of my ancestors, but I also remit and claim quit of all service those assarts and the land where the apple orchard is situated, if I have any right in them, and other rights, if the church had any in the time of Gentilis, so that my alms together with the alms of my ancestors shall serve for the salvation of us all. Witnesses: Alexander de Barentin2 , Henry de Sornes, Ralph de Eynsford, Geoffrey de Ros, Heilgar de Sturry and Adam his son, Bartholomew the steward, Roger the marshal, the porters William de Capes and Stephen, and many others.

2 Barentin (d6p. Seine Inf~rieure, arrond. Rouen, canton Pavilly). Alexander de Barentin was

butler to Henry II.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 604 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

553 In the king's court Gilbert de Plumpton is accused by Ranulf de Glanvill of eloping with an heiress in the gift of the king and of committing acts of violence and robbery; judgment is given against the defendant who is condemned to death, but saved from the gallows by the intervention of Bishop Baldwin of Worcester. The king grants a pardon, but Gilbert de Plumpton is kept in prison. In the meantime, as the king was staying at Worcester with his army to wage war against Rhys ap Gruffydd, as we have explained, a young man of noble extraction called Gilbert de Plumpton was led before him in fetters. Ranulf de Glanvill, the king's justiciar, who hated him and attempted to have his life taken, accused him of abducting some girl who was in the gift of the king, a daughter of Roger de Guillevast, and detaining her as his wife, and breaking by night six gates of the girl's father and taking one hunting horn and one halter and so on, together with the aforesaid girl. He also added that he took all this away in theft and robbery. The aforesaid young man denied by all means everything in connection with the violence and the thefts and the robbery and offered to stand trial on this, but Ranulf de Glanvill wanted him dead because he had promised to give the aforesaid girl, whom the aforesaid Gilbert' had already known as his spouse, as wife to Reiner, the sheriff of Yorkshire, with the inheritance of her father. He, however, urged those who were about to judge the said Gilbert to condemn him to death, which was done: they decided that he was to be hanged. As he was being taken to the gallows, all these events were reported to Baldwin, the bishop of the said city of Worcester. While the bishop was strongly bewailing the condemnation of this young man, his entourage urged him to save him from death, saying that he was in a legal position to do this since it was a Sunday, as well as being the feast of St. Mary Magdalen. The bishop, who was a mild and pious man, listened to their words, mounted his horse and quickly rode after the hangmen who were taking the young man to the gallows. They had already arrived there, had bound the young man's hands behind his back, covered his eyes with some green clay and put an iron chain round his neck, and the hangmen were ready to string the young man up, when the bishop arrived on the scene with a large crowd. Rushing forward and descending from his horse he stood under the gallows beside the bound man and proclaimed: "I forbid you in the name of God and St. Mary Magdalen and under pain of anathema to hang this man on this day, for today is Sunday and the feast of St. Mary Magdalen and you are not allowed to contaminate this day" The hangmen replied: "Who are you and what madness directs you that you dare obstruct the king's justice?" The bishop was as firm in mind as in word and said: "I am urged not by madness but by the clemency of the highest piety and I do not 553 1 Reiner was steward of Ranulf Glanvill in 1177. See Madox, Hist. Exch., 662. Glanvill himself was the actual sheriff of Yorkshire down to 1189.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 605 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

want to obstruct the king's justice, but to save you from imprudence so that you and the king will not be contaminating a solemn day and incur the wrath of the eternal King". As they were discussing amongst themselves, divine power prevailed and at the bishop's urging the man is freed from his fetters and handed over to the keeper of the king's castle to be shut up and hanged in the morning. But Almighty God, who does not forsake those who hope in him, granted the aforesaid Gilbert a long lifetime because of the merits of the aforesaid bishop, for when all these events were reported to the lord King Henry, who had left the town before this judgment was given, he loved and revered the aforesaid bishop even more from that time onwards and therefore he at once sent on that same day with great haste his messengers to the keeper of the castle, forbidding him to hang the young man until he knew his will concerning him. Blessed be God in everything, who saves those who pray to him and who freed Gilbert from the hands of the hateful and the snare of the iniquitous.2

554 Concord in the king's court between the abbey of St. Mary at York on the one hand and Roger de Appleton and Gilbert de Hemsworth on the other concerning a pond between Appleton Wiske and Welbury, for which a recognition was summoned by royal writ. This is the concord made in the court of the lord king at York on the Sunday after the Exaltation of the Holy Cross in the 3 0 th year of the reign of King Henry II before Godfrey de Lucy, Hugh de Morwick, Hugh Murdac, Roger Arundel, Geoffrey de Neville, William Vavassur and Geoffrey Haget, justices of the lord king, and before the other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present, between the monks of St. Mary of York and Roger de Appleton and Gilbert de Hemsworth concerning the pond' situated between Appleton and Welbury, for which a recognition was summoned between them by precept of the lord king, viz. that the aforesaid Roger shall by the grant of the aforesaid monks 2

554

0

[A shorter version of this incident occurs in

ROGER OF HOVEDEN

Chron., ii. 286 where the

information is added that Gilbert de Plumpton was kept in prison by Ranulf de Glanvill until the death of Henry II. The Pipe Rolls give additional information. In the Pipe Roll 30 Henry II, 29 we find expenses incurred by Ranulf de Glanvill for bringing Gilbert de Plumpton and his companions from York to Worcester. In the same Pipe Roll, p. 38 mention is made of the payment of certain revenues from the land of Gilbert de Plumpton into the royal revenue (a similar item appears in Pipe Roll 31 Henry 11,76). In Pipe Roll 32 Henry 11,96 we find mention of certain proceeds from the sale of chattels and houses of Gilbert de Plumpton having been paid into the royal treasury. - See also J.H. Round, Pipe Roll 31 Henry II, p. xxxii; C. Johnson, Pipe Roll 2 RichardI, p. xxii; H.G. Richardson, The Memoranda Roll of IJohn, London, 1943 (Pipe Roll Society, New Series 21), p. xciii; H. Mayr-Harting, "Henry II and the papacy", Journal of EcclesiasticalHistory, 16 (1965), 51: Richardson and Sayles, Law and Legislation, 98.] o '"[From the rubric in the cartulary it appears that the pond served as reservoir for a watermill.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 606 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

make a sluice in the aforesaid pond on the boundary of the aforesaid vills, eight feet wide and deep enough to reach the solid ground under the pond. The aforesaid Roger shall also every year remove the gates from the aforesaid sluice on the eighth day before the month of May and keep the pond open until the aforesaid Gilbert has carried off his hay from the meadows of Welbury. And if by chance the aforesaid Roger fails to remove the gates from the aforesaid lock on the aforesaid day, the aforesaid Gilbert shall remove them without any cause [for blame] until he has carried off all his hay.

555 Notification by Roger de Clere that he has given in alms to the Gilbertine house of Ormsby a quarter of the church of Fotherby belonging to his fee, which he has deraigned by judicial combat. Be it known to all the faithful of Christ that I Roger de Clere have given and by this my charter confirmed in pure and perpetual alms to the nuns serving God in the church of Ormsby the fourth part of the church of Fotherby which belongs to my fee, namely that fee which was Hugh de Twit's, with all things belonging to the fourth part of the aforesaid church. Moreover, be it known that I, Roger, with God's help, acquired the aforesaid fee by duel in the court of the lord king at London, and therefore I have thought it necessary to give some part of the fee to the service of God for the soul of my father and that of my mother and for my own soul and the souls of all my ancestors and friends. And lest anyone shall be able to infringe this my gift or oppose it in any way, I and my heirs will maintain and warrant it to the aforesaid nuns against all men and claimants as our own and special alms.1 Witnesses of this business are: Ralph de Wyham, Odo the priest, Walter the cook, Alan son of Theobald, Jocelin de Arescy, Stephen Barri, Elias the clerk, Humphrey the reeve, Martin the reeve, Thomas de Louth and William son 2 of Damme of Fotherby.

556 Sale of land to Emma, daughter of Henry, by Richard Scot, a man of John de St. Helen, in the latter's court.

555 ' '[Translation to this point, from GILBERTINE0 HousEs Charters no. 9, p. 43.10 2 o[See GILBERTINE HousEs Charters, p. xxvii.1

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 607 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

John de St. Helen to all his friends and men, French and English, greeting. Know that I have granted to Emma, daughter of Henry, my kinswoman, the messuage, with its appurtenances, which Richard Scot, who had been my man for that messuage, sold to her for 40 shillings, which Emma paid to him in my court. And he abjured in my court in the presence of many the aforesaid messuage and what he could claim in it and any attempt through which she or her [heirs] could suffer any damage. This same messuage she will hold by hereditary right from me and my heirs and the child after her whom she will have from William the cleric, the son of Edulf the cleric; if however she has no surviving child from him, the nearest heir of the foresaid Emma shall have the foresaid messuage by the foresaid right. She and her heirs will have the foresaid messuage with its appurtenances freely, quietly and honourably for six pence to be paid every year at the feast of St. Michael for all the service that belongs to me. In testimony of which etc.

557 After William Franceis has impleaded Simon fitz Ralph de Dene and the abbey of Thorney concerning land in Wing, an agreement is reached in the county court of Northampton in the presence of Thomas fitz Bernard, a royal justice, by which the plaintiff quitclaims the land and Simon fitz Ralph promises to warrant it forever to the abbey. Simon fitz Ralph de Dene, to all his friends and lieges, present and future, greeting. Be it known to you all that I have granted and confirmed in perpetual alms to the church of St. Mary of Thorney three bovates of land in the vill which is called Wing, which my father during his lifetime gave to the said church. And on top of those I gave after my father's death, together with his body, one bovate which I offered on the altar and to which afterwards I added a fifth bovate. Afterwards, however, at the time of Abbot Solomon, William Franceis claimed the said land against me and the church of Thorney as being the marriage-portion of my sister, who was the mother of the said William's wife and we have settled that claim through money, in such a way that William himself and his wife and his wife's mother have forever abjured the said land for themselves and their heirs and I have undertaken and promised to maintain forever and to warrant that land to the church of Thorney against all men as reasonable and free alms, and my heirs after me. And of this I gave security before Thomas fitz Bernard in the full county court of Northampton. In course of time, however, and with the consent of my heir and my wife I gave and granted to God and St. Mary and the monks who serve

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 608 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

God there, through a knife on the altar of Thorney, two virgates of land in pure, free and perpetual alms in the aforesaid vill of Wing, which Ascur the priest and Michael the son of Thurstan held from me, with the men who held them and all their appurtenances, free and quit of all secular service and demand, for the salvation of my soul and those of my wife, sons, daughters and all my ancestors and descendants. And to ensure that those my donations and grants shall forever remain firm and stable I have corroborated them by the present charter and the attachment of my seal and I and my heirs shall warrant them forever as free alms of the aforesaid church of Thorney. Witnesses: William the chaplain, Robert Basset, Peter fitz Simon, William de Ros, knight, etc.

558 Notification by Robert Foliot, bishop of Hereford and Adam, abbot of Evesham, papal judges delegate, that the suit between Prior John of Luffield and Hamo son of Meinfelin concerning the church of Thornborough ended in a composition before King Henry II. Robert, by God's grace bishop of Hereford, and Adam, by the same grace abbot of Evesham, to all whom this letter will reach. Know you all that the case which was conducted between the prior of Luffield and Hamo son of Meinfelin and had been delegated to us by the lord pope was terminated in such a way in the presence of the lord king that the prior and monks gave up to Hamo and his heirs the claim which they had on the cell of the aforesaid Hamo at Bradwell and on the monks and churches of the land of Hamo and they have forever renounced the right which they maintained to have there. On the other hand the forementioned Hamo, with the consent of his wife and his heir, gave and granted forever to the said prior and monks and church of Luffield a tenth of all his bread, which was made on his demesne and to his profit, and furthermore he gave them the church of Thornborough, free and quit with everything that pertains to it. We have certified and confirmed the above composition with the muniment of both our seals.

559 Recognition held at Oxford at the king's command before Ranulf de Glanvill in which knights of the county of Oxford, clerics of the archdeaconry of Oxford and knights of the honour of Wallingford record that the churches of Watlington and Mongewell do not belong to the prebend of Wallingford.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 609 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1184 an inquisition was held at Oxford at the command of the lord king before Ranulf de Glanvill, his justiciar. Knights of the county of Oxford, clerics of the archdeaconry and knights from the honour of Wallingford recorded that the church of Watlington is not of the prebend of Wallingford, nor should it be nor has it ever been, since Milo Crispin who instituted the prebends never had anything in the land of Watlington and does not belong to that barony. They also say that the church of Mongewell is not of the prebend of Wallingford, but the bodies of the dead used sometimes to be taken from Mongewell to Nuffield and sometimes to Newnham Murren. And the lord John fitz Ralph, patron of Mongewell, gave to the church of Nuffield one virgate of land and to the church of Newnham four acres of land, so that he could have a mother church at Mongewell and from that time onwards till this day it was a mother church. These are the knights who made that recognition: Thomas de Druval, Robert de la Mare, Ruelent de Auvers, Geoffrey de Bella Aqua, Alan fitz Anfrid, Robert de Wheatfield who was then sheriff, Henry de Ewelme, Roger fitz Alured, William de Bruges, Nicholas de Oilly and Jordan de Valognes. These are the clerics who took part in that same inquisition: Nicholas de Lewknor at that time vice-archdeacon, Gilbert de Bicester, Humphrey Dean, William de Wheatfield, Stephen de Nuffield, Robert de Whitchurch, William de Mapledurham, Ralph de Stoke, Bartholomew de Pyrton, Hugh de Crowmarsh, Ralph de Harpsden and Hervey de Newnham.

560 Final concord in the king's court, based on a recognition, between Abbot Robert of Croyland and Andrew fitz Hamo, who quitclaims his land in Baston. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Lincoln on the Sunday after the feast of St. Hilary in the thirty-first year of the reign of King Henry II before William de Vere, Roger fitz Reinfrid, William Rufus, Richard of the Peak, Otho fitz William and Robert de Inglesham, justices of the lord king and before the barons of the lord king and the knights who were then present, between the abbot of Croyland and Andrew fitz Hamo, through William de Leicester

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 610 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

whom the abbot had put in his place to gain and to lose, concerning four acres of land and one of pasture in Baston, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, namely that Andrew quitclaimed to the abbot for himself and his heirs all the right and claim which he had in the aforesaid four acres of land and an acre of pasture in Baston in return for two acres of land in Baston, one on one side of the manor and the other on the other side and for one acre of pasture in the same manor, whch the abbot granted to Andrew and his heirs to hold from him by the service of six pence per year for all the service that belongs thereto.

561 Final concord in the king's court at Westminster at the Easter session of the exchequer between Henry fitz Nigel and the prior and canons of Newnham concerning land in Goldington, after the said Henry had put himself on the grand assize. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the Easter exchequer in the 31 st year of the reign of King Henry II on the Tuesday following the feast of St. Dunstan before Richard the treasurer of the lord king, Hubert Walter, Hugh de Morwick steward of the lord king, William Rufus, William Basset, Alan de Furnellis and other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present, between Henry fitz Nigel and the prior and canons of Newnham through Walter, the cellarer of Newnham, whom the prior and canons had put in their place in the court of the lord king to gain and lose, concerning two virgates of land in Goldington for which the said Henry, who held that land, put himself on the assize of the lord king and asked a recognition against the said prior and canons whether he or the aforesaid prior and canons had the greater right in that land, i.e. that the aforesaid prior and canons have granted to the same Henry and his heirs the aforesaid land, to be held from the same prior and convent hereditarily by the service of one mark of silver per year for all service. And for this concord the said Henry gave the prior and canons half a mark of silver.

562 Final concord in the king's court at Thetford between Samson, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds, and Richard de Pakenham concerning the advowson of the church of Pakenham, for which a recognition had been summoned. This is the final concord made at Thetford in the court of the lord king on the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 611 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Thursday after Pentecost in the 31 st year of the reign of King Henry II before Hugh de Morwick, Ralph Murdac, William le Vavassur and Master Thomas de Husseburne, justices of the lord king and other barons and lieges of the lord king, who were then present, between Abbot Samson and the convent of the church of St. Edmund and Richard de Pakenham concerning the advowson of the church of Pakenham, for which a recognition was summoned in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the said Richard has quitclaimed his demand which he had against the aforesaid abbot and convent on that advowson. And for that quitclaim the abbot and convent of St. Edmund gave the aforesaid Richard one mark of silver and one seam of wheat.

563 Final concord in the king's court between Thomas de Arderne and Walter le Bret concerning the church of Wolfhamcote, apparently after a writ of darrein presentment was brought. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Warwick on the Monday after the octave of the apostles Peter and Paul in the 3 1st year of the reign of King Henry II before William de Vere, Robert de Inglesham, Ralph fitz Stephen, Miles de Muchegros and Richard the Fleming, justices of the lord king and other barons, knights of the lord king who were there present, between Thomas de Arderne and Walter le Bret concerning the church of Wolfhamcote which patron presented the last parson who died to that church, whose advowson the said Thomas has claimed against the aforesaid Walter, viz. that the said Thomas remised all his claim to the said Walter for himself and his heirs. And the advowson of that church remains with the aforesaid Walter and his heirs without any claim. And for this concord the said Walter gave the aforesaid Thomas 5 marks of silver.

564 Final concord at the exchequer between the prior of the Augustinian canons of Plympton and Ralph de Hampton and his wife in a plea on the church of Dean Prior, started by royal writ. This is the final concord made at Westminster at the exchequer on the day of the blessed Pope Calixtus at the Michaelmas term of the 31 st year of the reign of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 612 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

King Henry II before the Bishops Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich, and Ranulf de Glanvill, Richard the treasurer, Godfrey de Lucy, Hubert Walter and Hugh de Morwick the steward, between Prior Martin and the canons of Plympton and Ralph de Hampton and his wife Orreis, who put the aforesaid Ralph, her husband, in her place before the aforesaid justices to gain or to lose, concerning the church of Dean, for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king by a writ of the lord king.

565 Final concord in the county court of Yorkshire between Robert le Vavassur and William de Danby concerning land in Sutton.

This is the final concord made at York in the 31st year of [the reign of King] Henry II before Rainer [de Waxham] at that time sheriff' and the whole county between Robert le Vavassur and William de Danby concerning half a carrucate of land in Sutton. Robert le Vavassur gave the aforesaid William two bovates of land from the aforesaid half carrucate of land in Sutton in fee and heredity, etc.

566 Notification by Thomas fitz Hugh that he has quitclaimed to the monks of Lewes Priory the claim which he had brought against them in the county court of Yorkshire, in the synod of York and before the archdeacon of York, concerning the chapel of Kirk Sandall, belonging to the church of Conisbrough. Thomas fitz Hugh de Sandall to all sons of Holy Mother Church, present and future, greeting. Know that I have quitclaimed the chapel of Sandall which is a chapel of the mother church of Conisbrough to the monks of St. Pancras of Lewes forever for me and my heirs and that I have given up the whole claim which I had made against the monks for the chapel, for me and my heirs, in the county court of York and in the synod of York and in the chapter of Doncaster before the archdeacon of York and I have pledged and confirmed with my seal that I shall never make any claim to the chapel either personally or through somebody else. I

565 ' '[In fact Rainer de Waxham was only a deputy of the sheriff of Yorkshire, Ranulf de Glanvill.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 613 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

have made this quitclaim in favour of the monks of Lewes for my soul and that of my wife and for the souls of my father and mother and for the soul of my lord William fitz Godric and for the souls of all my ancestors and because they have received me and my wife and two children into the prayers of the church of Lewes. Witnesses: Reiner the sheriff and his brother Peter, Adam de Raineville, Thomas de Raineville, Adam fitz Peter, Adam de Birthwaite, Otes de Tilly, William de Balby and the whole county court, and of the synod Laurence the archdeacon [of Bedford], Ralph d'Aunay, archdeacon [of York], Jeremy the archdeacon [of Cleveland], master Roger de Arundel, William le Vavassur, Peter Stilenius, Dolfin the dean and his son Ralph, Adam de Sandall, Ternald de Normanton, Thomas de Dewsbury, John Talvas, and of the chapter master William fitz Fulk, Hugh de Cawthorne the dean [of Doncaster], master Lambert, Reiner de Darfield, Peter the parson of the church of Doncaster and his brother John, Adam de Brodsworth and his son Vincent, Jordan de Pickburn, Hugh de Hatfield, Robert Scot, Reginald the priest of Sandall, Gilbert the priest of Darfield and Richard the chaplain of Conisbrough.

567 Notification by Thomas fitz Hugh of Sandall that he has pledged to appear before the king's justices and to bear witness to the quitclaim which he made to Lewes Priory concerning the chapel of Kirk Sandall (see our no. 566). Let those present and future know that I, Thomas fitz Hugh of Sandall have, in the chapter of Doncaster and before many others, pledged to appear before the first justices of the lord king who will come to Yorkshire and there bear witness to all the agreements and the quitclaim which I made to the monks of Lewes concerning the chapel of Sandall, as my charter which I gave them thereon testifies. Witnesses: Hugh de Cawthorne, the dean, master Lambert, Adam de Brodsworth, Peter the parson of Doncaster, Thomas the parson of Fishlake, William fitz Fulk, Jordan de Pickburn, Richard the chaplain of Conisbrough, John the clerk of the dean of Lewes, Adam de Marisco, Thomas de Trumfleet and Reginald the priest.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 614 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

568 Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds loses the advowson of the church of Boxford through a recognition of darrein presentment, but later recovers it.

But when the church of Boxford was vacant and a recognition had been summoned to deal with the matter, five knights came, tempting the abbot and asking him what they should swear concerning it. The abbot, however, refused to give or promise them anything, but said: "When it comes to making oath, say what is right according to your conscience". But they retired in indignation, and by their oath deprived him of the advowson of that church - that is, the last presentation; yet later he recovered it after much expense and the payment of ten marks. The abbot retained the church of Honington, which was not vacant, but was claimed, in the time of Durand of Hostesli, though the latter in evidence of his right produced a charter of William, bishop of Norwich, containing the statement that Robert de Valognes his father-in-law gave that church to Arnold Lovell.'

569 Litigation between Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds and Robert de Holme concerning the advowson of half the church of Hopton. At a meeting in the church, lawful men of the hundred are elected by common consent and give a verdict in favour of the abbot. However, on complaint of Jordan de Ros, who pretends to be the parson, the case is brought before the barons of the exchequer. Finally an agreement is reached in the chapter of the monks at Thetford, by which Jordan surrenders half the church, but receives it back from Abbot Samson at the request of the bishop of Norwich. A. The narrative in Jocelin of Brakelond's chronicle. When half the church of Hopton' fell vacant, a dispute arose between the abbot and Robert de Holme, and a day of settlement having been appointed at Hopton,

568 569A

'[Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 60-61.]o '

See Appendix L. °[=BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 148-149.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 615 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

after much debate the abbot, led by I know not what impulse, said to this same Robert: "Do you swear in person that this is your right, and I will allow it to be so". And when that knight had refused to swear, with the consent of both parties the oath was put to sixteen law-worthy men of the hundred, who swore that this was the abbot's right. Gilbert fitz Ralph and Robert de Cockfield, the lords of that fief, were present and agreed. Thereupon master Jordan de Ros started up, holding a charter from Abbot Hugh and another from the aforesaid Robert, to the effect that whichever of the two might make good his claim, he should have the parsonage, and said that he himself was the parson of the whole church, while the clerk lately deceased was his vicar paying him a yearly pension for that half, and in support of this he produced a charter of Archdeacon Walchelin. But the abbot was vexed and angry with him and did not take him back into his friendship until Jordan himself in the chapterhouse of the monks at Thetford, at the instance of the abbot, absolutely and unconditionally and without any hope of recovery resigned that half of the church into the hands of the bishop there present before a multitude of clerks. This done, the abbot said: "My lord bishop, I am bound by my promise to give a rent to some one of your clerks; and I will give this half of this church to anyone you may choose". And the bishop asked that it might in all friendship be restored to master Jordan, and so Jordan received it at the abbot's gift.'

B. The entry in the Pinchbeck Register. A controversy arose between Abbot Samson of St. Edmunds and Robert de Holme concerning the advowson of one half of the church of Hopton. After the death of Nicholas the chaplain, the parson of that half, they met one day in the said church accompanied by Gilbert fitz Ralph, who was the capital lord of the fee after the abbot, and Robert de Cockfield, who held from him and from whom Robert de Holme also held the fee to which that advowson was said to belong. By common consent they elected seventeen lawful men and put themselves upon their verdict concerning the right of advowson. Having taken common counsel, they said that Abbot Anselm had given that moiety to Nicholas and that it was the right of the abbot. However, Jordan de Ros who claimed to be the parson of that moiety and was summoned to the exchequer because he seemed to deprive the abbot of it, claimed the abbot as his patron and showed a charter of Abbot Hugh, bearing the seal of the convent, concerning the donation of the whole church of Hopton before Ranulf de Glanvill, Hubert Walter, Hugh de Morwick, William Rufus, Richard the treasurer and his brother William, Michael Belet, Reiner de Gimingham, Robert de Cockfield and Gilbert fitz Ralph. Those were the jurors at Hopton: Ranulfde Hopton, Bernard, Richard fitz Eilac, Athene, Adam de Bosco, Ralph de 0

2 [Translation almost invariably from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 61-62.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 616 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Hinderclay, Matthew de Thelvetham, Hervey de Hepworth, Edward de Weston, Alan de Walsham, Gilbert de Knettishall, Hervey de Hopton, Humphrey the knight of Barningham, Ohard, Turstan de Stanton, Peter de Hinderclay, Walter de Hepworth.

570 Upon the death of Abbot Roger of Abingdon King Henry II gives the abbey to the custody of Thomas de Husseburne, who proposes to put all the possessions of the abbey in the king's hand and not only those pertaining to the abbot. The prior and monks complain to the justiciar Ranulf de Glanvill, who when the case is heard before the court of the exchequer at Westminster, pronounces judgment in their favour, since Thomas de Husseburne had been appointed merely for the abbot's affairs. After the death of Abbot Roger and the appointment by the lord king of master Thomas de Husseburne, a clerk of the lord King Henry II, to the custody of this abbey, this Thomas put it to us that the justices of the lord king had ordered him to seize into the hand of the lord king what is subjected to us as well as the possessions belonging to the chamber of the abbot. However, the prior and the convent took this very gravely and very much afraid of future damage and peril, eagerly urged him to postpone this seizure until they could speak to thejustices and show them our old right, going back to the time of King Edward, of dealing freely and quietly by our own hand with whatever belongs to us. By common consent we sent the lord Nicholas, our prior, with some brethren to Ranulf de Glanvill, who wielded the power of justiciar under the king in the whole kingdom, to expound our customs aloud and diligently and to beg him carefully that they should not be changed or disturbed for reason of the royal custody. After they had gone to Ranulfde Glanvill at the exchequer at Westminster and shown him quite fully our liberties and customs, he deliberated with the bishops and other justices who sat with him at the exchequer and pronounced by a decree of the whole court that no right and no customs which we had of old in our dependencies were to be changed for any reason, whether the church was vacant or ruled by a pastor. He also ordered the aforesaid Thomas, who was present, that as our accounts were separated from those of the abbot, as we clearly proved before him, he only had the care of whatever belonged to the chamber of the abbot. He was not to put his hand to whatever belonged to us, but was to let us have full right and power over our tenures and tenants, for the whole court said that it would be at our peril if the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 617 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

custodians of the king attempted to do what should not be allowed to the abbots. The aforesaid Thomas had caused a separate description to be made of all our possessions and customs on the authority of the king and the justiciar so as not to incur any repulse in what he intended to do. This document he brought with him to the exchequer hoping to be ahead of the prior and the brethren and he showed it to all the justices, believing that he could obtain the transfer of our possessions into his hands so that he could provide us stingily with nourishment and clothing and pay all the rest into the treasury. For he tried by all means to convince the justices that what belonged to us was not only to be equated with what belonged to the abbot, but also that our portion should be as small as possible by the deduction of whatever we used to receive at certain times of the year from the hand of the abbot. His undertaking would have been most detrimental to us if it had not been, as we explained, for the prior and the brethren who had pursued the matter and fully discussed with the justiciar every single custom and possession and shown frequently that they were not sufficient for us. Finally God's grace prevailed so that Ranulf de Glanvill, the prime justiciar, addressing himself to the otherjustices said that our customs had been instituted reasonably and wisely and that nothing superfluous could be found in them and that the king did not want, and he himself did not dare, to go against such old and just customs or make any changes to them. After Ranulf de Glanvill had thus suggested a judgment in our favour, i.e. that we should have in the future our possessions in full liberty and our old customs in their entirety, as further described, and they had been read before the justices, all the justices who sat around were in favour of his proposal and gave him their vote so that the prior and the brethren, who had been sent out with him, returned peacefully and joyfully.'

571 Final concord in the king's court at Westminster between Osney Abbey and Gilbert de Bracy concerning the advowson of the church of Stone for which a recognition was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on the Friday after the invention of the Holy Cross in the 3 2n"year of the reign of King Henry II before the bishops Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich and Ranulf de Glanvill, justices of the lord king and Richard, treasurer of the lord king, Jocelin, archdeacon of Chichester, Robert de Inglesham, Thomas de Husseburne, Hugh Bardulf, Alan de Furnellis, Michael Belet and Robert de Wheatfield and

570 1 '[See Pipe Roll 32 Henry II, 116-117.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 618 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

other lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between the abbot and canons of Osney and Gilbert de Bracy concerning the advowson of the church of Stone, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid Gilbert has quitclaimed to the aforesaid abbot and canons the aforesaid advowson of the aforesaid church for himself and his heirs. And he also gave them in pure and perpetual alms one hide of land in the same vill, to be held from him and his heirs by the royal service which belongs to that land.

572 Final concord in the king's court between Prior Ralph and the canons of Guisborough and Roger de Rosel and Richard his brother, whereby Richard quitclaims his right to the advowson of the church of All Saints in Easington. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster at the Easter exchequer on the Saturday before the Rogations in the thirty-second year of the reign of King Henry II before the Bishops Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich, Ranulfde Glanvill,justiciar of the lord king, Richard the treasurer of the lord king, Jocelin archdeacon of Chichester, Robert de Inglesham, Thomas de Husseburne, Hugh Bardulf, Robert de Wheatfield, Michael Belet and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, between the prior and canons of the church of St. Mary of Guisborough and Roger de Rosel and Richard his brother, concerning the advowson of the church of All Saints of Easington, which the aforesaid prior and canons claimed by the gift of the aforesaid Roger and for which Roger and his brother Richard had been summoned in the court of the lord king to show why they obstructed the presentation of a parson to the aforesaid church by the aforesaid prior and canons. Roger recognized and granted the donation of the aforesaid church which he had previously made to the aforesaid prior and canons. And at the request of his brother Roger the aforesaid Richard, moved by the love of God and for the salvation of his soul and those of all his ancestors, granted the aforesaid donation of his brother Roger and quitclaimed to the canons all his right and claim which he had or claimed to have in the advowson of the aforesaid church.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 619 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

573 Amiable composition between Christ Church Canterbury and the abbey of Robertsbridge concerning a marsh near Oxney, after a sworn inquest held by the men of Appledore. Alan, the prior, and the convent of Christ Church Canterbury to all the faithful of Christ, greeting. We want it to be known to all that the controversy which started between us and Abbot Denis and the convent of Robertsbridge concerning the whole marsh situated between the dike of the aforesaid monks and Oxney, except for that little part which they hold from the land of William son of Bass at Oxney, as this little part was divided and separated with our consent and theirs by the oath and view of the men of Appledore, was settled by an amiable composition. The aforesaid abbot and his monks, with the consent and the agreement of [Henry] the count of Eu and Countess Alice his mother and Alvred de St. Martin, on the basis of whose donation the abbot and monks claimed that marsh, have renounced forever all demand which they had made or which they could make against us concerning that marsh. We on our side for the sake of peace and piety and considering their poverty, have granted and assigned to them in perpetual alms and in their free and quiet possession a hundred acres of that marsh in the eastern part between their dike and Oxney, as aforesaid and close to the land of Adam de Charing. And to ensure that this agreement shall be kept firm and stable we and the aforesaid monks have had it corroborated with the seal of each church.

574 Notification by King Henry II that a suit in the king's court concerning the fief of Inkberrow between Bishop William of Hereford, defendant, and Bishop William of Worcester, plaintiff, has been terminated by the bishop of Hereford's confession, made before the planned sworn recognition of twenty-four knights took place. Henry, by God's grace king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his bailiffs and lieges, greeting. Know that

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 620 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the controversy which existed between the bishop of Hereford and the bishop of Worcester concerning the fief of Inkberrow, for which the bishop of Worcester demanded the service of one knight's fee from the bishop of Hereford and for which the bishop of Hereford maintained that he owed only the service of half a knight and on which a recognition by 24 knights was summoned before me, was terminated in my presence between William de Northolt, bishop of Worcester, and William de Vere, bishop of Hereford, at Kempsey as follows. When the said recognition by the aforesaid 24 knights concerning the aforesaid fief should have taken place, the bishop refused to accept the recognition and confessed that he owed the aforesaid bishop of Worcester for the aforesaid fief of Inkberrow the full service of one knight's fee. Witnesses: Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury, the Bishops Hugh of Durham, Hugh of Coventry and Peter of St. David's, Ranulf de Glanvill, Earl Ranulf [III de Blunderville] of Chester, Earl Robert [II Blanchmains] of Leicester, Earl William [III d'Aubigny] of Arundel, Earl Waleran [de Newburgh] of Warwick, Robert Marmion, William Marshal, Richard de Camville and Gilbert fitz Reinfrid. At Kempsey.

575 Final concord in the king's court between Reginald le Bere and Agnes daughter of Sibyl concerning land in Muxton, for which a grand assize was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Lichfield on the Wednesday after the feast of St. Laurence in the 3 2nd year of the reign of King Henry II before Robert Marmion and Hugh Pantulf and other justices, their colleagues and the barons and knights who were then present, between Reginald le Bere and Agnes daughter of Sibyl concerning three virgates of land in Muxton, for which a grand assize was summoned between them, namely that Reginald and Agnes shall divide between them the said land in wood and meadow and pasture and all other easements and one messuage shall remain Reginald's and one Agnes's. And for this concord Agnes will give Reginald two shillings a year on the vigil of St. Mary Magdalen for all the service that pertains to him.1

574 1 '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 86 n. 1.10 575 1 [R.W. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii, London, 1859, p. 323.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 621 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

576 Recognition made in the manor court of Herbert de Peri, lord of Horsepath, concerning the tithe of a hide of land in the said manor which was claimed by Osney Abbey against a servant of the late Hugh de St. German; the servant quitclaims the tithe. After the death of Hugh de St. German,' who had held for the duration of his life two thirds of the tithes of the manor of Horsepath belonging to the church of St. George from the canons of Osney, the canons took back the tithes into their hands, but a servant of the said Hugh, who had collected the said tithes for his lord, kept separate for himself the tithes of one hide at the suggestion of some people who were ignorant of the truth of the matter, maintaining that that hide was not of the demesne but in villeinage, so that it is liable to royal service as villein's land. The canons of Osney, however, claimed the tithes of that hide and of all the rest of the demesne. Nigel son of Herbert de Peri, who then held that vill in farm, ordered the men of the whole vill to speak the truth on this, testifying for the truth on peril of their souls and their goods. They all declared in one voice and without any dissension or counterclaim that the aforesaid hide belonged to the demesne and that the church of St. George had always and since antiquity had the two-thirds of its tithes and the church of the vill itself one third, and that they had never seen or heard the tithe of that hide being separated from the tithes of the rest of the demesne. Witnesses. Furthermore it was recognized there concerning the one and a half virgate which the men of that same vill hold that it belongs to the demesne and that two thirds of its tithes belong to the church of St. George, as those of all the rest of the demesne. Having heard this recognition, the servant of Hugh de St. German peacefully gave up the tithe of the aforesaid hide, which he had withheld for himself, to the canons of Osney, who received it and let it be transported where they wanted. The following were present at this recording: Richard Gernun, knight, Richard the priest of Seacourt, who used to be deacon in the church of St. Mary of Oxford, Nigel son of Herbert de Peri, who then held the vill in farm, Ralph de Lichfield, the canon, Matthew the lay-brother of Osney and the whole parish which had gathered on the day of the Nativity of St. Mary for the church service.

576 ' He died spring 1186; see Oriel Coll. Records, p. 114. O[=C.L. Shadwell and H.E. Salter (eds.), Oriel College Records, Oxford, 1926 (Oxford Historical Society, lxxxv).] 0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 622 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

577 Final concord in the king's court between Roger, abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, and his men of the hundred of Fordwich concerning the services and customs owed by the latter. Certain rules are specified concerning the transfer of pleas from the hundred court of Fordwich to the abbot's court at Canterbury. A. The narrative in the chronicle. In the aforesaid year a discord between the abbot of St. Augustine and his men of Fordwich was settled in the court of the lord king at Marlborough in the thirtysecond year of the reign of King Henry II before Ranulf de Glanvill and his fellow justices of the lord king, between Roger, abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, and his men of his hundred of Fordwich, namely that his men of Fordwich swore on the four Gospels in the hundred court of Fordwich that they will forever render to the abbot of St. Augustine and his successors and the convent of that church all service and all customs which they and their ancestors ever best and most fully rendered to the abbot and his predecessors. And on all complaints which are brought before the hundred court of Fordwich, judgment shall be given in the hundred court of Fordwich within forty days after the judgment stage is reached, and if no judgment is given within that term in the hundred court of Fordwich, the complaint on which judgment should have been given in that hundred court will be presented and recorded by six men or more of the hundred of Fordwich in the court of the abbot at Canterbury and will be settled there by the judgment of that court. And the men through whom that complaint is presented and recorded shall, after the recording, be allowed to recede freely and without molestation from the court, if they want to.

B. Text of the final concord. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Marlborough in the thirty-second year of the reign of King Henry II on the Tuesday after the feast of St. Andrew before Ranulf de Glanvill, Robert de Wheatfield, Michael Belet and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, between Roger, the abbot of St. Augustine of Canterbury and his men of his hundred of Fordwich, namely that his

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 623 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

men of Fordwich swore on the four Gospels in the hundred court of Fordwich that they will forever render to the abbot of St. Augustine and his successors and the convent of that church all service and all customs which they and their ancestors ever best and most fully rendered to the abbot and his predecessors. And on all complaints which are brought before the hundred court of Fordwich, judgment shall be given in the hundred court of Fordwich within forty days after the judgment stage is reached and if no judgment is given within that term in the hundred court of Fordwich, the complaint on which judgment should have been given in that hundred court will be presented and recorded by six men or more of the hundred of Fordwich in the court of the abbot at Canterbury and will be settled there by the judgment of that court. And the men through whom that complaint is presented and recorded shall, after the recording, be allowed to recede without molestation from the court of the abbot, if they want to.

578 Notification by King Henry II that Roger Bigod has recognised in the king's court that he owes Geoffrey, bishop of Ely, the service of six knights for his old tenures in Suffolk. Furthermore, Bishop Geoffrey has claimed the two manors of Broomsthorpe and Mundford, maintaining that they had been given to Hugh, the father of Roger Bigod, by Bishop Nigel of Ely during the war in King Stephen's reign. Henry, by God's grace king of the English and duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his lieges, French and English, of all England, greeting. Know that Roger Bigod recognised before me in my court at Windsor that he and his heirs owe to the church of Ely and Geoffrey the bishop of Ely and his successors the service of six knights for his ancient tenements, which his predecessors held in Suffolk from the church of Ely. And furthermore the aforesaid bishop Geoffrey there and then claimed against the aforesaid Roger Bigod two manors, Broomsthorpe and Mundford, which he complained had been alienated from the demesne of the bishop of Ely and given by his predecessor Bishop Nigel of Ely to Earl Hugh, the father of the forementioned Roger Bigod, in the time of King Stephen during the war. I therefore will and firmly command that the aforesaid Roger Bigod and his heirs shall do the aforesaid service to the church of Ely and the aforesaid Bishop Geoffrey and his successors for the aforesaid tenements that are in Suffolk. Witnesses: Geoffrey my son, Humphrey de Bohun the constable, Hugh de Cressy, Robert fitz Bernard, Gerard de Camville and Roger fitz Reinfrid. At Windsor.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 624 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

579 Record, established by a Gloucestershire jury in the time of King John, of a number of difficulties which arose after the death of William de Cirencester, concerning land in Cirencester belonging to Cirencester Abbey: Abbot Robert, who complained against Robert de Cirencester to King Henry II, obtained restitution of the land. In the year of the Lord 1201, the second year of King John, a jury met at Cirencester concerning the land of William de Cirencester. The verdict of those who swore. The jurors say that King Henry, father of the lord King John, delivered to Abbot Andrew the manor of Cirencester with the appurtenances to support the church of Cirencester which his grandfather Henry founded, and at that time William de Cirencester held his land in Cirencester for twenty shillings with other customs. And Hugh, the father of that William, held the aforesaid land in Cirencester in the same way at the time of King Henry the grandfather. And the same William recognised by his oath before the earl of Leicester and Henry de Pomerai and William de Beauchamp, who were then justices, that he held that land in villeinage. And Hamo de Baunton, William de Hottot, Alan de Bosco and Alexander the janitor were present at that recognition and they testify the same. And he recognised the same again before the earl of Gloucester and Guy Rufus, the dean of Waltham, and Turstin fitz Simon, who were then justices. This William died in the time of King Henry the father and Abbot Adam, and a cellarer of that abbot, called R. de Langley, seized the land of the aforesaid William after his death into the hand of the aforesaid abbot and tore out his garden and demolished the houses and carried them away on the authority of a patent writ of King Henry the father, which they still have and which was addressed to the abbot of Cirencester in the following words. Henry, king of the English and duke of the Normans etc., to the abbot of Cirencester, greeting. I order you to retrieve and hold all my demesne possessions of Cirencester as lawful men of Cirencester swore them and namely the service and tenement of William de Cirencester, as it was sworn by lawful men of Cirencester. Witness: master Alvered. At Woodstock. His brother Robert, however, seized that land into his own hand after William's death as the one who made himself heir. Abbot Robert complained to the lord king and William fitz Stephen, who was then sheriff, removed him on command of the lord king and restored that land to the aforesaid abbot. After the death of Abbot Robert the king took the abbey into his own hand with the manor of Cirencester and its appurtenances and gave it into the custody of Richard Brito and Thomas de Cuserugge and William the janitor, who took care of that land as demesne of the lord king. In course of time Richard the present abbot obtained from the king the manor of Cirencester with its appurtenances and afterwards had

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 625 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

a charter of confirmation of those lands of King Richard, and now Abbot Richard has a similar entry into that land from the lord King John. And they say that it is no escheat of the lord king nor can he give it away and it is worth a hundred shillings or more. Names of the jurors. These are the jurors of the inquisition of the land of William de Cirencester made by command of the lord king before Thomas de Rocheford, sheriff of Gloucester, at Cirencester. Osbert de Shipton, Hamo de Baunton, Robert Achard, Richard de Bagendon, Thomas de Veim, Miles de Cerney, Ansfrid Torel, Walter de Colesborne, William Hottot, William fitz Reginald, Alan de Bosco, Almaric de Colesborne, Richard de Garden, John Segare, Thomas de la More, Robert de Cardonville, Jordan fitz Isaac, Alexander the porter, Robert Archibald, Adam Water, Alwold the reeve, Richard Hart, Richard Orligan, Walter de Coates.'

580 Otuel de l'Isle notifies the king's justices, who are probably on eyre in Kent, that the prior and canons of Holy Trinity Aldgate, London hold half a knight's fee in Beckenham from him and that it is against his will and unjustly that Alexander de Orpington, the latter's son John and Osbert Huitdeniers entered that land; Otuel excuses himself and sends his son Otuel to bear witness. To the justices of the lord king, Otuel de l'Isle, greeting. Know that the prior and canons of Holy Trinity, London, hold some land in Beckenham from me in fee and heredity by the service of half a knight, as they held from my father and from my brother William and as our charters testify. And therefore I want you to know that neither Alexander de Orpington nor his son John or Osbert Huitdeniers have entered that land through me, but against me and without my consent and unjustly and against all reason, and therefore I send my son Otuel to bear witness of this and I myself would have come to this day if I had not been retained by old age and serious illness. If, however, it should be necessary in some place and at some time, I shall come and stand with the prior and the canons and do what I have to as the lord of the land which they hold from me, as mentioned before. Farewell.

579 ' '[A very similar text occurs in CIRENCESTER Cart. (ed. Ross), i, no. 40, pp. 35-36.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 626 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

581 Case heard in the king's court between Samson, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds and Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury, concerning a question of jurisdiction in Eleigh, a manor of Canterbury situated in the liberty of St. Edmunds, where a murder had been committed: some men of Bury St. Edmunds had forcibly seized the murderers and locked them up in the abbot's prison. As the charters produced by the two litigants are inconclusive, the abbot requests a sworn verdict of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, but the archbishop, convinced that the verdict would be biased against him, rejects this proposal, whereupon the case is postponed and nothing is heard of it any more. In the manor of the monks of Canterbury named Eleigh, which is in the abbot's hundred, it chanced that a man was slain, but the archbishop's men refused to allow those that killed him to be brought to trial in the court of St. Edmund. The abbot, however, complained to King Henry, saying that Archbishop Baldwin claimed for himself the liberties of our church, on the pretext of a new charter which the king had given to the church of Canterbury after the death of St. Thomas. But the king replied that he had never given any charter to the prejudice of our church, and that he did not desire to deprive St. Edmund of any of his ancient rights. On hearing this the abbot said to his private counsellors: "It is better policy that the archbishop should complain of me than that I should complain of the archbishop. I therefore desire to place myself in seisin of this liberty and will afterwards defend myself with the help of St. Edmund, to whose right in this matter our charters bear witness". So, early in the morning, Robert de Cockfield being in charge of the enterprise, about four score armed men were suddenly despatched to the township of Eleigh, and taking them by surprise, they seized the three man-slayers in question and brought them bound to St. Edmund's and cast them into the lowest dungeon. When the archbishop complained of this, Ranulf de Glanvill the justiciar gave orders that those men should be bound by gage and pledges to stand their trial in that court where they ought so to stand; and the abbot was summoned to come to the king's court to answer the charge of violence and injury which he was said to have done to the archbishop. Now the abbot did not essoin himself, but presented himself several times. And at length at the beginning of Lent they stood before the king in the chapterhouse of Canterbury, and the charters of both churches were read aloud by the parties. And our lord the king replied: "These charters are of the same age and both were issued by the same King Edward. 1 I know not what to say save that the charters should 581 ' The manor of Monk's Eleigh belonged to the archbishop, but lay within the Liberty of St. Edmund, and the abbot claims that it comes under his jurisdiction. Cp. Baldwin's Feudal Book (FD p. 9) °[ = BURY ST. EDMUNDS FeudalDocs.]': "En descriptos hic habes quicunque hec vides viii hundretos et dimidium in quibus tota saca et soca et regales omnes consuetudines sunt Sancti iEdmundi super uniuscujusque terram quicumque ibi possideat"

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 627 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

fight each other". 2 The abbot replied: "Whatever may be said of the charters, we are in seisin and have been so up to this time, and on this matter I desire to place myself on the verdict of two counties, to wit, Norfolk and Suffolk, that they allow this to be true".' But Archbishop Baldwin, 4 after consultation with his folk, said that the men of Norfolk and Suffolk had a great love for St. Edmund and that a great part of those counties was under the abbot's jurisdiction, wherefore he refused to stand by their decision. The king, however, was angry and rose in indignation, and said as he departed: "Let him take who can!" 5 And so the matter was postponed "and the suit is still unjudged". 6 But I noted that certain men of the monks of Canterbury were wounded, even unto death, by country folk of the township of Milden, which lies in the hundred of St. Edmund; and because they knew that the complainant must sue in the court of the accused,' and were unwilling to come to the court of St. Edmund to plead, they preferred to say nothing and shut their eyes, rather than make any complaint to the abbot or his bailiffs.

582 The justices in eyre having amerced Norfolk and Suffolk, a contribution is placed on the lands of Bury St. Edmunds. The abbot resists basing himself on a charter of King Edward. A recognition of knights is held at the exchequer and their favourable verdict enrolled. The two counties of Norfolk and Suffolk' were placed in the king's mercy by the justices in eyre on account of a certain offence, the amercement of Norfolk being fifty marks and of Suffolk thirty marks. And when a certain portion of that common amercement was placed upon the lands of St. Edmund and sharply demanded, the abbot without delay went to our lord the kina. and we found him at 2 Because the charter we hold from St. Edward is older than that held by the monks of

Canterbury. Because the charter which they hold gives them no liberty save among their own men: and our charter speaks of the time of King Edward and that of his mother Queen Emma, who had eight and a half hundreds for her dowry before the times of St. Edward, and had Mildenhall as well. '[Translation of the marginal note.]' See Appendix K [ =BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 147-148.10 4 Archbishop of Canterbury (1184-1190). The date of this dispute would appear to be 1186; cp. tandem in capitejejunii;i.e. when the king went to Canterbury on February 11, 1187, to settle disputes between the archbishop and his monks (Gervase, RS i.353) 0[=GERVASE OF CANTERBURY Chron.]' I Matt. xix 12. Here not in the biblical sense, but meaning "Let him take who can!" 6 Horace, Ars Poetica, 78. 7 Cp. Gratian, pars 2, caus. 3, quaest. 6, canon 16. 8'[Translation taken almost verbatim from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 50 52.]0 582 ' o[The Pipe Roll of 34 Henry II for 1187-1118, p. 59 mentions a communis misericordiaon the county of Norfolk and on the county of Suffolk; the entries mention the fact that the archbishop of Canterbury was remitted certain sums per libertatem carte sue.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 628 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Clarendon.' And when the charter of King Edward, which makes the lands of St. Edmund free of all geld and scot,3 was shown to the king, he gave orders by his letters that six knights of the county of Norfolk and six of Suffolk should be summoned to recognize before the barons of the exchequer, whether the domains of St. Edmund should be quit of the common amercement. Only six knights were chosen, to save labour and expense and because they had lands in both counties, to wit Hubert de Braiseworth, William fitz Hervey, William de Francheville and three others, who went to London with us, and on behalf of the two counties recognised the liberty of our church. And the justiciars who were present enrolled their verdict.4

583 Final concord in the king's court between the priory of Lewes and William fitz Arthur, as attorney for Richard de Buncton, concerning the advowson of the church of Buncton. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Canterbury in the 33 rd

year of the reign of King Henry II on the Friday after the feast of St. John the

Baptist before Ralph, archdeacon of Colchester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield and Michael Belet, justices of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, between the prior of Lewes and the monks of that place and William fitz Arthur, whom Richard de Buncton put in his place to gain or lose, concerning the advowson of the church of Buncton, about which there was a plea between them in the king's court, namely that the prior and monks remitted and quitclaimed to Richard and his heirs the advowson of the said church on condition that the parson whom Richard or his heirs will institute in that church shall pay four shillings per year, at Michaelmas and that he who is instituted in that church as parson by Richard or his heirs shall after his institution pledge his faith before the bishop and pay the aforesaid pension at the said term to the church of Lewes and shall afterwards renew that faith in the chapter of Lewes. 1

2

583

Henry II was in England between April 27, 1186 and February 27, 1187, and was at Clarendon,

his favourite palace near Salisbury, at the close of that period. See Appendix K 0[ = BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 147-148]0 geldis et scottis, used in the general sense of contributions due to the Crown. 0 [Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 64-65; see also our no. 592.]' '[See L.F. Salzman, Chartulary of the priory of St. Pancrasof Lewes, ii, 1934, pp. 81-82 (with the erroneous date of 1177, based on the erroneous reading of the 23rd instead of 33rd year of the reign of King Henry) and p. 117.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 629 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

584 Agreement made between the monks of Kirkstall Abbey and Peter de Bessacarr before the king's justices at York concerning, inter alia, the quitclaim made by Peter of land at Hitchells in Bessacarr, of which he said he had been disseised by the monks. This is the concord made in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1187 between the monks of Kirkstall and Peter de Bessacarr when the justiciars of the lord king were at York, i.e. Godfrey de Lucy, Jocelin, archdeacon of Chichester and William le Vavassur, concerning the claim and the recognition which Peter had against the monks and which had been put in writing before those same justiciars concerning his common in Bessacarr, of which he said he had been disseised by the monks. Peter quitclaims to the monks the whole claim which he had against them concerning the common so that those lands for which Peter had complained and on which a view had been held and a recognition should have taken place before the aforesaid justiciars at York, shall remain quit to the monks to be cultivated forever for the salvation of the soul of Peter, his wife and his heirs and for the souls of his father and mother and all his ancestors, in pure and perpetual alms, free and quit of all terrestrial service, i.e. all the land of Hitchells which the monks used to cultivate from the road which leads via the church of St. Wilfrid towards Thornwath as far as Hitchell Wood and all the plough-land between Bernolvescroft and the road which leads from the vill of Bessacarr to the church of that vill as far as the aforesaid road which leads via the church to Thornwath. And if in the future the aforesaid monks want to take something for their own use or to cultivate some part of the common of the aforesaid vill, Peter permits and grants them this without any claim, provided similarly the monks shall permit Peter and his men of the aforesaid vill, without any claim, to cultivate and take for their own use their parts of the said common in so far as it belongs to their land which they hold in the aforesaid vill. Furthermore the claim which the monks made in the past against Peter concerning the turbary is thus terminated and confirmed between both parties by the present chirograph, so that the monks as well as Peter and his men will take from the turbary whatever is sufficient for their proper usage without the monks or Peter or his men giving or selling anything from the turbary to anyone. If anyone should be caught giving or selling anything from the turbary he shall pay 6 pence for his misdeed the first time and if he were caught a second time, he will pay 12 pence without any pardon and the third time 18 pence. Furthermore as far as the turbary is concerned where the monks used to dig as well as Peter and his men, to the south of the grange of the monks, none of them shall henceforth dig from the grange of the monks as far as the mill along the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 630 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

road leading from the viii of Bessacarr to the mill and the marsh, except for the area between Askeledic and the mill. However, the men of the aforesaid Peter shall take in the fields of Bessacarr bracken and heather as much as they need without being disturbed. Witnesses.

585 Final concord in the king's court between Abbot Benedict of Peterborough and William Grimbald about land in Inglethorpe about which pleading had already taken place in the court of King Stephen. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on the Tuesday before the feast of St. Laurence in the 3 3rd year of King Henry II before the Bishops John of Norwich and Gilbert of Rochester, Robert de Wheatfield, Ranulf de Glanvill, justices of the lord king and Godfrey de Lucy, Hugh Bardulf, Geoffrey fitz Peter and Michael Belet and other lieges, who were then present there, between the abbot of Peterborough and William Grimbald concerning 9 acres of land and the outer court of the castle in Inglethorpe which he claimed against the abbot and for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the said William has quitclaimed for himself and all his heirs the whole of the aforesaid land and outer court and whatever right he had there to the church of Peterborough and the abbot and his successors forever, as demesne of the church of Peterborough. And for this quitclaim the abbot gave William 4 marks of silver.

586 Final concord in the king's court between the abbot of St. Mary's in York and the prior and monks of St. Bees (a dependency of St. Mary's) on the one hand and Ralph Corbet on the other, concerning the advowson of the church of Whicham, for which a recognition had been summoned by a writ of Ranulf de Glanvill. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Carlisle on the Saturday after the feast of St. Bartholomew in the 3 3rd year of the reign of King Henry II before Godfrey de Lucy, Jocelin, archdeacon of Chichester, and William le Vavassur, then justices of the lord king, and other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between the abbot of St. Mary of York and the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 631 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

prior and monks of St. Bees and Ralph Corbet concerning the advowson of Whicham, for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king by a writ of Ranulf de Glanvill, i.e. that the aforesaid Corbet has quitclaimed the advowson of the aforesaid church of Whicham for himself and his heirs to the aforesaid abbot and prior and monks of St. Bees, and the aforesaid abbot and prior and monks have granted the aforesaid Ralph the prayers of their abbey. 587 Final concord in the king's court between Luffield Priory and William son of Richard de Kaines concerning the mill of Heyford on which there was a plea between them and for which William, a monk of Luffield, was appointed as attorney. This is the final concord made in the court of the king at Northampton in the 3 3 rd year of the reign of King Henry II on the Thursday after the feast of the Nativity of St. Mary, before Ralph archdeacon of Colchester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield and Michael Belet, justices of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, between the prior of Luffield acting through William the monk, whom he had put in his place to gain or lose, and William son of Richard de Kaines concerning the mill of Heyford, for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that one half of the aforesaid mill shall remain forever to the prior and monks of Luffield, quit of the aforesaid William and his heirs, and after five years William shall let the monks have the other half of the mill or some other land or revenue within the county of the same value as that half. And for this concord the prior gave William 25 s.'

588 Recognition by Oliver de Lanvaley, lord of Kingston, in the court of the hundred of Tintinhull, which belongs to the abbey of Montacute, that he and his men from Kingston are bound to go to the said hundred court three times a year. 587

Charters, ii, pp. xliv-xlv. Other documents concerning the mill of Heyford are no. 358 (LUFFIELD Charters, ii. 65) and no. 363 (LUFFIELD Charters, ii. 68-69) dated 26 November 1194 and c. 1187 respectively. They suggest the following course of events: Luffield obtained one moiety of the mill of Heyford on 10 September 1187 and a promise of the other moiety within five years (LUFFIELD Charters, no. 361, ii, pp. 66-67). Shortly afterwards Luffield granted the moiety which they had thus obtained to Hugh of Heyford against payment of a rent (LUJFIELD Charters, ii. no. 363 in which reference is made to no. 361). On 24 November 1194 Luffield tries to get hold of the other moiety of William fitz Richard de Kaines, but a final concord is reached by which William fitz Richard retains the moiety against payment of a rent.]0 O[LUFFIELD

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 632 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

In the year of the Lord 1187 I, Oliver de Lanvaley, lord of Kingston, have recognized in the presence of Jocelin, prior of Montacute, at Tintinhull in the full hundred court held there on the Saturday in the octave of Michaelmas that I Oliver and my men from the vill of Kingston are obliged to go three times a year to the said hundred of Tintinhull, as the other suitors and tithings of the said hundred come and are bound to come to it, namely on the octave of Michaelmas, on the octave of Epiphany and on the octave of Hock Day and that my foresaid men shall present there everything which [belongs] to frankpledge ..

589 Final concord in the king's court at Oxford between Osney Abbey and Thomas fitz Turstin concerning eight acres of land in Ewelme which Geoffrey Pigaz had given to the canons in alms. The canons of Osney and Humphrey, the brother and heir of Geoffrey Pigaz, had quarrelled about the seisin of some of the land and the canons had also been disseised without judgment by the parson of the church of Ewelme. After the death of Geoffrey Pigaz, his brother and heir Humphrey lost part of his land by the judgment of his fellow inhabitants of the county, which part consisted of four acres of the aforesaid twelve acres which his brother gave us. When therefore we asked him to be given seisin of the aforesaid land, which his brother had given us, he refused to seise us of the eight acres that had been left to him, unless we quitclaimed to him the four acres which he lost. This we did and we made our charter of the quitclaim of those same four acres for him and so we were finally seised of the other eight acres. Afterwards Thomas fitz Turstin, the parson of the church of Ewelme, disseised us of them without judgment, maintaining that those acres belonged to his church, for which he was summoned before royal justices and made the following agreement with us. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Oxford in the 3 3 rd year of the reign of King Henry II on the Monday after the feast of St. Michael, before Ralph archdeacon of Colchester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield and Michael Belet, justices of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present there, between the abbot of Osney and the convent of that place and Thomas fitz Turstin concerning eight acres of land which Geoffrey Pigaz gave in alms to the aforesaid canons in the vill of Ewelme, on which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid acres remain forever with the aforesaid abbot and convent, quit of the aforesaid Thomas and his 588 ' '[For the rights of the abbey of Montacute in the hundred of Tintinhull see Regesta iii, no. 591592; Two cartularies of the Augustinian priory of Bruton and the Cluniac priorY of Montacute, (London), 1894, no. 58, p. 146 (Somerset Record Society 8) (calendar).]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 633 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

heirs. And for this concord the aforesaid abbot and convent gave to John, the cook of the aforesaid Thomas, the aforesaid acres, to be held by hereditary right from them and their church for the free service of 2 shillings per year for all service.

590 Final concord in the court of King Henry II between the abbey of Osney and Emma de Peri and her son William, whom she had appointed as her attorney, concerning land in Ledall. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Oxford in the 3 3 rd year of the reign of King Henry II on the Tuesday after the feast of St. Michael, before Ralph archdeacon of Colchester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield and Michael Belet, justiciars of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king who were present there, between the abbot of Osney and the convent of that place and Emma de Peri and her son William, whom she had put in her place to gain and lose, concerning half a hide of land in Ledall and on which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king, as follows. One half of the aforesaid land remains forever with the aforesaid abbot and church of Osney in pure and perpetual alms, quit of the aforesaid Emma and her heirs, saving the service of the lord king, i.e. that virgate of land which Sired de Draycott holds, and the other virgate of land remains forever with Emma and her heirs, quit of the aforesaid abbot and convent of that same place.

591 Final concord in the king's court concerning land in Arden between Abbot Roger of Byland and the nuns of Arden, who have deraigned it by an assize of novel disseisin. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster in the thirty-third year of the reign of King Henry II, on the Tuesday after the feast of All Saints, before the Bishops Geoffrey of Ely and John of Norwich and before Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord king and Hubert, dean of York and Richard, the treasurer of the lord king and Godfrey de Lucy and Hugh Bardulf, the steward of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, between the abbot of Byland and the nuns of Arden acting through Muriel, the prioress and brother Stephen, who was then custodian of the nuns, concerning land and a wood in Arden, which the nuns claimed against the abbot and on which

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 634 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

there had been a plea between them in the court of the lord king, namely that all the land which the nuns deraigned by a recognition of novel disseisin against the abbot in the court of the lord king remains forever to the nuns, i.e. all the land towards the south as far as the main road leading through Cleveland from the Wheat Beck to the Rye, as was perambulated by the wapentake of Birdforth, and all the land towards the north beyond the Wheat Beck which by right belongs to the nuns, all this remains forever to the nuns.

592 Recognition in the king's court at the exchequer that the abbey lands of Bury St. Edmunds should be quit of certain charges in connection with breaches of the peace.

In the 6 th year of the abbacy of the lord Abbot Samson a recognition was held by command of the lord king at Westminster at the exchequer on behalf of the two counties of Norfolk and Suffolk that the domains of St. Edmund used and ought to be quit of common amercement, i.e. whenever the county is in the king's mercy because of some forfeiture, and that the domains of St. Edmund ought to be quit of murder [fines]. Those are the names of the knights who recognized this: Thomas de Baylham, John Manatus, William fitz Hervey, Hubert de Braiseworth, William de Francheville and Robert de Boulers of Soham. Those were the justices: Ranulf de Glanvill, Hubert [Walter] dean of York, Richard [fitz Neal] treasurer, Godfrey de Lucy, Thomas de Husseburne, Jocelin archdeacon of Chichester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield, Hugh Bardulf and others.l

592 ' '[See also no. 582.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 635 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

593 Quitclaim by William fitz Robert to Thame Abbey in the county court of Buckinghamshire of the land of Shipton.

Let it be known to all present and future that I William fitz Robert and my heirs have quitclaimed to the church of St. Mary of Thame and the monks who serve God and St. Mary there whatever right we had in the land of Shipton, which is of the fee of [William I] de Ferrers, earl [of Derby] and that we have confirmed this by an oath in the full hearing of the county of Buckingham at Aylesbury for 100 s., which the aforesaid monks have given us therefore in the sight of the county of Buckingham at Aylesbury. Witnesses: William de Chilworth who at that time was sheriff of Buckingham, 1 Hamo fitz Meinfelin, Richard fitz Nigel and Hugh de Nuers.

594 Quitclaim by Ralph of Bristol to Thame Abbey in the county court of Oxfordshire of a hide in Norton.

Let it be known to those present and future that I Ralph of Bristol have, for the salvation of my soul and those of my ancestors and descendants, recognized, quitclaimed and foresworn in the full county court of Oxfordshire all my right in the hide which I held at Norton to God and the church of St. Mary of Thame and the monks who serve God there, which hide the aforesaid monks claimed to hold in their demesne in its entirety, with its appurtenances. I have also sworn that neither I nor my heirs or anyone else through us shall lay claim against the aforesaid monks to the aforesaid hide or its appurtenances and if anyone should make a claim, I shall do what I lawfully can to protect their right. And because I recognized, restored and confirmed this to the aforesaid monks without plea or expenses, they gave me 16 marks of silver. Witnesses: William de Chesney, William de Seacourt, Robert de Stanford, William fitz Henry, Hugh fitz William, Nicholas de Lewknor, Walter de Besthorpe and those who are mentioned in the preceding charter.

593 ' '[In the years under consideration two Williams occur in the Pipe Rolls as sheriffs of Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire, one is William fitz Richard and the other is William Rufus: either may have been "of Chilworthj.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 636 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

595 Notification by King Henry II that the controversy between the abbey of Saint-Wandrille and Jeremy de Ecclesfield concerning the rectory and a lay fee in Ecclesfield was terminated before him by Jeremy's quitclaim in return for a perpetual vicarage and certain other advantages. Henry, by God's grace king of the English, duke of the Normans and Aquitainians and count of the Angevins, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs and all his bailiffs and lieges, greeting. Know that the controversy which existed between the abbot and convent of Saint-Wandrille and the cleric Jeremy de Ecclesfield concerning the church of Ecclesfield and the chapels pertaining to that church, i.e. of Sheffield, Bradfield and Whiston, and concerning the lay fee which the said abbot had in Ecclesfield and the appurtenances, was terminated before me and with the grant and consent of the chapter of Saint-Wandrille between Abbot Geoffrey of that place and the aforesaid Jeremy, as follows. Jeremy has quitclaimed to the said abbot and convent the parsonage which he said he had in the said church and chapels and all the hereditary right which he claimed in the said abbot's lay fee in that same vill and the appurtenances. The abbot on the other hand with the consent of his convent granted the said Jeremy the perpetual vicarage of that church, viz. one third of the whole church and the chapels and all offerings and things and lands pertaining to it, in free, pure and perpetual alms and he also granted him to hold two thirds of the church and the chapels from him in farm for the rest of his life, with his whole lay fee in that same vill and the appurtenances, in tithes, rents, lands and all places and appurtenances, in their integrity, for 20 marks of silver per year, payable at Michaelmas. I therefore will and firmly order that the said convention and fine made between them before me shall be held firmly and unshaken. Witnesses: Bishop Hugh of Durham, Bishop John of Norwich, Earl William [III d'Aubigny] of Sussex, Ranulf de Glanvill, William de Humez the constable, Walter fitz Robert, Saher de Quinci, William Marshal, Geoffrey fitz Peter and Richard de Camville. At Geddington.1

595 1 [A.W. Douglas, "Frankalmoin and Jurisdictional Immunity, Maitland revisited", Speculum, liii (1978), 40-41.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 637 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

596 Final concord in the king's court between William de Cretingham and Philip de Columbers concerning land at Cretingham. Ranulf de Belleville, who was William de Cretingham's warrantor, loses his seisin by default, but Philip accepts William, who does homage to him in the king's court, against the payment of a lump sum of ten marks of silver and a yearly rent of five and a half marks of silver. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Winchester on the Tuesday before the octave of the apostles Peter and Paul in the 3 4 th year of King Henry II before Ranulfde Glanvill, Godfrey de Lucy, Hugh Bardulf, Geoffrey fitz Peter, Michael Belet, Robert de Wheatfield, Ralph de Arden and other lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between William de Cretingham and Philip son of Philip de Columbers concerning the whole land which Philip claimed against William in the court of the lord king in Cretingham and for which the said William vouched Ranulf de Belleville to warranty in the court of the lord king and of which the said Ranulf lost his seisin in the court of the lord king by default, and Philip recovered his seisin, i.e. that the said Philip granted to the said William and his heirs all the aforesaid land to hold from him and his heirs against the yearly payment of five and a half marks of silver on the following four terms, 18 s. 4 d. at Michaelmas and the same amount at Christmas, at Mid-Lent and on the feast of St. John the Baptist. And for this concord the said William gave the said Philip ten marks of silver and William became Philip's man in the court of the lord king.

597 Final concord in the king's court between William fitz Geoffrey and the prior of Twinham Christchurch and Walter de Lisle, his warrantor, concerning land in Freshwater, for which a recognition was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Winchester on the Sunday after the feast of St. Matthew the apostle in the 3 4 h year of the reign of King Henry II, before Hugh Bardulf, Ralph fitz Stephen, William Briewerre, Robert de Wheatfield, Matthew d'Escures, Roger fitz Everard [Richard Brito] archdeacon of Coventry, [Robert de Inglesham] archdeacon of Gloucester, the archdeacon of Dorset' and master Thomas de Husseburne, justices of the lord 597 ' '[Since Adelelm witnessed a deed of Bishop Jocelin of Salisbury who died in 1184 and since his successor William is mentioned in 1190, the archdeacon in our document can be either Adelelm or William (Le Neve, Fasti, ii. 637).] 0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 638 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

king, and other barons of the lord king who were then present there, between William fitz Geoffrey and the prior of Christchurch and Walter de Lisle, the prior's warrantor, concerning one hide of land in Freshwater which the aforesaid William claimed against the aforesaid prior as his right and inheritance and for which a recognition was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid William gave up all his right and claim, which he said he had, in the aforesaid land, for himself and his heirs to the aforesaid prior and his successors forever. And for this fine and concord the aforesaid prior and the aforesaid Walter, who warrants that land to the aforesaid prior, gave the aforesaid William 3 marks of silver.

598 Concord by fine of judicial combat in the county court of Staffordshire between Godfrey de Shobnall and Juliana de Shobnall concerning half a hide of land which Juliana claimed by royal writ to hold from the abbot of Burton. This is the concord by fine of combat' before Thomas Noel, sheriff in the county of Stafford, between Godfrey de Shobnall and Juliana de Shobnall concerning the half hide of land which Juliana claimed by writ of the lord king to hold from the abbot of Burton. The foresaid Juliana received one acre of the land in seisin and the rest of half a bovate of land remains to Godfrey for the rest of his life for the service due to Juliana, and for the foresaid Juliana's concession the foresaid Godfrey gave her twenty shillings. After the foresaid Godfrey's death Juliana shall have that land in fee and heredity for herself and her heirs. And the aforesaid Godfrey swore in the county court of Stafford that he would invent no trick or wicked contrivance through which Juliana herself or her heirs could lose this inheritance. Witnesses of this business are: Robert, the priest of Stapenhill, Ralph fitz Ernald, David de Caldwell, Philip de Burgh, Hugh Bagot, William de Samford and several others and the whole county court.

598 ' This is a very interesting example of a trial by wager of battle in the reign of Henry II, in the county court before the sheriff. Juliana had evidently transferred her suit into the county court by writ of right, and it would have been decided by a duel if the parties had not come to terms. The "duellum" was waged (vadiatum), but not fought (percussun). As the final concord was madefine duelli, the champions had appeared in the arena, and the duel had been stopped at the last moment by a compromise, which is drawn up in the above form. Thomas Noel was sheriff the last five years of the reign of Henry II.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 639 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

599 Final concord in the king's court between Abbot Robert and the monks of St. Mary at York and John fitz John concerning land in Fimber for which a recognition of mort d'ancestor was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at York on the Tuesday after the feast of St. Michael in the 3 4th year of the reign of King Henry II before Bishop Hugh of Durham, William de Stuteville, William fitz Audelin, master Roger Arundel, Peter de Ros, Geoffrey Haget and William Vavassur, then justices of the lord king, and other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between the abbot and monks of St. Mary of York and John fitz John concerning two carrucates of land in Fimber for which a recognition of mort d'ancestor was summoned between them in the court of the lord king by his writ and which two carrucates of land John, his father, gave to the abbey of St. Mary at York, viz. that the aforesaid John fitz John gave up for himself and his heirs to the aforesaid abbot and monks the aforesaid two carrucates of land in Fimber and all the right and claim which he claimed in them. And for this quitclaim the aforesaid abbot and monks gave the aforesaid John fitz John two marks of silver.

600 Final concord in the king's court between Peter fitz Peter of Oakerthorpe and Hugh the clerk concerning land in Wingfield, for which an assize of mort d'ancestor was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Nottingham on the Thursday after the feast of St. Luke the Evangelist in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of King Henry II before Geoffrey the bishop of Ely, Jocelin the archdeacon of Chichester, Geoffrey fitz Peter, Michael Belet, Nigel fitz Alexander, Robert de Hardres and Henry de Northampton, cleric, justices of the lord king and other barons and lieges of the lord king, who were then present, between Peter fitz Peter of Oakerthorpe and Hugh the cleric concerning twenty-five acres of land by the church of Wingfield, for which an assize of mort d'ancestor was summoned between them to recognize if Peter, the father of the aforesaid Peter, was seised in his demesne as of his fee of the twenty-five aforesaid acres of land on the day of his death and if he died after the first coronation of the lord king and if this Peter is his nearest heir. From these twenty-five acres of land eighteen will remain to the aforesaid Peter, who has granted forever for God and the salvation of his soul and those of his ancestors seven acres of land from the aforesaid twenty-five acres of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 640 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

land to God and the church of Wingfield, i.e. two acres with the tofts nearest to the church to the east and five acres to the north nearest to Ostona. And the aforesaid Peter remitted and quitclaimed in the church of Wingfield all right which he claimed to God and St. Mary of Derby and the canons who serve God there, for God and the salvation of his soul and those of his ancestors, etc.'

601 Final concord concerning the advowson of the church of Boxted between Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds and Robert of Coddenham, who had put himself on the king's assize.

the 600

This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster in 3 4 th year of the reign of King Henry II on the Saturday after the feast of All Henry II's 35th year began on 19 December 1188, and he died 6 July 1189. The date of this fine is somewhat curious since neither October 1188 nor October 1189 fell within Henry II's 3 5th year. Richard I's regnal year began on 3 September and 19 October 1189 falls within the first year (3 September 1189 to 3 September 1190). It is improbable that the judges or their clerk would assign a fine of October 1189 to Henry II's 3 5th year, and there are other reasons for regarding 20 October 1188 as the correct date. The Nottingham fine does not stand alone; four others made before the same group of justices in the month of November and likewise dated 35 Henry II are known, and others may come to light. (See Cott. Claud. D xii, fo. 150b, 7 November at Northampton; ibid. fo. 107,9 November at Northampton; Harl. 3688 fo. 174b, 18 November at Bedford; Cartularyof St. Frideswide,ii, p. 233,20 November at Bedford. Professor Stenton who has made a collection of final concords of the twelfth century kindly supplied me with these references.) The entry of the amercements arising out of this eyre on the Pipe Roll of I Richard I, covering the final months of Henry II's reign and the beginning of Richard's first year (Michaelmas 1188 to Michaelmas 1189), and made up Michaelmas 1189, raises a presumption that the eyre was concluded earlier than November 1189. The amercements resulting from the activities of other groups ofjudges known to have been visiting other parts of the country in 1188 are recorded on the same roll. The eyre which covered Nottingham, Northampton, Bedford and other counties in the N.E. Midlands probably closed at Bedford soon after 20 November since two of the judges, Geoffrey fitz Peter and Michael Belet were at Westminster 29 November 1188 (Cott. Galba E. ii, fo. 158b). If the justices before whom these fines were made had visited the N.E. Midlands so recently as October-November 1189, it is somewhat improbable that Northamptonshire, Bedfordshire and the other counties which had not been given to Count John in this region would have been visited again in the summer of 1190 even though the greater part of the country was subject to judicial visitations in that year (see Mrs Stenton's introduction to the Pipe Roll of 1191, P.R.S. New Series ii, pp. xxi seq.). In the autumn of 1189 Richard was busy preparing for his crusade and many of his ministers including some of the judges before whom the above-mentioned fines were made were in constant attendance upon him. Most of these judges who toured the N.E. Midlands in - we think - October and November 1188 were men closely associated with the exchequer and Mrs Stenton has suggested to me that they or their clerks may have dated the fines made before them by the exchequer year. Henry II's 35th year according to this reckoning began Michaelmas, 1188 whereas the regnal year began on 19 December 1188, and it will be observed that the fines in which this peculiarity of dating occurs fall between Michaelmas and December. '[See Stenton, Pleas, iii, p. lxxv.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 641 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Saints, before Bishop John of Norwich, Ranulfde Glanvill, Hubert [Walter], dean of York, Godfrey de Lucy, Richard [fitz Neal] the treasurer of the lord king, Ralph archdeacon of Hereford, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Ralph archdeacon of Colchester and other lieges of the lord king, who were present there, between the abbot of St. Edmunds and Robert de Coddenham, through Robert de Flamville, the abbot's seneschal, whom the abbot had put in his place in the court of the lord king to gain or to lose, concerning the advowson of the church of Boxted which the abbot claimed against Robert and for which Robert, who held that advowson, put himself on the assize of the lord king and requested a recognition, who of them had the greater right in that advowson, i.e. that the aforesaid Robert recognized that half that advowson belonged to the aforesaid abbot as his right and restored it to him and his successors quit of himself and his heirs and that the [other] half of that advowson remains quit to the aforesaid Robert and his heir forever. And for that concord the aforesaid abbot gave the aforesaid Robert 10 marks of silver.

602 Litigation between Ramsey Abbey and John Lestrange concerning the advowson of the church of Holme; final concord in the king's court; quitclaim by the abbot of Ramsey; grant by the bishop of Norwich of a rent payable by the parson of Holme to Ramsey. A. Final concord in the king's court between Abbot Robert of Ramsey and John Lestrange concerning the advowson of Holme, for which a grand assize was summoned and which is quitclaimed by the abbot. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on the Sunday after the feast of St. Martin in the 34th year of the reign of King Henry II before Bishop John of Norwich and Ranulf de Glanvill, justiciars of the lord king, and Godfrey de Lucy and Ralph archdeacon of Hereford and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present there, between the abbot of Ramsey and John Lestrange through master Herbert, whom the same abbot had made his attorney

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 642 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

in the court of the lord king to gain or to lose, concerning the advowson of the church of Holme, for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king and for which a grand assize was summoned. The abbot and convent of Ramsey have quitclaimed forever for themselves and their successors all right and claim which they had in that advowson to the aforesaid John and his heirs. And Bishop John of Norwich, with the consent of the aforesaid John Lestrange, gives and grants to the church of Ramsey one mark of silver per year to be received from the parson of the aforesaid church in the week of Easter, i.e. that whatever parson is presented in that church by John Lestrange shall pay the aforesaid mark every year at the aforesaid term to the aforesaid monastery for the aforesaid church.

B. Grant by Bishop John of Norwich of a rent, payable by the parson of the church of Holme to the abbot of Ramsey, who was involved in litigation with John Lestrange, patron of the said church. To all the faithful of Christ whom this written document will reach, John, bishop of Norwich,I greeting in the Lord. We want it to be generally known that, as there was a controversy between the venerable man Abbot Robert and the convent of Ramsey and the noble man John Lestrange concerning the advowson of the church of Holme, we have granted, compelled by the duties of our office and wanting to make peace between them for the sake of piety and with the agreement of John [Lestrange], patron of that same church, that the aforesaid abbot and convent shall forever receive from that same church one mark of silver per year, which the cleric, whomsoever the bishop will institute as parson in that church on the presentation of the aforesaid John or his heirs, shall pay every year to the abbot and convent for the aforesaid church, so that the abbot and convent shall not be entitled to claim anything else in that church. The aforesaid John and his heirs shall present a cleric to the bishop for that church whenever it is vacant. And to ensure perpetual stability to this our concession we have confirmed it with the present writing and by attaching our seal. Witnesses: Godfrey de Lucy, the archdeacons Ralph2 of Hereford, Ralph3 of Colchester and William of Totnes,4 Geoffrey the chaplain, master Lambert and master Walter de Calva.

602B

John of Oxford, bishop of Norwich, 1175 1200. 2 Ralph Foliot, archdeacon of Hereford. He died 1195.

Ralph was archdeacon of Colchester in 1186. He died 1190. There is no William archdeacon of Totnes in Le Neve's list.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 643 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

C. Quitclaim by Robert, abbot of Ramsey, of the advowson of the church of Holme to John Lestrange; thanks to a grant of Bishop John of Norwich the abbot will receive a rent from the parson of the said church. To all the faithful of Holy Church to whose notice the present writing will come, Robert, by the grace of God abbot of Ramsey, and the convent of that same place, eternal salvation in the Lord. We want it to be known to you all that the controversy which arose between us and the noble man John Lestrange concerning the advowson of the church of Holme, for which a grand assize was summoned in the court of the lord king at Westminster before Ranulf de Glanvill, Godfrey de Lucy and Ralph archdeacon of Hereford and many others, who were then present there, was settled by the following fine. For the good of peace we have quitclaimed forever all the right and claim which we had in that same church of Holme to that same John and his heirs and we have retained nothing for ourselves in that church, nor shall we be able in the future to claim anything in it for ourselves except for one mark of silver, which by the gift and confirmation of Bishop John of Norwich and the consent of the aforesaid John Lestrange we are to receive every year in the week of Easter from the cleric who has been instituted as parson in that church by the bishop of Norwich at the presentation of the aforesaid John Lestrange or his heirs. And to add strength to this document in the future we have added the force of our seal. Witnesses.

603 Richard of Ilchester, bishop of Winchester, informs the king's justices that at some time in the past he brought about an agreement between the church of Wells and Walerand de Wellesley and his wife and her sister, who had claimed the land of Biddisham by the king's writ. Richard, by God's grace bishop of Winchester, to the justices of the lord king, greeting, grace and the blessing of God. Know that when the church of Wells held the land of Biddisham, Walerand de Wellesley and his wife and his wife's sister claimed that land by writ of the lord king. I, however, made peace with them, gave a sum of money to one of the women and gave 20 solidates of land to Walerand and his wife, which their heirs still hold, and by this agreement they gave up all their right and claim which they said they had in that land and abjured it forever for themselves and their heirs. Farewell in the Lord.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 644 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

604 Thomas de Druval impleads the abbot of Eynsham by royal writ concerning the common pasture of Goring, claimed by the abbot, but, after the deraignment in the abbot's court and the recognition held by his own men, he restores it to the abbey. Be it known to all present and future that I Thomas de Druval summoned the abbot of Eynsham by a writ of the lord king concerning the common pasture of Goring, which he maintained to be entitled to and declared to have had in the time of King Henry, King Henry II's grandfather. And on the appointed day, because of the deraignment of his men and the recognition of mine, I have restored and granted the aforesaid pasture to the church of Eynsham fully and perpetually, in the wood and in the plain, free and quit of all exaction of custom. And since I have withheld it unjustly and have unjustly demanded customs for it, I have granted, in order to satisfy God and the aforesaid church, a grove near Appelhanger and an island close to the vill of South Stoke to the church in alms forever and also the service which Adam de Woodcote used to render to me for that grove and that island. All this I have done with the counsel and consent of my men and friends. Witnesses: Ralph Waleis, Hugh fitz Osbert, Hugh fitz Richer, Peter de Hughenden and William the knight.

605 Grant by Simon de Mans of the mill and various plots of land in Doddenham to his son William, who is given seisin in the shire court of Worcester.

Let those present and future know that I Simon de Mans, with the grant and consent of my son and heir Walter, have given and granted to my son William for his service and homage and have put him in seisin, in the full county court of Worcester, of the mill of Doddenham with all its appurtenances and of the land that used to belong to Gilbert de la Hay, the land that used to belong to Siward, the land of Alfred fitz Semer with all its appurtenances, the land which is called Hefurlong and the land which is called Lefdiacre, the land which is called Culfrefurlong and the whole pasture which lies next to the acre of the demesne. All this my aforesaid son William and his heirs shall hold freely, honourably and quietly and with all free customs from me and my heirs by hereditary right, against a yearly payment of one pound of pepper at the Nativity of St. Mary for all service

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 645 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

except royal service. And if this William were to die without children, I have granted this same donation to his brother Simon, whom William himself has appointed as his heir with my consent. And for this donation and grant William gave me one hawk and a gold ring and to my son and heir he gave a gold clasp. And to ensure that this my grant and donation shall forever remain valid and unshaken I have confirmed it by this writing and with the attachment of my seal. Witnesses: Robert Marmiun who at that time held the shire of Worcester,' Geoffrey Marmiun, John Puiher, William Puiher of Pirton, Henry Puiher, Walter de Kenswick, Alexander de Kenswick, William de la Mare, Gilbert de Hanley, William Drugell, Simon Puiher, Alan de Broadwas, Bernard the cleric, Robert Olifard, Nicholas de Broadway, Richard de Greenhill, Walter de Broadwas, Walter de Portes, Walter Haket, Samson Puiher and many others.

606 Final concord in the king's court between Stephen de Pimley and Walter, abbot of Lilleshall, concerning a wood in Hencott and Pimley, for which a plea of novel disseissin was moved. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Shrewsbury in the 3 5 th

year of the reign of King Henry II on the Wednesday after the purification of

St. Mary before Ralph de Arden, Maurice de Berkeley, William fitz Alan, Thomas Noel, Hugh Pantulf, master Robert of Shrewsbury, Robert de Haseley and Nicholas Brito, justices of the lord king and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present, between Stephen de Pimley and the abbot of Lilleshall, concerning a wood in Hencott and Pimley about which there was a plea of novel disseisin between them in the court of the lord king, namely that the said wood will serve their common easements by the view of the forester so that neither the abbot nor Stephen shall sell or give away anything from that wood, and if any waste has been caused either side will restore it. And the boundaries of this wood run from Scotebrug, through Sumergeld to Holeford and from Holeford through the oakwood that was marked long ago to Deorefaldand from Deorefaldto Choliereswa1, and so back to Scotebrug, and the wood contained within those boundaries is the wood about which there was a claim between the abbot and Stephen.

605 606

Robert Marmiun was sheriff of Worcestershire 1184 1188. O[R.W. Eyton, Antiquities ofShropshire, vi, 1858, pp. 368 369.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 646 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

607 Final concord in the county court of Wiltshire between Abbot Robert of Malmesbury and Jordan fitz Hugh who had claimed five virgates of land in Chelworth by royal writ. This is the final concord made at Devizes in the full county court of Wiltshire on the Thursday before the feast of St. Gregory in the 3 5 1h year of the reign of King Henry II before William of Salisbury, sheriff of Wiltshire,1 Roger fitz Everard, Robert Geresbert, James de Potterne, Roger Pipard, William de Percy, Miles Hose, William de Calne and other knights who were then present, between the abbot of Malmesbury and Jordan fitz Hugh concerning five virgates of land and appurtenances in Chelworth which this Jordan claimed against this abbot in the county court by a writ of the lord king, namely that [the aforesaid Jordan quitclaimed all right which] he had in the aforesaid five virgates of land and appurtenances in Chelworth, for two marks of silver which the aforesaid abbot gives him.

608 Final concord in the king's court at Westminster between the abbot of Sibton and Reginald Kote concerning a tax on the consumption of wine. Reginald who had disseised the abbot unjustly and without judgment recognizes that the said income belongs to the abbot and monks of Sibton, whereupon the abbot grants him the said casks of wine, to be held from him and his successors against a yearly payment of twelve shillings. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster in the 3 5 th year of the reign of King Henry II on the Thursday after the feast of St. Mark the Evangelist before Hubert, dean of York, William, archdeacon of Totnes, Geoffrey fitz Peter and Hugh Bardulf and William Rufus, the lord king's stewards, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Osbert de Glanvill, Michael Belet and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present, between the abbot of Sibton acting through brother Anketil his monk, whom he had put in his place in the king's court to gain or to lose, and Reginald Kote concerning all the casks of wine which were emptied at the fair of St. Botolph [in Boston], at the demesne court of the said Reginald and on the land which that Reginald had deraigned against Skypman in the vill of St.

607 ' '[William, earl of Salisbury, followed Hugh Bardulf (1187 1189) in the shrievalty of Wiltshire, see V.C.H. Wiltshire, v. 6.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 647 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Botolph, when the aforesaid abbot made a claim against Reginald as of the gift of Richard Pynzard. The abbot had complained that Reginald had disseised him thereof unjustly and without judgment so that there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king, where Reginald recognized that the fee of the aforesaid casks belonged to the aforesaid abbot and his monks and their successors, whereas the abbot granted and conceded to Reginald and his heirs all the casks, as mentioned before, which were emptied at the demesne court of Reginald, at the fair of St. Botolph and on the land which Reginald deraigned against Skypman in the vill of St. Botolph, to be held from the abbot and his monks against the yearly payment of 12 s. on St. Botolph's day. And the abbot and his successors shall warrant the fee of the aforesaid casks to Reginald and his heirs against everyone. And for this concord Reginald gave the abbot 4 marks of silver.

609 Final concord in the court of King Henry II at Gloucester, where a grand assize was summoned, between Ralph, abbot of Winchcombe, and Humphrey de Sherborne concerning land in Sherborne. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Gloucester in the 3 5 th year of the reign of King Henry 11 on the Thursday after the feast of St. Mark the Evangelist before Ralph de Arden, William fitz Stephen, William fitz Alan, Maurice de Berkeley. Hugh Pantulf, master Robert de Shrewsbury, Robert de Haseley and Nicholas Brito, justices of the lord king, and other lieges of the lord king who were then present there, between the abbot of Winchcombe and Humphrey de Sherborne concerning one hide of land in Sherborne, for which a grand assize was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, viz. that the whole aforesaid land remains forever with the aforesaid Humphrey and his heirs to be held from the abbot of Winchcombe and the convent of that place by the free services of 10 s. per year for all service that pertains to the abbot and the convent, saving all service to the lord king, to be paid at four terms per year, i.e. 30 d. at the feast of St. John the Baptist, 30 d. at the following feast of St. Michael, 30 d. at Christmas and 30 d. at the feast of St. Mary which is in March. And for this tenement Humphrey shall have a charter from the abbot and the aforesaid convent, for the greater confirmation of this concord.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 648 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

610 Final concord in the king's court between Hugh de Caillewey and John Eskeling concerning half a knight's fee in Aylworth, for which a grand assize was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Gloucester in the 35

th

year of the reign of King Henry II on the day of the apostles Philip and James

before Ralph de Arden, William fitz Stephen, William fitz Alan, Maurice de Berkeley, Thomas Noel, Hugh Pantulf, master Robert de Shrewsbury, Robert de Haseley and Nicholas Brito, justices of the lord king and other lieges who were then present, between Hugh de Caillewey and John Eskeling concerning half a knight's fee in Aylworth, for which a grand assize had been summoned between them in the court of the lord king, namely that the whole aforesaid fee remains forever to the aforesaid John and his heirs to be held from William de la Mare, who is the capital lord, and his heirs by the free service of half a knight. And for this concord John gave William de ]a Mare five marks of silver and Hugh de Caillewey eleven marks of silver.

611 A workman who has forged a false mould of the royal seal is condemned to be hanged, but reprieved and locked up in a monastery.

This piece of courtesy in our king I add to the rest, that it may be plain to all that even to those whom he disliked he observed mercy in his wrath. A clever workman had taken an impression of the king's seal in pitch and had made a copper seal so exactly like it that no one could see the difference. When this became known to the king, he ordered the man to be hanged: but he saw a venerable man, good and virtuous, the brother of the criminal, weeping with covered head, and was straightway overcome with pity, and made more account of the goodness of the virtuous man than of the villainy of the culprit, and with tears restored joy to the tearful one. However, when the thief was set free, he ordered him to be confined in a monastery, lest his pity should appear more indulgent than was right'

611 ' *[Translation taken from M.R. James, Walter Map's "De Nugis Curialium", London, 1923 (Cymmrodorion record series, no. ix), p. 270.]1

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 649 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

612 In the court of King Henry II Abbot Benedict of Peterborough establishes that his knights owe no more than four shillings per knight's fee in connection with the castle-guard at Rockingham. This same Abbot [Benedict] has deraigned at great cost and with immense labour in the court of the lord King Henry that the knights of the honour of Peterborough shall in time of peace not give more than 4 s. per knight's fee for the castle-guard at Rockingham. They used to be molested with great injuries and exactions for the said guard, for they always before gave half a mark and sometimes more according to the will of the constables, and it is therefore that he prudently protected the said knights against such exactions by a charter of King Richard.'

613 Grant to Kirkstead Abbey by Simon de Horbling of land in Reasby which had remained in his possession after a fine of duel with Walter of Welton.

To all sons of Holy Church present and future Simon de Horbling, greeting. Know that I have granted and given in pure and perpetual alms and by this my charter confirmed to God and the church of St. Mary of Kirkstead and the monks of that place one bovate of land in the fields of Reasby, namely that which remained in my hand when a concord was made between me and Walter of Welton concerning our duel. The monks shall have this bovate with one toft which belonged to Aldelin Little Fig and with all its appurtenances in and outside the vill in arable, meadows, roads, paths, moors and marshes with free entrances and exits and the common pasture in all the fields for their cattle and their sheep, with all the freedoms with which I used to hold it, against the annual payment to me and my heirs of two shillings only for all things, at the feast of St. Martin. And I and my heirs shall warrant the aforesaid to the monks against all men forever. I have pledged to maintain and warrant this my donation firmly in the hand of Robert the priest, the brother of Gilbert de Greetwell. Witnesses: this same Robert, William the parson of Snelland, Helto and William his brothers, Thomas the cleric of Snelland, Geoffrey fitz Bertram and Hugh de Merle.

612

'

°[V.C.H. Northamnptonshire, i. 295, 390-392, particularly concerning the de la Mare's as hereditary constables of the knights of Peterborough.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 650 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

614 On the occasion of a judgment given in favour of a poor man at the exchequer, Walter Map has a conversation with Ranulfde Glanvill about lay and ecclesiastical courts. Yet is there one place, the exchequer, in which money can do no miracles, for the glance of the just king seems ever to be fresh there. And thus it happened that after I had heard a concise and just judgment given against a rich man in favour of a poor one, I said to the lord Ranulf, the chief justice: "Although the poor man's judgment might have been put off by many quirks, he has obtained it by a happy and quick decision" "Certainly", said Ranulf, "we decide cases here much more quickly than your bishops do in their churches". "True", said I, "but if your king were as far off from you as the pope is from the bishops, I think you would be quite as slow as they" He laughed, and did not say no.

615 Dispute between Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds and master Jordan de Ros concerning land at Harlow as to whether is is a free fief of the church or not. With Ranulfde Glanvill's leave a recognition by twelve knights is held in the abbot's court and an agreement reached. A. The narrative in Jocelin of Brakelond's chronicle.

Afterwards a dispute arose between the abbot and the same Jordan concerning the land of Herard at Harlow', as to whether it was a free fief of the church or not. And when a recognition had been summoned to be made by twelve knights in the king's court, it was, by leave of Ranulf de Glanvill, held in the abbot's court at Harlow; and the recognitors swore that they had never known that land to be separated from the church, but that nevertheless it owed the abbot the same service that was owed by the land of Eustace and certain other lands of laymen in the same township. At length they came to an agreement on the following terms: master Jordan in full court recognised that the land was a lay fief and that he had no claim therein, save by grace of the abbot; and he shall hold that land all the days of his life, on an annual payment of twelve pence to the abbot in lieu of all services. 2 614

' '[Translation taken from M.R. James, Walter Map's "De Nugis Curialium", London, 1923

(Cymmrodorion record series, no. ix), p. 277.10 615A ' See Appendix M [ =BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 149-150.] 2 0[Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron. 62.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 651 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

B. The chirograph of the agreement between Abbot Samson and Jordan de Ros. A dispute arose concerning the land which Erard held in the township of Harlow between Abbot Samson and master Jordan de Ros, the parson of the church, who claimed that land to be a free fief of the church. On this the abbot asked a writ of recognition and twelve recognitors were nominated who, however, received leave from the justice of the lord king to let that recognition take place in the court of Harlow, by the same recognitors. Thus it was done before the hundred in the churchyard of Harlow and the oath taken and the verdict heard and a triple chirograph made of which the abbot had one and Jordan de Ros the other and Michael the reeve of the hundred the third, whose text was the following. This is the verdict recognized on the land which Erard held and for which a controversy arose between the abbot of St. Edmunds and Jordan de Ros. They say that that land and the church of Harlow were in their days never separated, but whoever held one held the other, but that the parson held that land owing the same service to the king as the land of Maurice and the land of Eustace towards the king, and towards the abbot he is held for 40 acres of land in all sorts of services. These are thejurors: Eutropius de Merth', Ambrose de Parndon, William de Muchegros, Walter de Hatfield, Osbert de Mathle, Roger de Swythsand, Clement de Parndon, Robert de Parndon, Baldwin and Odo de Parndon, Ralph the cleric of Harlow and Geoffrey de Harlow. Afterwards, however, Jordan de Ros recognized in the full court at St. Edmunds that that land was a lay fee and it was granted to him to hold for his lifetime by the service of 12 d.1

616 William de la Mare testifies that he was present at Gloucester when Roger de Beovill quitclaimed in the county court land which he had claimed by royal writ against the canons of St. Augustine's, Bristol.

William de la Mare to all present and future who will receive this document, greeting. Know that I was present at Gloucester where Roger de Beovill abjured in

615B ' '[Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, 91-92, 327.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 652 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the full county court two virgates of land, which he claimed by a writ of the lord king against the canons of St. Augustine's of Bristol in Ashleworth, before William fitz Stephen, then sheriff of Gloucester and where he gave back the writ of the lord king into the hand of the foresaid sheriff before the whole county and quitclaimed all his right to the canons for six marks of silver, which they gave him so that he will warrant that land to them against his whole family, if anyone should move a claim against them.

617 Final concord and quitclaim before the barons of the exchequer by Nicholas son of Turold to Abbot Alvred of Abingdon of the advowson of the church of Winterbourne, after an assize of darrein presentment has been summoned. A. A first version in a cartulary of Abingdon. Be it known to those present and future that I Nicholas son of Turold have given and quitclaimed forever for me and my heirs to God and the church of St. Mary of Abingdon and the abbot and monks who serve God there all my right and claim, which I have said I had in the advowson of the church of Winterbourne, for which a recognition was summoned in the court of the lord king, where peace was made amongst us before the barons of the exchequer, as is contained in the chirograph which was made between us in the foresaid court. Furthermore I confirm by the present charter the tithe of my demesne of Chilton, which I have given to the aforesaid church in perpetual alms, namely in the grain that is to be received at the gate of my grange and in cheeses and hides, lambs and young pigs and everything that is subject to the tithe. Witnesses etc.

B. Another version in the same cartulary. This is the final concord etc. between Abbot Alvred of Abingdon and Nicholas son of Turold concerning the advowson of the church of Winterbourne, for which a recognition was summoned on the presentation of the parson who last died there, namely that the foresaid Nicholas gave and quitclaimed forever for himself and his heirs all right and claim which he said he had in the advowson of the foresaid church to the church of Abingdon and the abbot and monks who serve God and Holy Mary there forever.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 653 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

618 In a letter of 1189 to Subprior Geoffrey and his associates the monks of Christ Church Canterbury describe a meeting between Archbishop Baldwin and Adam de Charing, at which the sacrist of the cathedral recalled a trial by battle in Hollingbourne. We are not yet in full possession of the court of our men. We addressed the archbishop on this matter, who called Adam de Charing and asked him how this used to be, but he replied that there were older knights in the province who might be well informed. To this the sacrist said: "Fie! What do you say? Have you not seen and been present at Hollingbourne where two rustics fought a duel before me because of a theft and I had the loser hanged, as justice of the convent? And you yourself have very often pleaded in our court". Nevertheless the matter is postponed.'

619 Inquisition held in 1189 of the manors of Glastonbury containing, inter alia, some information on claims made by Richard Cotele, a vassal, against his lord, the abbot. Richard Cotele did homage and fealty. At Camerton he holds 6 hides and a half, at Glastonbury 3 dwellings, at East Brent the right of the castellan, at Domerham I hide, at Doulting I virgate, at Ure in the New Forest I virgate, at Mells 1 pasture and 1 wood, at Radenhurst in the manor of Deverell 1 pasture; he does not know how much it amounts to in hides. All this he holds by the service of one knight and if the lord requires it, he shall be constable. And he says that he has put everything in his duel, but the abbot claims it for his recognition and the court has said against Richard that he has taken five pounds of silver per year from Camerton after the duel, to the detriment of the abbey.

620 Final concord in the king's court at Westminster concerning the advowson of the church of Bekesbourne between Eustace de Burnes and William de Bec; the latter relinquishes his claim. 618 ' '[See Urry, Canterbury, 180-181.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 654 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

A. The final concord. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Westminster on the Tuesday before the feast of St. Peter's Chair in the first year of the reign of King Richard before the Bishops Hugh of Durham, William of Ely and Hugh of Coventry, and Roger fitz Reinfrid, Robert de Wheatfield, master Thomas de Husseburne and the other barons and lieges of the lord king who were then present, between Eustace de Burnes and William de Bec concerning the plea that existed between them on the advowson of the church of Bekesbourne in the court of the lord king, which William claimed against Eustace in such a way that William and his heirs quitclaim to Eustace and his heirs the whole advowson of the aforesaid church of Bekesbourne forever without any claim or demand. And for this quitclaim Eustace gave William a hundred shillings sterling.

B. The charter by which William de Bec relinquishes his claim. To all sons of Holy Mother Church William de Bec, greeting. I want it to be known to everybody that the charters which had previously been made concerning Bekesbourne and the advowson of the church there and were granted by the hand of my father Hugh de Bec and by my own to the church of Holy Trinity at Hastings and the Hospitallers and all other places except the church of Saint Gregory at Canterbury were not granted reasonably but unjustly. Indeed, neither my father nor my mother ever had any right of advowson in the aforesaid church of Bekesbourne, therefore they could not reasonably give to someone else what was not theirs. Nor could I, who believed that I had some right in the advowson of the aforesaid church, reasonably give it away, as there has always been litigation concerning the right of advowson between me and Eustace de Burnes until I appeared in the court of King Richard in the first year of his reign and finally quitclaimed whatever right in the church of Bekesbourne I had claimed and was believed to have, to Eustace and his heirs in my own name and that of my heirs with a chirograph in the court of the lord king before Bishop William of Ely, the lord king's chancellor, and before the other justices. And as the aforesaid Eustace and Robert his father had at some time in the past given the church of Bekesbourne to the canons of St. Gregory, whom I often and unjustly vexed concerning this same church, I having repented and asking forgiveness for this unjust vexation, have faithfully promised before God and the church that I would in the future no more vex them on this matter. And to ensure that the canons of Saint Gregory shall forever have and possess the church of Bekesbourne freely and quietly I have given up all right which I may have had in it at some time and as far as I and my heirs are

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 655 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

concerned I have granted it all to them to possess freely and quietly forever for me and my heirs. And in order that this my charter and what it contains shall forever be valid and firm, I have corroborated and strengthened this my charter with my seal. Witnesses: Peter the chaplain, Richard the priest, Roger de Faversham, Ralph de Faversham, Theobald de Sartrino, John de Hackington and many others.

621 Final concord in the court of King Richard I between Thorney abbey and Richard fitz Robert and Margaret his wife concerning the advowson of the church of Tydd. This is the final concord made at Westminster in the court of the lord King Richard in the first year of his reign on the eleventh day of April before the Bishops William of Ely, Richard of London and Gilbert of Rochester, Archdeacon Herbert of Canterbury, Archdeacon Jocelin of Chichester, Roger fitz Reinfrid, Hugh Bardulf, Robert de Wheatfield and Thomas de Husseburne and other barons of the lord king, who were then present, between the abbot and convent of Thorney on the one hand and Richard fitz Robert and his wife Margaret on the other, concerning the church of Tydd on which there was a plea in the court of the lord king, viz. that the aforesaid Richard fitz Robert and his wife Margaret quitclaimed forever the church of Tydd with all its appurtenances to the abbot and convent of Thorney in free and pure alms, for the salvation of their souls and those of their ancestors and descendants. And the aforesaid abbot and convent granted them to partake forever in all the prayers and advantages in their monastery and that the clerics who shall for the time being serve the aforesaid church shall render them the honour and reverence to which patrons are entitled on the part of clerics, the presentation of parsons, however, being reserved for the aforesaid abbot and convent.'

621 1 '[This final concord was preceded by litigation in church courts, before the bishop of Lincoln and papal judges delegate, of which two papal documents have survived: a letter of Clement III of 4 January 1188 (HOLTZMANN Papsturkunden,iii. nr. 402, p. 502) and a letter of the same pope of 15 March 1189 (op. cit., iii, nr. 412, pp. 511-512). It appears that Margaret, wife of Richard fitz Robert, was a daughter of William de Ros (d. 1190), who had founded the church of Tydd together with Roger II, earl of Montgomery (last mentioned in 1162, cfr. Sanders, English baronies,29). The monks maintained that the church had been granted to them with all the rights pertaining to it, through the mediation of Bishop Robert de Chesney of Lincoln (1148-1166), whereas Richard fitz Robert maintained that they had only received an annual revenue and that 0 all the rights in the church had fallen to him as son-in-law of one of the founders.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 656 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

622 Concord in the portmoot of Oxford between William son of Fulk and Richard cousin of Segar about land which had belonged to Wigot the cordwainer near the Northgate of Oxford and land which had belonged to Fulk the lorimer. This is the concord made by way of fine between William son of Fulk and Richard cousin of Segar concerning land which belonged to Wigot the cordwainer, near the Northgate of Oxford and land which belonged to Fulk the lorimer, for which there was a plea between them, i.e. that William son of Fulk and Reiner his brother claimed the land which used to belong to the aforesaid Wigot the cordwainer free and quit to the aforesaid Richard and his wife Belsanta, their sister, and to their heirs, as the aforesaid William and his brother Reiner, together with their mother Matilda, gave the aforesaid land to the aforesaid Richard in free dowry with their sister Belsanta. The aforesaid Richard quitclaimed to William son of Fulk and his heirs the land which used to belong to Fulk the lorimer, free of the gage which William had given him. Furthermore the aforesaid Richard gave to the aforesaid William son of Fulk two marks of silver and a tunic and cloak as a premium. And if the aforesaid Richard and Belsanta his wife were to die without heir, the land which used to belong to Wigot would revert to William son of Fulk as his heredity. And if William son of Fulk and his brother Reiner were to die without heir, the land which used to belong to Fulk the lorimer, their father, would revert to the aforesaid Richard and his wife Belsanta and their heirs as their heredity. This concord was made in the portmoot of Oxford when Laurence fitz Harding and Henry fitz Segrim were reeves and John Kepeharm and Lambert son of Tovi were aldermen, who are witnesses of the agreement. And this concord was made before Nigel the dean, William fitz Ralph then bailiff of Osney, William fitz Sueting, Thomas fitz Eilric, Augustine fitz Geoffrey, master Edmund the physician, Robert Hoser and William de Graundpount. And other witnesses were Segar the merchant and his son John, William Pilet, Turald the cordwainer, John fitz Eilnod and his brothers Benedict and William, Gilbert fitz Burewold and his brother Roger, William fitz Godwin, Lambert the cordwainer, Walter the cordwainer, Ralph Petit, Adam fitz Segrim, John fitz Ranulf fitz )Elfwig and Robert fitz Wimarc.

623 Simon II de Beauchamp confirms the sale in his court of land in Ravensden by Eudo son of Ralph Engaine to Wardon Abbey.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 657 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Simon de Beauchamp, to all sons of Holy Church, greeting. Be it known to you that I have granted and by the present charter confirmed to God and St. Mary [de Sartis] and all saints and the monks who serve God there the donation and sale which Eudo son of Ralph Engaine made to them, viz. 15 acres in the field of Ravensden which is called Benefield in perpetual alms, free and quit of all earthly service, custom and every sort of exaction by the king, lords and all other men. Let it be known that Eudo has made this donation and sale to them before me and my barons in my court at Bedford and that the monks gave him four and a half marks of silver for it. The aforesaid Eudo pledged to hold this transaction loyally and to warrant it firmly in the hand of William de Alneto, and afterwards he offered it on the main altar in our presence. Witnesses: Ralph Mansel and Geoffrey Loerenc and his brother John.

624 William fitz Richard and Amfrid his brother give to the priory of St. Frideswide at Oxford in free alms land which Sadwin and his wife have deraigned in the court of St. Frideswide and sold to them. To all sons of Holy Mother Church etc. William fitz Richard and Amfrid his brother, greeting. Know that we have granted for the love of God etc. to God and the church of St. Frideswide of Oxford and the canons etc. in free and pure and perpetual alms all that land which we held from the church of St. Frideswide, viz. the land which belonged to William Maloisel, against the payment of 5 s. per year, which land was deraigned by Sadwin and his wife in the court of St. Frideswide and sold to us in course of time. The following arrangement was made. I William have granted my part, i.e. half that land to the aforesaid church, so that I shall hold that my part as long as I live against the customary rent of 30 d. and that after my death the aforesaid land, being my part, shall immediately come into the hands of the prior and canons without anyone's contradiction or reclamation, so that half the revenue above the usual rent shall be paid to my wife Matilda for the rest of her life and after her death my aforesaid half shall forever remain free and quit to the said church. And I Amfrid, brother of the said William, have similarly granted my part of that land which I held from the said canons to the said church, paying the aforesaid canons for it the usual yearly service of 30 d. as long as I live and after my death my aforesaid part shall forever and fully remain to the aforesaid church, free and quit. And so that ..

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 658 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

625 Quitclaim in the hallmoot of Eakring by Robert Starrlett and his wife of land there to Rufford Abbey.

Let it be known to all the faithful who will see or hear this writing that I Robert Starrlett and my wife Beatrice have, in the presence of our lord Roger de la Hay and our lady Matilda de Hereford, his wife, and before the hallmoot of Eakring, declared two bovates of land in the territory of Eakring with all their appurtenances in the wood and in the plain, in toft and croft, in meadows and pastures, in assarts and all other easements, to be forever free and quit of all claim from us and our heirs in favour of the monks of Rufford, i.e. as they used to belong to Ougrim, formerly the forester of Walter de Ghent, and which we have restored before the hallmoot in the hands of our lord Roger de la Hay and Matilda de Hereford, his wife, by a wooden rod. For this grant the monks have given to me Robert one cap and to my wife one cow. Moreover, the monks have granted that we can hold from them during our lifetime the toft belonging to the aforesaid land against the yearly payment of only 4 d. on the feast of St. Botolph, and after our death the aforesaid toft will be left free and quit to the monks. All this we have confirmed to be held firmly in the hand of our lord Roger de la Hay and we have had the seal of that same Roger attached to this our charter in testimony. Witnesses: Cog de Carlton and others.

626 Sale and quitclaim of land by Reginald de Wall to the abbey of Cirencester: oath before the hallmoots of Cirencester and Wall.

Be it known to all whom this document will reach that I, Reginald de Wall, son of William Rufus, have spontaneously and on my own initiative sold forever halfa virgate of my land in Wall to Abbot Richard and the convent of Cirencester with the consent of my wife and my heirs for twenty-two shillings and one cart-load of wheat, and the other half virgate I will hold from the house of Cirencester for six pence. And to ensure that this sale shall be valid and unshaken in the future I have confirmed it by means of an oath and the placing of a seal before the hallmoot of Cirencester and the hallmoot of Wall at Cirencester. And by the same oath I have quitclaimed whatever right and claim I said that I and my heirs had in Wall and Elmstone, as I had previously abjured when I acquired that virgate from the aforesaid house, this is also testified by a chirograph that was previously made

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 659 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

between me and the aforesaid house. This sale was made in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1191 on the 3 0 th of April at Cirencester. Witnesses etc.'

627 Upon the death of Robert de Cockfield, his son Adam claimed the half hundred of Cosford by hereditary right. The abbot admits that Adam's father Robert was allowed to hold it for his lifetime but strongly denies that he had any hereditary right. An agreement is reached in the sense that Adam de Cockfield renounces any right in the hundred and that the abbot confirms him in his other lands. Robert de Cockfield having died, his son Adam came and with him his kinsfolk, Earl Roger Bigod and many other great men, soliciting the abbot concerning the holdings of the aforesaid Adam and more especially concerning the holding of the half hundred of Cosford for an annual rent of a hundred shillings, on the ground that it was his by hereditary right; for they said that his father and grandfather had held it for eighty years past and more. But the abbot, when he got a chance to speak, put two fingers against his two eyes and said: "May I lose these eyes on that day and in that hour, when I grant any hundred to be held by hereditary right, unless the king, who has power to take away my abbey and my life, should force me to do so". And then setting forth the reason for what he had said, he continued: "If any man should hold a hundred by hereditary right, and should commit an offence against the king of such a kind that he ought to be disinherited, the sheriff of Suffolk and the king's bailiffs would forthwith seize the hundred and exercise their power within our bounds; and if they had the custody of that hundred, the liberty of the eight and a half hundreds would be in peril". And then, turning to Adam, he said: "If you, who claim to be the heir of that hundred, should take to wife some free woman, who held at least one acre of land as tenant in chief of the king, the king after your death would seize your entire holding and the wardship of your son, if he were under age; and so the bailiffs of the king would enter into St. Edmund's hundred, to the prejudice of the abbot. Moreover, your father acknowledged to me that he claimed no hereditary right to the hundred, and because his service was acceptable to me, I permitted him as a reward of his merits to hold it all the days of his life" When he had said this, a large sum of money was offered to the abbot, but he could not be moved either by bribe or entreaty. At length they came to an agreement on the following terms: Adam renounced the 626 ' Wall forms part of Aldsworth, Gloucs.; 'Eilmundeston' is now known as Elmstone Hardwick, near Cheltenham.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 660 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

right' in the hundred which he alleged that he possessed, and the abbot confirmed to him all his other lands; but no mention was made of our township of Cockfield, nor is it thought that he has any charter for it: Semer and Groton he will hold for 2 his lifetime.

628 Notification by Hubert Walter, bishop of Salisbury, of the result of an inquest held by the knights, the freemen and the hundred of Sherborne concerning the land of North Wootton. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Hubert by the grace of God bishop of Salisbury, greeting in the Lord. Know you all that it was recognized by the inquisition, which we made through knights and freemen and all our hundred of Sherborne, that the land of Wootton, held by Walter Despenser was and is of the free escheat of the bishopric of Salisbury and not of the demesne of the bishopric and that our predecessor Jocelin of good memory was well at liberty to give it as his free escheat. Therefore we hold the gift of our venerable predecessor Bishop Jocelin of Salisbury, which he made to the aforesaid Walter and his heirs as his charter testifies, for valid and we confirm it by the present document and the attachment of our seal. Witnesses: Hugh abbot of Reading etc.

629 Deraignment against William de Lisours by Benedict, abbot of Peterborough, of a purpresture made by Fulk de Lisours, William's father, upon the abbey's manor of Oundle.

627

In 1192 Adam in an assize of mort d'ancestor before the king's justices at Westminster renounced his claim to the half hundred of Cosford, and the abbot confirmed to him certain hereditaments held of the abbey, and leased to him Semer and Groton for life (Pipe Rolls, Norf., Suff., 2 Rich. I). '[This information is not to be found in the Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I.]1

'[There are other texts throwing light on the Bury tenures of the Cockfield family, i.e. an appendix on various transactions from the time of King Stephen onwards (BURY ST. EDMUNDS

Chron., 138-139), a plea in the king's court at Tewkesbury in 1201 and an assize of mort d'ancestor (BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 123-124; CURIA REGis ROLLS, i. 430.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 661 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

This [Abbot Benedict] built New Place1 which was a purpresture by Fulk de Lisours, who was chief forester, upon his manor of Oundle and which he deraigned by a plea against William de Lisours. And all that belongs to New Place, i.e. 9 carrucates of arable land with the woods of Sewardsley and Frindshaw and everything that by law belonged to the church of Peterborough in those parts he manfully kept or justly recovered by pleas or weapons, and many have seen him armed in that acquisition.2

630 The monks of Bury St. Edmunds complain to their abbot about encroachments by the burgesses in the market-place and ask that they should be disseised. The abbot declares that he cannot disseise them without a judgment. The burgesses offer a financial settlement to the monks, which they refuse and the matter rests there for a few years. Finally the abbot confirms the liberties of the burgesses, so that the financial settlement never materialises. In the tenth year' of the abbacy of Abbot Samson, by the common counsel of our chapter, we complained to the abbot in his court, saying that the revenues and expenditure of all good towns and boroughs in England were growing and increasing to the profit of their possessors and for the good of their lords, save only in this town, which pays us forty pounds and never more; and that the burgesses2 of the town were the cause of this, for they held so many and such great encroachments in the market-place, in respect of shops, booths and stallage 3, without the assent of the convent and at the sole gift of the reeves of the town, who were the annual tenants4 and, as it were, the sergeants of the sacrist, removable from office at his good pleasure. But the burgesses on being summoned replied that 629 1 '[New Place or Biggin Grange, now Biggin Hall in Benefield, formerly in Oundle, cf. J.E.B. Gover, A. Mawer and F.M. Stenton, Place-Names of Northamptonshire, Cambridge, 1933, 212.]2 o[V.C.H. Northamptonshire, iii. 89 90.10 630 ' 1192 '[However, Knowles, Heads, 32 makes clear that Samson's first year was from 28 February 1182 till 27 February 1183, so that his tenth year was 28 February 1191-27 February 1192.]o 2

The exact status of the burgesses is obscure. They may correspond to the 118 men ad victum monachorum, who could give or sell their land (DB f. 372). The town had greatly increased since then, but as late as 1327 there were haggovele tenants who were not exempt from toll and probably not burgesses (Mem. iii. p. 306 o[= BURY ST. EDMUNDS Memorials]';L p. 50 o[ = M.D. Lobbel, The Borough of St. Edmunds, Oxford, 1935]o), although technically freeholders. stalagia normally means 'stall rents', though here it may perhaps mean stalls. The passage suggests the possibility that the shops and stalls had become permanent buildings and that rent

was either evaded or inadequate; see L p. 48. 4

i.e. they are responsible for paying the fixed rent of £40 mentioned above.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 662 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

they were in the king's assize5 and refused to answer a claim which contravened their liberties and charters in respect of the holdings which they and their fathers had held in comfort and in peace for a year and a day without any claim upon them; and they said that it had been the custom from of old that the town-reeves should, without consulting the convent, grant places for shops and booths in the market-place for a sum to be paid to them every year. But we protested and desired that the abbot should disseise them of such holdings, for which they had no warrant. The abbot, however, coming to our council, as if he had been one of us, said to us in secret that he desired that we should keep our rights in so far as he could secure them, but that he was bound to proceed in accordance with the law, and that without a judgment of the court he could not disseise free men of their lands or revenues which, justly or unjustly, they had held for a number of years; if he did so disseise them, he would fall under the king's mercy by assize of the realm. The burgesses therefore, taking counsel, offered the convent a revenue of a hundred shillings for a peaceful settlement, and that they might keep their holdings as they were accustomed to do. But we refused to agree to this, preferring to postpone our suit, in the hope that perchance in the time of some other abbot we might recover all or change the place of the market; and so the matter was put off for several years. But when the abbot had returned from Germany 6 , the burgesses offered him sixty marks and asked that he should confirm the liberties of the town in the same form of words in which his predecessors, Anselm, Ording and Hugh had confirmed them; and Abbot Samson graciously granted their request. And though we murmured and grumbled, a charter was given to them as he promised, and since it would put him to shame and confusion, if he could not fulfil his promise, we were unwilling to gainsay him or provoke him to anger. But the burgesses, once they had got the charter 7 of Abbot Samson and the convent, had even greater confidence that they would never, so long as Samson was abbot, lose their holdings or their liberties; and for this reason never again were they willing to give or offer the aforesaid revenue of a hundred shillings. But the abbot, at last taking note of this, spoke to the burgesses on the matter, saying that, unless they made their peace with the convent, he would forbid them to build booths at the market of St. Edmund. They, however, replied that they were willing every year to give a silken cope or some other ornament worth the hundred shillings which they had formerly promised, yet only on this condition, that they should be quit in

They had charters from previous abbots and threatened to appeal to royal justice, if their privileges were questioned. They claim prescription as having held their tenements for a year and a day. 6 '[In June 1193, see above.]' 7 This charter °[= BURY ST. EDMUNDS Kalendar,no. 1,pp. 75-7610 is virtually a repetition of that granted by Anselm. See FD p. 1140[= BURY ST. EDMUNDS Feudal Docs., no. 113, pp. 114-115 (our no. 295).]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 663 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

perpetuity of the tithing pence8 which the sacrist exacted with such harshness. But the abbot and the sacrist refused, and so the suit was once more postponed; and even to this day we have lost those hundred shillings, as the proverb says: "He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay" 9

631 Final concord in the king's court between Nicholas fitz William and Abbot Richard of Cirencester after a recognition of mort d'ancestor was summoned. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Oxford on the Friday after the feast of St. Matthew the apostle in the sixth year of the reign of King Richard before William de Sainte-M~re-Eglise, Robert abbot of Malmesbury, Richard de Herriard, Ralph of Arden, master Thomas de Husseburne, master John de Bridport and master Gervase of Newbury, justices of the lord king, who were then present, between Nicholas fitz William, the plaintiff, and the abbot of Cirencester, the tenant, concerning a toft in Rothwell with the appurtenances, which Wulfric held and for which a recognition ofmort d'ancestor was summoned between them in the court of the lord king, i.e. that the aforesaid Nicholas quitclaimed for himself and his heirs to the aforesaid abbot and his successors all his right and claim which he had in the aforesaid land forever. And for this quitclaim and concord the abbot gave Nicholas ten shillings sterling.

632 Final concord in the king's court between Edith de Leigh, who brought a writ of mort d'ancestor, and Prior Senatus of Worcester cathedral concerning land at Broadwas. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Worcester on the Sunday after the feast of St. Matthew the apostle in the 6 thyear of the reign of King Richard, before Bishop William of Hereford, Hugh Bardulf, Richard of the Peak, Simon de Pattishall, Hugh de Chacombe and Robert de Haseley, justices, and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present there, between Edith de Leigh, who was claiming for herself and put in the place of William the smith her They demand relief from the sacrist's rigorous exaction of tithing pence at view of frankpledge. '[It is not clear to us on what ground the editor connects the ten percent of the payment demanded by the sacrist with the view of frankpledge.] 0 9 [McGuire, The case of Jocelin, 386.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 664 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

husband, to gain or to lose, and the prior of Worcester, tenant, concerning half a virgate of land with its appurtenances in Broadwas, for which there was a plea between them in the court of the lord king by writ of mort d'ancestor, viz. that the aforesaid Edith gave up to him forever all her claim and all the right which she had in the aforesaid half virgate in Broadwas for her and her heirs. And for this quitclaim the prior gave the said Edith two marks sterling.'

633 Final concord in the king's court between Prior Senatus of Worcester cathedral, called to warranty by Alelm de Grimley, defendant in an assize of mort d'ancestor, and Avice and Goldiva, plaintiffs, concerning lands in Grimley and other places. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord king at Worcester on the Sunday after the feast of St. Matthew the apostle in the sixth year of the reign of King Richard before Bishop William of Hereford, Hugh Bardulf, Richard of the Peak, Simon de Pattishall, Hugh de Chacombe and Robert de Haseley, justices and other lieges of the lord king, who were then present there, between the sisters Avice and Goldiva, plaintiffs, and the prior of Worcester, whom Alelm de Grimley had called to warranty, concerning the appurtenances of half a virgate of land in Grimley, for which an assize of mort d'ancestor was summoned between the aforesaid women, the sisters Avice and Goldiva, and the said Alelm in the aforesaid court, viz. that the prior recognized and granted to the aforesaid sisters Avice and Goldiva that all the land which Richard Rudduc, their father, held in Worcester beyond the Severn and all the land, with the meadow, which this Richard held in Moseley,' Simbatenhill, Rampaleya, Sifurdeleia, Sebrondescroft, Bromcroft, Tortemedua and Maneshale, belong to the right and heredity of the aforesaid sisters Avice and Goldiva and are to be held by them and their heirs forever from the prior and his successors for 10 s. per year, payable for all service on four terms, i.e. at Michaelmas 30 d., on the feast of St. Andrew 30 d., at the Annunciation of St. Mary 30 d. and at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist 30 d. 632

633

'

On the seven groups of itinerant justices who visited almost the whole of England in September, 1194, see PipeRoll 7 RichardI, ed. D.M. Stenton (Pipe Roll Soc., N.S. VI) xviii-xxii. One group visited Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Staffordshire and Shropshire. The Worcestershire entry in the Pipe Roll refers to William bishop of Hereford, Hugh Bardulf and their colleagues. William bishop of Hereford is mentioned in the entries relating to all five counties, Hugh Bardulf in the Gloucestershire and Shropshire entries as well as under Worcestershire, Richard Peche is mentioned in the Herefordshire and Gloucestershire entries, Simon de Pattishall in the Herefordshire, Gloucestershire and Shropshire entries, and Robert de Haseley occurs in the Herefordshire entry only. Hugh de Chacombe (at this time sheriff of Staffordshire) is not named as a justice in the Pipe Roll. '[See Stenton, Pleas, iii, p. c.]0 Moseley in Grimley.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 665 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

634 A case is heard in the hundred court of Risbridge, in the liberty of St. Edmunds Bury, between Richard, earl of Clare, who demands a yearly payment of five shillings for the hundred of Risbridge, and Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds, who denies owing any payment. No decision is reached and the affair is put off. A general summons was made in the hundred of Risbridge that the complaint and claim of the earl of Clare might be heard at Wickhambrook. 2 He himself came surrounded by a throng of barons and knights, Earl Aubrey and many others supporting him; and he said that his bailiffs gave him to understand that they used formerly to receive five shillings a year on his behalf from the hundred and its bailiffs, but that now this sum was unjustly denied them; and he alleged that his predecessors at the time of the conquest of England had been enfeoffed of the land of Alfric the son of Withar, who was once the lord of that hundred.3 But the abbot, consulting his own good and yielding no ground, made answer: "My lord earl, I marvel at your words. Your claim fails! King Edward gave this hundred to St. Edmund in its entirety and confirmed his gift by charter, and there is no mention therein of those five shillings. You must tell me for what service or cause you demand these five shillings". And the earl, after consulting his friends, replied that it was his duty to carry the standard of St. Edmund in the army, and that it was for this that the five shillings were due to him. And the abbot made answer: "In truth five shillings is but a paltry sum for a man so great as the earl of Clare to receive for such service, but it is no great burden for the abbot of St. Edmund to give five shillings. Earl Roger Bigod maintains and asserts that he is seised of the duty of carrying the standard of St. Edmund, for he carried it when the earl of Leicester was taken and the Flemings destroyed.4 Thomas of Mendham also says this is his right. When you have made good your claim against these two, I will gladly pay you the five shillings which you demand". The earl replied that he would talk over the matter with his kinsman Earl Roger, and thus the affair was put off even to this day.5

634 ' Risbridge, the south-west hundred of the liberty of St. Edmund, contained many manors of the earl of Clare, including Clare itself. The earl of Cornwall also held wide possessions both in Norfolk and Suffolk, their administrative centre being Eye. Cp. H.M. Cam, Hundred and Hundred Rolls (1930), pp. 206 ff. 2 Wickhambrook in the centre of the hundred. Is it a coincidence that just to the north there is a spot called Meeting Green? 0 [Alfric the son of Withar occurs as Alvricusfilius Wisgari in Domesday Book, ii. 389 b.]0 0 [Robert III, earl of Leicester, in rebellion against Henry 1I, landed with a strong force of Flemings at Walton in Suffolk, and was completely defeated by the royal forces at Fornham St. Genevieve (October 16, 1173), see BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., p. 1, n. 1.]o '[Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 57-58.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 666 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

635 Grant by Hamo fitz Hamo to Richard de Beauchamp of land in Thornborough, which William son of Turbern held and quitclaimed to Hamo in the king's court. Let all those present and future know that I Hamo fitz Hamo have given and granted and by this present charter of mine confirmed to Richard de Beauchamp three virgates of land in Thornborough with all their appurtenances and liberties, those namely which William fitz Turbern held and quitclaimed to me in the court of the lord king before the justices for himself and his heirs, to be held from me and my heirs freely and quietly and honourably in all places and commons for the service of a tenth part of one knight and saving the king's service. Witnesses: Hugh de Haversham, Alan fitz Meinfelin, Peter de Bekerug, Robert fitz Alan, Roger Visdelou, Simon de Stratford, William de Fraxino, William de Lucton and many others.

636 Confirmation by Hugh du Puiset, bishop of Durham, to his son Henry of the manor of Little Haswell, which Geoffrey de Haswell had held and which Richard fitz Odo had claimed and, afterwards, quitclaimed by fine of duel in the bishop's full court. Hugh, by God's grace bishop of Durham, to all barons and men of the whole of his bishopric, greeting. Know that I have given, granted and by the present charter confirmed to Henry du Puiset Little Haswell, which Geoffrey de Haswell held and which Richard fitz Odo claimed against this same Geoffrey and afterwards quitclaimed in our full court at Durham by fine of duel, so that Geoffrey and Richard have surrendered that vill to Henry for his payment and service and have quitclaimed it forever to him and his heirs for themselves and their heirs. Therefore we will and order that Henry and his heirs shall have and hold the aforesaid vill from us and our successors in hereditary fee, with all its appurtenances in the wood and in the plain, in meadows and pastures, in waters, ponds and mills, in roads and paths and in all other franchises and free customs, freely and quietly and honourably for the service of one third of a knight. Witnesses: Gilbert Hansard, Roger de Coneres, Geoffrey fitz Richard, Jordan de Eschaulande, John de Amundeville, Philip fitz Hamo, Alexander de Helton, Geoffrey de Torp, Richard

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 667 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

de Park, Roger Burdun, William fitz Reginald of Stafford, Gilbert de Clare, Gilbert de Leigh, Walter de Farlington and many others.'

637 Pope Celestine III orders the bishops of London and Lincoln and the abbot of Reading to decide a case between the bishop of Winchester and the Order of the Knights Hospitaller of St. John of Jerusalem concerning the administration of St. Cross Hospital near Winchester; at a certain moment the case had been brought before the royal exchequer, which had declared itself incompetent. To all sons of Holy Mother Church whom this writing will reach, Richard and Hugh by God's grace bishops of London and Lincoln and Hugh by the same grace abbot of Reading, greeting in the Lord. We have received a mandate of the lord Pope Celestine III with the following words. Celestine, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to the venerable brothers the bishops of London and Lincoln and his beloved son the abbot of Reading, greeting and apostolic blessing. From the complaint of our venerable brother Bishop Godfrey of Winchester it reached the audience of our apostolic see that while the disposition and administration of the house of Holy Cross outside the walls of Winchester, built at the expense of the cathedral church, and the nomination of the custodian and his administration belong by right to the bishop, as it used to belong to his predecessors, brother Alan, the master of the Hospital of Jerusalem in England, and his brethren, after an appeal had been lodged to the apostolic see to the great detriment and abatement of the freedom of the church, caused the aforesaid bishop to be summoned by royal officials to appear in a secular court, forcing him to appear in the royal court at the exchequer, where royal accounts used to be rendered, to answer concerning the custody of the aforesaid house. On the day which had been set for the parties, the bishop by the judgment of the magnates of that court was completely freed of the observance of that tribunal against those Hospitallers. Although the bishop's appeal was renewed, the aforesaid brethren of the Hospital, supported by lay power, did not hesitate to penetrate into that church or house by violence on the feast of the Holy Cross and expelling the priests and other clerics who were attached to the service of that church, with great presumption and contempt for the appeal, receiving the key and the possessions from lay hands, they occupied the houses and granges of that house through lay power and breaking the bishop's locks. As this bishop had made a complaint against those brethren before our venerable brother Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, now legate of the apostolic see, for those great injuries 636 ' o[Scammell, Hugh du Puiset, 221, 222.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 668 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and had asked full justice to be done to him concerning them, they subjected themselves to the examination of the archbishop in spite of their privilege. After hearing the arguments of both parties, the archbishop removed those who penetrated into the aforesaid house by violence and restored the full possession of that house to the aforesaid bishop. Afterwards by pretext of some letter which they had obtained from the apostolic see in general terms concerning their injuries, they often vexed the said bishop before the said archbishop concerning the custody of the aforesaid house and they still have not stopped doing so. On behalf of the prior and the brethren on the other side it was put to us that the running and administration of the aforesaid house of Holy Cross belong to them by right, because of the gift of Henry, late bishop of Winchester of blessed memory and founder of the house, as is expressed in his letter and that of our most beloved son in Christ Richard the illustrious king of England, as they say, and while those brethren had the custody and the administration of the house for many years, the aforesaid bishop took it away from them with its appurtenances and against justice and exercised the administration through his own ministers and according to his own will to their great detriment. This same bishop furthermore pronounced sentence of excommunication against the prior and some of the brethren in violation of the content of the privileges which the apostolic see had granted them. He also to their great detriment forbade the collection of money, which had been ordered by a mandate of the apostolic authority throughout his diocese for the recovery or defence of the land of Jerusalem and the sustenance of the poor. He also allowed churches and vicarages belonging to the aforesaid house to be occupied by several people and to be kept after having been occupied. Since we cannot and ought not to leave all this without any complaint or correction, we command you by our apostolic writing and sternly order your discretion that you summon before you those who should be summoned, most carefully examine the elements of the case and if you can establish that the disposition and administration of the aforesaid house and the nomination of the custodian and his administration belong by right to the bishop and that the aforesaid Hospitallers have caused him to be summoned, as it is said, before a civil judge and that they penetrated into that church and its possessions with violence and through lay power and that the bishop has afterwards received restitution of that house from the archbishop, as it is said, you shall impose perpetual silence upon the master and the brethren concerning the custody, administration or possession of that house, without any remedy of appeal, safeguarding however in all other points the disposition of Bishop Henry of Winchester of blessed memory, the founder of that house, concerning their maintenance and sustenance. See to it in the first place, however, that if it is established that some alienation of the possessions of that church has taken place against the form of the law, you shall annul it as justice demands. If on the other hand you discover that something has been changed in connection with that house to the detriment of that bishop on the occasion of that

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 669 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

letter, after the appeal had been made to us, you shall without delay revoke it by apostolic authority, as suitable, restoring everything to the situation which prevailed at the time of the appeal, taking cognizance of other articles and pronouncing a fitting decision, if some question is put forward by one side or the other. If the bishop cannot prove what we have mentioned against the brethren, listen carefully on all questions which they have against each other what they will propose, and terminate the case between them according to justice and without appeal, forbidding the aforesaid bishop on our behalf to molest or cause any prejudice to the aforesaid brethren concerning the money they collected or their vicarages or anything else, or to pronounce against them a sentence of excommunication or interdict contrary to the contents of their privileges without our special mandate, in spite of the aforesaid letter or any other letters if they should appear, having been obtained from the apostolic see, concealing the content of this letter. If you cannot all participate in the performance of this order, let at least two of you do it. Given at the Lateran on 9 June in the fifth year of our pontificate.

638 Richard of the Peak grants to Rufford Abbey a sheepfold in Brushfield and promises to support the monks to deraign the land of Brushfield, of which they have been unjustly deprived. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, present as well as future, Richard Peche, greeting. Know that I have given and by the present charter confirmed to God and St. Mary of Rufford and the monks who serve God there, for the salvation of my soul and for the souls of my father, my mother and all my ancestors, the site of the sheepfold in the territory of Brushfield, which my grandfather Avenel and his wife Avice held for their lifetime, and I grant that they shall hold the aforesaid sheepfold with the pasture and all its appurtenances from me and my heirs in perpetual alms, free and quit of all temporal service which is due to the king or any other man, except that they shall pay to me and my heirs every year at Christmas one cheese worth 4 d., on the understanding that I and my heirs shall maintain those monks and their brethren and their possessions in all places and expressly in the Peak, and at their summons I am obliged, and my heirs also, to assist them in their pleas in my province. And moreover I must stand by them to deraign the land of Brushfield, of which they are unjustly deprived, as my fee and heredity. The monks on the other hand have granted to me and all my ancestors the common benefit of their house in death as well as in life. And for this grant they have presently given me I mark of silver. Witnesses: William de Scarcliff, Hugh the 637 ' '[V.C.H.Hampshire, ii. 194.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 670 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

chaplain, Richard the cleric of Wollaton, Gervase Avenel, Serlo de Pleasley, William le Waufre, William fitz Herbert and Ralph fitz Daniel.

639 Notification by Bertram de Verdun of an agreement reached before royal justices, after twelve lawful men were heard, between himself and Robert de Harcourt concerning the chapelry of Market Bosworth which Bertram de Verdun claimed as belonging to the church of the said village. To all sons of Holy Mother Church, Bertram de Verdun, greeting. Know you all that the litigation which existed between me and Robert de Harcourt concerning the chapelry of Bosworth, which I claimed as belonging to the church of Bosworth, was ended by a compromise reached before justices of the lord king, through twelve lawful men, i.e. that Robert de Harcourt and his heirs shall have their chapelry forever without any vexation and quit of any claim by the mother church of Bosworth and he shall have as his chaplain in his chapel to celebrate divine offices whomsoever he prefers, and also with the two thirds of the income of all his demesne and his court of Bosworth, in oblations and other incomes of that court, one third, however, being destined for the mother church of Bosworth in oblations and other incomes. The enclosed pasture in Robert de Harcourt's park, which I had claimed, shall remain to Robert de Harcourt and his heirs as theirs. Witnesses: Pe[ter son of] Simon, Alan fitz Fulk, Pain de Praers, Roger de Morton, Richard de Freville, Henry de Verdun, Helias the cleric, Henry the cleric, Robert..., Ralph de Normanville, William Saket, William de Alencon, Robert the deacon and many others.

640 Final concord in the court of John, earl of Mortain, son of King Henry II, between Colchester Abbey and Roger de Cotton concerning land in Wickham Skeith which Roger had claimed by a writ of the earl. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord John, count of Mortain, at Eye before Walter de Falaise at that time steward of Eye and Walter the prior of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 671 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Eye, Roger de Huntingfield, Arnulf Rufus, Peter fitz Walter, Hubert de Braiseworth, William fitz Gilbert de Coleville, Walter the Fleming, John de Barling and several other barons and knights of that court who were then present, between Osbern, abbot of Colchester and the convent of that place and Roger de Cotton concerning all that land which Roger claimed against the abbot and the convent and their men in Wickham, on which there was a plea between them in that same court by a writ of the earl. The aforesaid Roger quitclaimed for the salvation of his soul and that of his father and all his predecessors and successors all the aforesaid land to God and St. John and the abbot of Colchester and the convent forever for himself and all his heirs, and he will warrant it to the abbot and the convent for himself and all his heirs. For this he became a brother in the church of St. John the Baptist of Colchester and the abbot and convent demised to Roger all the land which Stephen Muggel then held in Wickham from the abbot to be held freely against the yearly payment of sixteen pence by way of service.

641 Litigation between the abbey of Crowland on the one hand and the priory of Spalding and the men of Holland on the other concerning the marsh between Crowland and Spalding, involving an armed attack in violation of the king's peace. The case is rich in judicial incidents such as an appeal by the abbot and some of his men, imprisonment and amercements, a request of a grand assize, a sworn recognition by the knights of the shire (instead of judicial combat), the use of a writ of right, a recourse to the essoin of sickness, the default of Crowland and the adjudication of seisin to Spalding and a case of contempt of court. After complaint to King Richard I seisin is finally restored to Crowland. The said Abbot Robert supported a most serious plea on behalf of his church against the prior of Spalding and the men of Holland, who with an army attacked the precincts of Crowland as the following account set out by himself fully will show. The abbey of Crowland, which the blessed confessor Guthlac, who rests there, founded four hundred years and more ago is the special alms of the kings of England from their personal gift in the Old English times after King Ethelbald founded the house by granting the marsh in which it is situated, as is contained in the life of the saint written in the old days, for the abbey is established far from other inhabited land in the middle of a marsh. But the men of Holland, the nearest neighbours on the north strongly desired to have common in the marsh of

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 672 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Crowland, for after their marsh had dried up, of which each village had its share, they had converted it into good and fertile arable, so that they have considerably less than the usual amount of common pasture for their stock of which they have little. In the thirty-fifth year of King Henry, in the last year of his life, he being overseas occupied in wars and other affairs, a false rumour came into England of his death. Hearing this, the men of Holland thought how they could violently attack and gain possession of the marsh, considering that it would be easy to overcome the abbey of Crowland, a poor and small house, confident in their valour and the multitude of their riches. And therefore Gerard de Camville, Fulk de Oiri, Thomas of Moulton, father of the present Thomas, and Conan son of Elias, who had other reasons for anger against the house of Crowland and Abbot Robert, gathering in with them Richard of Fleet and Walter and many others, met Nicholas, prior of Spalding, so that he might offer himself as the leader and prime mover of this violence. What more? All the more powerful folk of Elloe wapentake, save a few, conspired against Crowland, meeting sometimes in the barn of the prior of Spalding at Weston and sometimes in Holbeach church. When therefore in the usual way the abbot of Crowland had put his marsh in defense, as he was accustomed to do about Rogation tide [14 May 1189], and this was publicly proclaimed on Spalding bridge so that the men of Holland and others could keep back their stock from entering the marsh to let the grass grow more freely, they refused and then compelled more than before to come in. The abbot's servants, appointed as usual for this purpose, by his command impounded the animals as they had been accustomed to do in other years. Upon which the men of Holland, very angry, on the appointed day, the feast of Saints Nereus and Achilleus [12 May, 1189], came into the marsh of Crowland as if to war, three thousand men and more, all armed with every sort of arms. Abbot Robert with a few of his men met them at the ditch called Asendyke, where the boundary of Crowland marsh runs, humbly speaking to them words of peace, for he thought, as others did, that they had come to overthrow the entire abbey, they replying proudly to him and resisting him to his face. But the Lord modified their malice and turned it from the destruction of the abbey, but they entered the midst of the marsh thus armed and divided the marsh in accordance with the site of their villages, although they were set around at some distance, and they encamped about the abbey like people putting up tents and huts and each setting armed servants to guard their part. They dug turves and cut down a great part of the grove and holt of Crowland and burned it and depastured the meadows and carried away crops and did other deeds of violence for a fortnight as if in armed camps.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 673 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Meanwhile the abbot and monks of Crowland and their servants were in a difficult position, so anxious and troubled that they scarcely dared go outside the doors of the church. But they agreed to make their plaint to the justices of the lord king and they sent quickly to the one whom they found was nearest to them, Geoffrey fitz Peter, who was then at King's Cliff, in Northamptonshire. He sent six knights from Northamptonshire to view and fully report that extreme outrage. Coming in at the eastern side, they came first to the tent and hut of the men of Sutton, who are Gerard de Camville's men and saw there every sort of arms. On being asked, they replied that they were there by their lord's command and in this way all of each encampment, until they came last of all to the Spalding hut, vouched their lords to warranty. Meanwhile Abbot Robert secretly hastened to London and before Hubert Walter, who then was acting on behalf of Ranulf de Glanvill who was overseas with the king, and before his fellowjustices, he made complaint about such injuries put on him in the peace of the lord king; and he showed the great charter of the lord king setting out the bounds of the marsh. They, very much condoling with him, and surprised and angry, commanded Geoffrey fitz Peter on behalf of the lord king that he should summon before him the prior of Spalding and all the Holland men and give full assurance to the abbot about these things. Having heard of this, those armed men who had been in the huts now for a fortnight, burned them and returned to their own parts. And so at the summons of Geoffrey fitz Peter those Holland men came with the prior to meet him at Deeping. And in Whitsun Week [28 May-4 June 1189] Geoffrey fitz Peter brought with him many great men, closely associated with the lord king. There they were appealed by Abbot Robert of the king's peace, and all the aforesaid violence and injury. Also seven of the abbot's men stood up on his behalf and appealed seven of the chief men, each of damage done to the abbot to the extent of 20 marks, Hugh Poll [appealed] Gilbert de Peccebrig; Robert Bee [appealed] Elfric of Fulney Gilbert's brother, Hugh the miller [appealed] Conan son of Elias; Robert of Weston [appealed] Fulk de Oiri; Alfred of Leverington [appealed] Thomas of Moulton: William of Glinton [appealed] Alger de Coleville; Robin Robet [appealed] Alexander of Whaplode. Some of those who were appealed with many others were taken and imprisoned, Gilbert, namely, and his brother Elfric at Northampton; William Pulleia and Hugh of Whaplode at Rockingham, and others elsewhere. Afterwards he set both parties a day to appear before the chief justiciar at Michaelmas at Westminster. While this was happening the lord King Henry died, the lord King Richard was crowned on 3 September; the justices were changed and the Holland men became more spirited, for if he had lived they feared condemnation. On the appointed day the abbot of Crowland came with his friends and his champions to prosecute his

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 674 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

plea and his appeals, and the prior of Spalding was there with his accomplices. Thomas of Moulton was sick and sent his steward on his behalf. At that time Hugh, bishop of Durham was sitting as chief justiciar. But Conan son of Elias, Fulk de Oiri, Thomas of Moulton's steward, Alexander of Whaplode and Alger de Coleville feared for themselves and through the intervention of friends prayed the abbot for the blessing of peace and an agreement in order that the talk might be cut short. These with their friends pledged their faith to the abbot that never to all eternity would they move a claim upon the marsh of Crowland, that they would put themselves in the king's mercy for the damage done, and that they would restore the damage by the judgment of friends. They came before the justices, pleaded guilty and were amerced; Thomas of Moulton, five pounds of silver; Fulk five marks; and Conan as much.' The remaining two were poor and at the abbot's request did not make fine there. But the prior and his men, namely Gilbert and Elfric his brother persisted in their contumacy. And so another day was set at which the abbot came and the prior with his men. The abbot complained touching the prior and his men, who, coming armed into the marsh of Crowland, which is the alms of the lord king, had broken the royal peace. But the prior replied that he had come with arms into his own marsh, which belongs to the priory of Spalding of the fee of William de Roumare, and he promised the lord king 40 marks for the grand assize to prove this. The abbot of Crowland had not used due precaution, because he had not brought with him the royal charter nor any strong young man who could offer pledge upon the ownership of the marsh on behalf of the abbot, except H. Poll and Robert Bee, who had appealed Gilbert and Elfric his brother. And because the abbot could not choose the duel, he was bound to consent to a recognition, although dangerous to him; for the knights of the shire are very far away from the marsh of Crowland and know nothing of its boundaries; and there is hardly anyone living in the county of Lincoln who is not in some way bound either to the house of Spalding, or to William de Roumare, or to one of those who had moved a claim upon the marsh. For although those named above, withdrawing themselves, had remitted their claim, nevertheless, privately and secretly they were weighing out help, counsel and money to the prior and his men. And so there were chosen in the king's court, knights of the shire, whose names were written down, to make the recognition and the men of Holland rejoiced because it seemed to them that the business could now be completed by money. The lord King Richard sent his mandate to the sheriff of Lincoln in this form. ... greeting. We command you that you summon Roger of Huntingfield, Conan of Kirton, Walter Malreward, Ralph son of Stephen, Alan de Wichet', William of Fulletby, Alan de Marc, Richard of Bracebridge, Alver de Hugwell, Robert de 641 ' In 1190 the sheriff paid in the royal treasury £5 on behalf of Thomas of Moulton for licence of concord with the prior of Spalding and 5marks each from Fulk and Conan, Pipe Roll2 Richardl, p. 89. The clerk was in error over the form of the entry.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 675 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Thorp, Alan Merscon, Hugh de Neville, Hugh of Boothby, Robert son of Henry, Ralph of Rippingale, Geoffrey de ]a Mare, Robert de Guing, who have been named by four knights chosen for this, to view the marsh touching which there was a plea in our court between the abbot of Crowland and the prior of Spalding, that they shall be there to view the marsh on the Monday next before Christmas, and do you be there with four or six of the more lawful knights of the shire. And summon the aforesaid knights after the view has been made that they be before us on the fifth day after the feast of St. Hilary, wherever we shall be, or before our justices on the same day at Westminster to recognise by their oath whether the abbot of Crowland or the prior of Spalding has the greater right in the same marsh in which the huts were made and the turves and holt were burned, according to the seisin which the same had from the first coronation of our father King Henry. And have there this writ and the summoners. Witness, the bishop of Durham. On the Monday next before Christmas Nigel, sheriff of Lincoln, did not come in his proper person to view the marsh, but sent on his behalf Walter de Essartis, who was also a supporter of the men of Spalding. Very few of the knights named came, who making the view, caused their verdict to be recorded in this form. This is the verdict of the knights touching the view of the marsh whence the suit between the abbot of Crowland [and the prior of Spalding arose. The abbot] says that the marsh where the huts were found, the burning done and the holt stubbed up is his own and part of the fee of the abbey of Crowland, so that the abbot this year and ever since he became abbot has received the rent. The men of Holland say that that marsh is not the abbot's, but is their own, from Munechelade towards the east, and that they were not responsible for either burning or stubbing up done within Munechelade. Asked whether they were prepared to warrant the burning and stubbing up outside Munechelade or not, said that they refused to answer touching these things because the lord king's justices have their record enrolled. Meanwhile the men of Holland, by the favour of the sheriff and without the abbot's consent, made what changes they wished among the knights named, as for example, Roger of Huntingfield, Hugh of Boothby, Geoffrey de la Mare. When the day of the plea approached the abbot was detained by sickness and caused himself to be essoined because he was ill on the journey and he was given another day at Westminster after the Purification of St. Mary [2 February 1190]. But Abbot Robert setting out to go there became so ill at Cottenham that he caused himself to be essoined because confined to his bed. Four knights came to view him

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 676 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

by command of the justiciar and set him another day after Easter. Abbot Robert's illness grew so much worse that he died on Easter eve and Crowland was seized into the hand of the king and the chancellor, who, when the king went over seas had remained as chief justiciar of all England. The abbey of Crowland being thus vacant and in the king's hand, the tempest ceased... 2 Meanwhile the lord William de Longchamps, bishop of Ely, chancellor of the lord king, then apostolic legate, having sent messengers to the king in Normandy, where he was carefully arranging his journey to Jerusalem, obtained licence from him to appoint an abbot to the monastery of Crowland. And so with the king's assent and the choice of the brethren of Crowland, Henry, a monk of Evesham and the brother in the flesh of the aforesaid chancellor, was elected into the abbacy of Crowland. While the chancellor was acting as chief justiciar the Spalding folk made no claim against Crowland, but when owing to Count John and the conspiracy against the chancellor, nay rather against the lord king, now serving God in Judea, the chancellor had been expelled from England and his brothers, Henry and Osbert, and many of his household taken and held in iron chains and most harsh prison, William de Roumare, a warm friend and now sworn to Count John, incited the persecution of Henry abbot of Crowland owing to the hatred of his brothers; and now seizing the opportunity, he caused the abbot to be summoned by the king's writ to appear on an appointed day at Westminster against the abbot of St. Nicholas of Angers, for the aforesaid Nicholas prior of Spalding had now been deposed, to hear the recognition of his marsh. The abbot of Crowland, anxious and not knowing which way to turn, for he saw peril threaten him on every side, dared not go outside the portals of his monastery, lest he should be taken like his brothers, or even killed. Already threats of this sort had been made against him as he had heard from many. And so on the first day he caused himself to be essoined for difficulties met on the journey; on the second, for being confined to his bed by illness. Wherefore the justices of the king's court ordered the sheriff, Gerard de Camville, the chancellor's enemy and the man who began this trouble, that he should send four lawful knights to view the abbot on the appointed day; the names of the knights are these: Walter of Braytoft, Reginald of Bennington-the other names have been cut out-only one of whom, Reginald of Bennington, came at the appointed day, and certain other low fellows, men of the prior of Spalding with others. Abbot Henry, considering that they would not come, on the preceding night entered a ship at the gates of Crowland, while he was not fully recovered, and caused himself to be borne to a certain manor of his in Cambridgeshire on his way to the court. The aforesaid Reginald, having summoned the prior of Crowland, said that he had come by the king's command to view the abbot's sickness, and although his fellow knights similarly instructed were not found there, he 2

The author here notes that King Richard disafforested the marshes of Holland and Kesteven between the Welland and the Witham.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 677 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

nevertheless sought to make his view, and those who had come appointed a day for the abbot [to appear before the justices]. When the day approached, the abbot, more concerned for the perpetual disinheritance of his church than for his own safety, set out for London, where he arrived on Ascension Day and found gathered against him the chief men of the land, namely Count John, Walter archbishop of Rouen, Hugh de Nonant bishop of Chester, William de Roumare and his accomplices, Gerard de Camville and Roger of Stixwould his under-sheriff, the abbot of Angers and others beyond numbering gathering against him in hatred of his brothers. William de Roumare and the abbot of Angers, by many prayers, great gifts and evil insinuations, had moved all who at that time were great in the land against the abbot and house of Crowland so much that it did not seem to them that they would have acquired full and perfect victory over the chancellor and his following so long as the abbey of Crowland, which his brother ruled, remained in peace without loss of its estates. For William de Roumare intended by all means to convert the site of the said monastery, which is the proper alms of the lord king and his predecessors, kings of England, to his own barony and the prior of Spalding. In the hearing of many he said that the abbey of Crowland is situated in his fee, although it was founded as royal alms before any one of his race was known and before the existence of Spalding, which at one time is said to have been a manor of Crowland.... At length the abbot of Crowland was summoned to the exchequer before all the aforesaid assembled against him, alone with three monks and two very modest knights, because no one else dared stand with him. William de Roumare's steward, an eloquent and greedy man, spoke against him very insolently, craftily and wickedly, and seemed to have given great pleasure to the archbishop of Rouen and Count John and the others. When he had dragged out his case for a long time, blaming, reproaching and reviling the chancellor and his [brothers], every one listening in complete silence, he who ought to speak for the abbot could scarcely be heard for the tumult. At length he replied sufficiently briefly on the abbot's behalf that the marsh in which the abbey is set he ought to hold of the demesne and crown of the lord king, and that he held in peace and quiet when his lord the king, his advocate, set out to Jerusalem, and he has vouched the lord king to warranty, and that he may have an adjournment he offered forty marks to the lord king, but they refused to hear or understand. At length the abbot produced the lord king's

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 678 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

charter in which the limits of the marsh are set out, and another charter in which the king forbids that the abbot of Crowland shall be impleaded except before himself. This was read last. For he first offered the charter of King Richard in the same words, but Count John rejoined that the abbot's brother the chancellor had made this charter according to his own will. But after he had heard his father's charter Count John blushed. These charters being read and understood, the abbot's adversaries were beyond measure confused not having anything to reply. Seeing this, Robert de Wheatfield, one of the justices who supported them, asked in a high voice if the knights who had made the view of the abbot were present, and they produced four low fellows who it was said were hired for the occasion, namely Geoffrey of Thurlby, who held a tenement of [the abbot of] Angers, William son of Alfred and Walter Rufus of Hamby and Gilbert son of Justi of Bennington, neither knights nor holding a knight's fee. The abbot replied that these were not the knights named and that neither they nor the others came to make the view, and he offered proof of this. They refused to hear him, but the false witness which the others bore against him they caused to be written down and nothing of the truth which the abbot put forward were they willing to write. Nevertheless, all who had been present, except the abbot's adversaries and illwishers, sympathising and pitying the oppression of the abbot, thought that judgment would be in his favour because those who claimed to have been the viewers [of his sickness] were not of the knightly order nor girt with the sword, and the third of them did not know how to speak French. Another day was appointed for him after the octave of Whitsun to hear judgment. At that day the abbot of Crowland returning found his adversaries and illwishers now sure of [a favourable] judgment. Judgment was put off on the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and at length the abbot, called to it once, twice and a third time came and stood with Benedict abbot of Peterborough and Baldwin Wake. The aforenamed Robert de Wheatfield pronounced [the judgment] that the abbot of Crowland, who essoined himself against the prior of Spalding for lying in his sick bed at Crowland was not found there in bed when the view of him should have been made, should, for the time being, lose seisin but not right, that is, possession but not ownership; and the prior of Spalding should have seisin which was in contention between them. The abbot, not daring to reply, withdrew confused and sad. His adversaries, returning quickly, were put in seisin by the sheriff of Lincoln of all the marsh of Crowland within Munechelade, which they have never claimed, and without and two leagues beyond Crowland as far as Namansland, and only a little holt standing about the abbey did they leave him for his own; and the gallows on which the robbers taken in the village of Crowland were hanged by judgment of the abbot's court, they carried away and put up on the other side of Spalding to the eternal shame of Crowland. And after it spread through every land that the lord King Richard had been

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 679 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

captured in Germany and detained in the emperor's hands, the abbot of Crowland immediately set out on a laborious journey into Germany in midwinter, and he found the king at Speyer fifteen days before he was freed. He complained to him about the injuries and losses put on him, no so much on himself as on the crown of the king, and showed him his father's charter. The lord King Richard on the second day that he was free confirmed his father's charter and commanded that letters should be directed to Hubert, the archbishop of Canterbury, who was then acting as justiciar, that the abbot of Crowland should have seisin of his marsh according to the charter of his father and as he had it when the king set out for Jerusalem, which was done in this form. Richard, king of England, to the archbishop of Canterbury, greeting. We command you that without delay you cause the abbot of Crowland to have seisin of his marsh of Crowland according as the charter of King Henry our father bears witness that he ought to have, whence he has been disseised after our crossing over. 3 Witness, myself. At Speyer on 22 January in the fifth year of our reign. And so having returned from Germany Abbot H(enry) found the archbishop at London and presented to him the king's command, to which he immediately gave effect, directing it to the sheriff of Lincoln, in whose place Eustace of Leadenham was then acting. The under-sheriff, Eustace, therefore solemnly reseised the abbot and the house of Crowland of their marsh on behalf of the king and the justiciar at the beginning of Lent and peacefully and quietly the abbot possessed it for the whole of that year and another. Nevertheless about the kalends of July the abovesaid abbot of St. Nicholas of Angers obtained revocatory letters against us and sent them to Jocelin, then prior of Spalding, in this form. Richard, by the grace of God king of England, to the archbishop of Canterbury, greeting. The abbot of St. Nicholas of Angers has complained to us that by reason of certain letters which he says the abbot of Crowland truly sought, as he says, from us while we were in captivity in Germany, he is unjustly and without judgment disseised of a certain marsh between Crowland and Spalding belonging to the priory of Spalding, which is of the house of St. Nicholas of Angers, whence the same abbot of St. Nicholas in our court, by the judgment of our court, has recovered seisin, as he says, and he has given us forty marks of silver to have the judgment of our court touching the same marsh; wherefore we command you that upon this you cause diligent enquiry to be made and if it is clear to you that this is so, do you then cause the abbot of St. Nicholas to have such seisin of the same marsh as he had by judgment of our court; and when he has had the same seisin, do you receive from the same abbot the twenty marks which he has promised to us for having his seisin. Witness, myself. Then the Spalding folk rejoiced and thought for certain that they would 3 Landon Jin. no. 393. °[=L. Landon, The Itinerary of King RichardI, London, 1935.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 680 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

immediately have reseisin, because they had promised much to many helpers. When therefore they brought this mandate to the archbishop at Westminster, he asked the truth from those who were presiding as justices. They recorded that the abbot of Crowland was disseised for a default which he had made and the abbot of St. Nicholas was seised, and that the abbot of Crowland again recovered seisin without ajudgment of the king's court [so that] it seemed to some that the Spalding folk ought immediately to be put in seisin. But because the command was conditional and the abbot of Crowland was not present, the archbishop put the case in respite until the quindene of Michaelmas. Hearing this, the abbot went to the archbishop to ask his advice. He replied that unless he received another command before the appointed day he would give seisin to the Spalding folk according to the king's command. Therefore the abbot, troubled, and with the advice of the convent and his friends, prepared to cross the sea, for he was summoned not to plead, but to hear the king's command in these words. Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, to the sheriff of Lincoln, greeting. Summon the abbot of Crowland by good summoners to be before us at Westminster in the quindene of Michaelmas to hear the command of the lord king touching the marsh between Crowland and Spalding, whence a quarrel arose between him and the prior of Spalding; and meanwhile cause that marsh with all the appurtenances coming thence to be in peace without destruction and waste. Witness: Simon of Pattishall. Therefore on the Sunday next before the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, the day of St. Hypolitus the martyr [13 August], taking leave of the brethren with the accustomed prayers, as well in privacy as with the convent, and the celebration of the mass and blessing his brethren, the lord abbot of Crowland departed with the greatest courage, beginning his journey. When he approached Winchester he heard that the said Archbishop H(ubert), primate of all England, legate of the apostolic see and chiefjusticiar of the lord king of England in the whole realm, had come there on account of national business. And so going to him, the abbot pointed out the necessity for his journey, obtained licence and seeking his blessing, received it.4 At last he hastened to the sea at Portsmouth. There he found a great gathering of the greatest men of the land, earls, barons and knights, awaiting a tranquil sea and urgently desiring to cross on account of a most urgent summons from the king. Mortal discord and a grievous quarrel had arisen between the king and King Philip of France, who fraudulently rather than violently had stolen the greatest and best part of Normandy while our lord King Richard was held in Germany. Hence the lord king desiring to be avenged had summoned the greatest men of England, whom the abbot joined as they waited to cross. And so, boarding the ships they had a prosperous journey to Barfleur and landed on the feast of St. Augustine, the doctor [28 August]. Thence the abbot 4 Landon Itn., p. 104.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 681 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

came to Rouen in the company of the same nobles who held him in no little veneration. The king of France, leading an army into Normandy, had wasted it almost to its borders, wherefore the lord king of England was in such straits and so anxious that he could attend to nothing but expeditions, the ordering of camps and the custody of castles, so that the abbot postponed setting out to the king the business on which he had come. Meanwhile the lord king's chancellor, the bishop of Ely, who had been sent by the king to Germany to get the emperor's advice, returned, and hearing of his coming the abbot went to meet him, setting out the point of his business. After a little time, on St. Lambert's day [17 September] the king came to Pont-de-l'Arche. The abbot hastening there found the chancellor with the king and did not want to put off any longer supplicating the king on his business, and so humbly and urgently he began to tell him the reason why he had come, but the chancellor took the words from his mouth and set out the whole business. The king replied that he very well remembered the abbot coming to him for this reason in Germany and that he would willingly do him full justice; but "Follow me", he said, "until I can attend to you" The chancellor with the abbot and his other well wishers thanked him. The chancellor immediately set off again to the emperor in Germany. The abbot and those with him followed the king through villages, castles and cities until at last the king came to Falaise. Resolutely and humbly the lord abbot entreated him, and at the king's command set out before the king succinctly and briefly by his own mouth the account of the whole business. The firmness of his mind and his brief speech seemed to please the king and because his adversaries, as appears in the king's writ quoted above, had promised the king twenty marks, he promised to pay the same amount. The king replied briefly that he would take council about these things. This was the day of St. Maurice the martyr [22 September]. Afterwards the abbot followed the king for many days through many places until he came to Gorron on Michaelmas eve. On the morrow at the solemnity of mass he went to him a humble suppliant and was heard. The king, having summoned master Eustace his seal-bearer, said: "Hasten to complete this abbot's business", setting out our mandate to the archbishop of Canterbury in these words. Richard, by the grace of God king of England, to the venerable father in Christ, H(ubert), by the same grace archbishop of Canterbury. The abbot of Crowland coming to us in Germany told us that by reason of the default, when because of his brother he did not dare appear, he was disseised of a certain marsh between Crowland and Spalding; we found out by enquiry from him and others that he had hidden for fear because his brother had been chased from the kingdom, and so fallen into default, which default we remitted. We ordered by our letters while we were in Germany that the same abbot should have full seisin of the aforesaid marsh, as the charter of our father King Henry bears witness. We still

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 682 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

wish the same, commanding you, as we commanded, that according to the tenor of our father's charter the quarrel touching that marsh should be settled according to the custom of England, because we have warranted our charter and remitted his default. If perchance the prior of Spalding has paid the twenty marks at the exchequer which he promised for having seisin of the marsh, cause them to be repaid to him, and if he has not paid them, do not receive them, because he obtained the letters from us by a false suggestion of the bishop of Coventry. Nor should this matter stand over on account of letters which the abbot of St. Nicholas of Angers has obtained touching the aforesaid marsh. And do this when you shall have a mandate on it from William de Sainte-M6re-Eglise. Witness, myself. At Gorron on 30 September. And to the same William he wrote thus. Richard, by the grace of God etc., to William de Sainte-M~re-Eglise, greeting. We command you that when the abbot of Crowland shall give you good pledges to pay fifty marks at the terms we have set him, do you inform the archbishop of Canterbury so that he can then act touching the abbot in regard to the marsh of Crowland as we have ordered by our letters. Witness, myself. At Gorron on 30 September. The abbot having received these mandates left the court with haste, seeking the port so that he could appear against his adversaries in the quindene of Michaelmas at London. But when he came to Barfleur he waited there a long time, not able to cross on account of the high seas. Wherefore on the appointed day, as is said above, he could not appear before the justices at London. Nevertheless, the bailiffs whom he had left in England, namely Nicholas the monk and William the clerk, coming on the appointed day, essoined their lord the abbot for difficulty of crossing the sea. Respite of forty days and one day was given him, according to the custom of the realm. On St. Wulfran's day [15 October] the abbot landed at Portsmouth, and hastening to complete his business, by which he was fatigued, he set out as soon as possible to London, for he heard that the lord archbishop had either come or was about to come there. Having found the archbishop he presented the king's mandate and the archbishop, having inspected and heard it, asked whether he had the witness of William de Sainte-M6re-Eglise of whom mention was made in the writ, and because he was not at that time present, the archbishop would do nothing on that occasion. Soon this William came. The abbot mindful of his suit, immediately went to him, and offered him greeting on behalf of the king and produced his mandate. Having read it and understood it, William asked whether he had pledges according to the king's command to pay fifty marks at the appointed terms and the abbot produced as sureties William d'Aubigny and master Stephen, archdeacon of Buckingham. And this was done before the feast of All Saints and the aforesaid William appointed Easter as his first term when he should pay half and the second term of payment at Michaelmas. Therefore he

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 683 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

wrote to the archbishop in letters containing the command directed to him by the lord king, that the abbot had satisfied him by finding the best of sureties and urgently requested that he should not longer delay the abbot's business. After he heard this the lord archbishop said that he wished to confer with his fellow justices about this business. And so the abbot waited there ten days and on each day when he could have access to the archbishop he urged him, even to weariness, that he should attend to him and his suit. But the archbishop was in such a weight of business that he could in no wise find time for the plea. At length the abbot's reproaches caused the archbishop to send two of his familiar counsellors with him before the justices sitting in the bench with the king's command, so that they should hear, understand and declare what ought to be done therein. Therefore having read, as well the abbot's charters, as the royal letters, it seemed to them that the seisin of the marsh ought to remain in peace to the abbot. But because it was contained in the king's command that that plea should be settled according to the custom of England, it was on this point in particular that the archbishop wished to be assured what he ought to do. To this doubt the justices replied that in as much as the abbot was disseised on account of a default and the king has remitted and remits that default to him and warrants his charter and default, by the custom of England he should recover the seisin which by that default he had lost. Those who had been sent returned and informed the archbishop about what they had been told. This was done on St. German's day [30 October]. The archbishop informed the abbot that he must inquire whether he had made that default through fear, as the lord king said in his letters, or in contempt of the king's court. And in this way that lord dragged out the business to the morrow of All Saints. At length on the day of All Souls [2 November] the archbishop sitting in the judgment seat, the justices sitting all around, the abbot stood up an unwearied suppliant for the consummation of his business. The archbishop caused the command of the lord king to be recited and when it had been read through before them all, he began to enquire from those who sat in the bench at that time the reason why the abbot fell into default, namely whether it was fear or contempt of court. And when the judges wished to speak together secretly about this, one of them stood up, a faithful and wise man named Richard of Herriard, and said to the archbishop that the enquiry which the lord king bears witness by his present letters that he made, as is openly contained in the mandate, among other things, ought to suffice for this matter. To this opinion the archbishop agreed as well as the other judges, whose names are these: Roger Bigod, William de Warenne, William Briewerre, Richard Barre archdeacon of Ely, Richard of Herriard, Simon of Pattishall, Osbert fitz Hervey, Henry de Chastill'. And so the lord archbishop wrote to the sheriff of Lincoln in this form. H(ubert), by the grace of God etc., to the sheriff of Lincoln, greeting. Know that the lord king warrants to the abbot of Crowland the default which he made

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 684 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

when the king was on his pilgrimage, by reason of which default the abbot was disseised of his marsh between Crowland and Spalding, and he commands that the abbot should fully have seisin thereof. Therefore we command that without delay you cause him to have such seisin as he had before he was disseised thereof by reason of that default. And so Abbot H(enry) in 11935 returned with full seisin of the marsh. But at the day appointed to his proctors as is above related, he wished for the greater security, to be present and he was at London on the morrow of St. Edmund, king and martyr [21 November]. But Prior Jocelin of Spalding refused to labour there in vain, knowing for certain that the abbot of Crowland would have won his suit, but he sent there one of his monks named Hugh Grull who did his utmost against us in all things. When he appeared before the justices he was told that the abbot of Crowland by the king's command and their common consent had obtained possession of his marsh and ought quietly and peacefully to possess it, unless the lord king should otherwise command. This Grull departed, sad and confused beyond measure, according to that text: "let them be confounded and put to shame that seek to do us evil." 6

642 Henry II de Oilly, royal constable, asks the royal justices to see to it that Osney Abbey can peacefully enjoy possession of its land at Stonnal, on which William de Bray makes unjustified claims. To the justiciars of the lord king, Henry de Oilly, his constable, greeting. Know that while my grandfather Robert had the manor of Shenstone in his hand, he gave some part of that manor, called Stonnal, to Hugh de Tew, his knight, for his service before any ancestor of William de Bray had anything in the manor of Shenstone. Afterwards, however, this same Hugh, with the agreement of his aforesaid lord Robert de Oilly gave that part of Stonnal in alms to the house of Osney, which the same Robert, my grandfather, had founded, and the canons of that house have held the aforesaid tenement until the present day without doing any service for it. Since, however, the aforesaid William bothers the aforesaid canons and their men because of the aforesaid tenement, I ask you for the love of God to see to it that the alms of my ancestors be safe and remain with the aforesaid canons without vexation. 1 5 recte 1195. *[=S.]* 0 6 [Ps. 35, 4.]1 '[Translation taken from Stenton, English Justice, 154-186.]o

642 ' '[See the agreement reached between Osney and William de Bray concerning Stonnal (SHENSTONE

Charters, no. 6 [36], p. 246: [c. 1190-1195.]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 685 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

643 Notification of an agreement between Abbot Hugh of Osney and William de Bray concerning land at Stonnal: a jury is to recognize to whom the disputed land belongs. In connection with a chirograph passed in the king's court another jury is to establish which fines William de Bray is entitled to for certain trespasses in his woods. Let it be known to all that this is the agreement between Abbot Hugh and William de Bray about the quarrels that had arisen between them concerning certain lands which the abbot said belonged to his church at Stonnal. The abbot is to choose six men, whom he wants, from the men of William de Bray and William six from the men of the said abbot and Abbot [Thomas] of Croxden must be summoned and those must by their oath recognize to whom the aforesaid lands ought by right to belong.1 Moreover the aforesaid William restores forever the park to do what has been mentioned before. The same William also quitclaims the abbot and his men of the pannage and the pigs before the feast of St. John the Baptist and if by chance the said William accuses one of the abbot's men of buying pigs after the feast of St. John, for those they shall pay pannage or swear that they were not thus bought. Moreover he recognizes as lawful a charter which the canons have from the same William concerning the church of Shenstone. Furthermore he grants to the abbot and his men in the woods and in the plain common pasture and free entry and exit. He moreover grants to the abbot and his men the right to gather bracken and herbage without hindrance. Mention is also made in some chirograph in the court of the lord king of trespass in the wood of William de Bray and the agreement between them is as follows. The abbot must elect 4 knights and William de Bray also 4 knights and those 8 must establish to which fines the aforesaid William is entitled when the men of the abbot are found trespassing in his wood, and those 8 must also establish the fines when the cattle of the abbot's men is found in William's wood at the time of pannage, when mast is to be found in the wood. And if by chance the said William wants to make assarts in his woods, the abbot ought not to stop him except in the wood where the park is to be, and for all these grants the abbot must give the aforesaid William 10 marks. Moreover those 8 must decide how [to share the cost] in the court of the lord king of the licence for the concord. The abbot promised by God's word firmly to hold this agreement and he found pledges and William de Bray made the same promise and also found pledges.2 643

'[The composition of the jury is not quite clear, because the role of the abbot of Croxden is not unambiguously established: he might be an effective member of a jury of thirteen, or merely an important Staffordshire landowner and witness, in which case the jury consisted of twelve members (in this sense Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 76 n. 1 0 2 [A comprehensive agreement was reached and recorded c. 1208: OSNEY Cart., no. 590, v, pp. 91 94.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 686 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

644 William fitz Osbert leads a tax riot in London and after seeking refuge in the church of St. Mary le Bow, is arrested at the command of Hubert Walter, the chief justice, condemned to death and hanged at Tyburn with several of his followers. A. The narrative in William of Newburgh's Historia Rerum Anglicarum. In London a few days passed between the death of the aforesaid abbot' and the destruction of somebody who recently had come to the fore and had undertaken momentous things, for fate decided that neither would see the joy of Easter, because at a short interval death has separated them who seemed to belong together by the similarity of their cause and undertaking. Indeed the abbot believed that he ought to castigate the fraud and unbridled avarice of the royal officials for the sake of the king's advantage as well as peace in the provinces, whereas this other man, a citizen of London, made himself the champion of the poor citizens against the insolence of the rich, acting as it were in loyalty to the king and strenuously maintaining - and he was very eloquent - that on the occasion of every royal edict the rich spared their own fortunes and because of their power placed the whole weight on the poor and defrauded the royal treasury of a large sum. This man was, not surprisingly, born in London and was called William and nick-named Longbeard: he looked after his beard because it was a striking element that made him more conspicuous in meetings and assemblies. A sharp mind, moderately educated but unusually eloquent and known for the wantonness of his soul and his way of life, he wanted to perform great things and dared to undertake enormous novelties. Finally his inhuman and shameless behaviour towards his own brother was a sign of his madness and vileness in other things. Indeed he had an older brother, a citizen of London, whom, while he was at the schools, he used to ask for the necessities of life and to receive the payment of his expenses, and when he was growing up and made even bigger expenses and asked for more abundant funds, he tried to obtain by threats and terror what he could not get by asking and when he had tried this in vain, because his brother who had to look after his own house could not give him satisfaction, he began to look for revenge and was inflamed to behave criminally. Thirsting for his brother's blood after receiving so many benefactions from him, he accused him of the crime of betraying the king, whom he went to see;2 having obtained his goodwill by artfulness and

644A

' O[Robert abbot of St. Etienne, Caen, d. 11 April 1 196.]o 2 He had been a crusader, and was one of those who claimed to have seen a vision of St. Thomas at sea (Ben. Petr. ii. 116) o[-GESTA HENRICI SECUNDI.] ° Probably he thus came under Richard's eye.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 687 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

obsequiousness, he put it to him that his brother had conspired against his life and showed himself so devoted towards the prince that out of loyalty to him he did not even spare his own brother. But the prince laughed at it, possibly filled with horror at the malice of this most inhuman man and refused to let the law be contaminated by such an injustice.3 Nevertheless, thanks to the favour of some people he obtained a position in the magistracy of the town and gradually began to plan something painful and to prepare an evil deed. By his two great vices, pride and envy, the former being an appetite for one's own excellence, the latter the hatred of other people's happiness, he could not bear the wealth and glory of certain citizens or magnates, whom he realised he did not equal, and in his great ambition he conspired to undertake daring and impious acts on the pretext ofjustice and piety. By clandestine ways and poisonous rumours among the common people he reviled the rich and the powerful for their insolence, treating them with indignity and, inflaming the poor and mediocre to an immoderate love of freedom and happiness, he influenced many of them and tied some to himself who were so fascinated by his delusions that they were at his beck and call in everything and ready to obey him without hesitation in whatever he, the provider of everything, would order. Thus a mighty conspiracy arose in London fed by the zeal of the poor against the insolence of the powerful and it was said that the number of the conspiring citizens amounted to 52,000 who, as appeared later, enlisted, each with his name, with the architect of this nefarious undertaking. An enormous amount of iron tools were prepared for breaking into fortified houses and were kept in his house and when they were discovered afterwards, were proof of his most evil machination. Strengthened by so many followers, he started at every meeting as if he were acting for the common poor, but nevertheless also pretending to act to the king's advantage, to resist noblemen to their face, maintaining with powerful eloquence that the fisc underwent great losses through their fraud. As they were indignant and agitated against him for this, he deemed it necessary to go overseas to complain to the prince that he suffered the enmity and calumny of the powerful because of his loyalty to him. 4 Having returned home he began, with his usual slyness and as if supported by the king's favour, to act with even greater assurance and to inspire his own accomplices even more strongly. As suspicion and rumour of the conspiracy which had already got under way became more frequent, the lord [archbishop] of Canterbury, to whom the kingdom had mainly been committed, It is not impossible that he went to the king (he certainly crossed over to see him once afterwards), and was by him referred to the law courts. The Rotuli Curiae Regis for 6 Ric. I. "in crastino Sci. Edmundi" (i. p. 69), show that on November 21, 1194, he pursued his brother Richard fitz Osbert for treasonable language. A "further day" was given him, on December 21, for an appearance on the octaves of St. Hilary. The result, however, is not recorded. See also Diceto, ii. 143. o[ RALPH DE DICETO.] ° 4 Hoveden, iv. 5, 6 0[=ROGER OF HOVEDEN Chron.]0 says: "Et ablit ad regem trans mare et impetravit ab eo pacem sibi et populo. Unde Hubertus . regis justitiarius . . in iram commotus, praecepit, ut . . caperetur". His journey is also represented by Newburgh as having been immediately followed by Hubert Walter's action. 3

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 688 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

esteemed that things could no longer be dissimulated, convoked the common people, spoke to them squarely, refuted the rumours which had started and admonished them to give hostages for being loyal to the king and keeping the peace, in order to eliminate all sinister suspicion. Swayed by his smooth words, the people obeyed and hostages were given. Nevertheless, that man pursued his plans and supported by the crowd proceeded with a show of pomp and organized public meetings on his own authority, arrogantly proclaiming himself to be the saviour of the poor and grandly forecasting that he would soon put an end to the insolence of the perfidious. I truly understood the pride of his words from the narrative of a trustworthy man, who told me that a few days before he had been present at his meeting and had listened to his speech for, taking an example or a witness from the Holy Scriptures, he started as follows: "You will joyfully draw water from the sources of the Saviour" and applying this to himself he said: "The saviour of the poor am Iand you, the poor, have suffered under the hard hand of the rich and you should draw the water of salutary doctrine from your sources and you should do this joyfully, for the time of your visitation has come. Indeed, I shall separate water from water. The people are the water and I shall separate the humble and loyal people from the proud and perfidious: I shall separate the elect from the reprobate as light from darkness". As that man had been given a mouth to speak great things and had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon, the forementioned administrator of the kingdom summoned him by the counsel of the magnates to reply to the accusations; on the appointed day he appeared, so guarded by a mob that his summoner was terrified and acted leniently, prudently postponing judgment to avoid danger. And while the people were behaving more quietly because of the danger to the hostages, two noble citizens looked for a moment when he could be found without the crowds and [the administrator] sent a detachment of armed men to those citizens in order to arrest him. He himself killed one of them,5 who stood close to him, with an axe and the other was massacred by one of his followers, whereupon he fled with a few of his company and his inseparable concubine to the nearby church of St. Mary le Bow, attempting to protect himself there for a time, not so much in a place of asylum as in a castle, in the vain hope that the people would soon arrive. But although they were sorry for his dangerous predicament, they did not come to his rescue, either because of the hostages or out of fear for the numerous knights, for as soon as the administrator of the realm heard that he had occupied the church, he sent a considerable strength of knights who shortly before had been called up from the neighbouring provinces. Having been ordered to come out and stand trial so as to avoid a place of prayer being turned into a den of thieves, he preferred to continue his vain wait for the conspirators until he was forced with his followers to leave the church, which was besieged with fire and smoke. As soon as he came out, the first man to meet him 5 Hoveden, iv. 6, gives the name, Geoffrey.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 689 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

was the son of the citizen whom he had killed, and to avenge his father's blood he stabbed him in the stomach with a knife.6 Having been arrested and put on trial, he was by the judgment of the royal court first drawn by horses and afterwards hanged on a gibbet together with nine7 of his followers, who had refused to give him up. As is written: "Who digs a pit shall himself fall into it and who breaks a hedge, a serpent shall bite him", thus the instigator and architect of so much evil perished according to the dictate of justice, and the rage of this nefarious conspiracy expired with its author and those whose mind was wiser and more prudent were glad when they saw and heard of the punishment and washed their hands in the blood of the sinners, but the conspirators and those who had hoped for a change' violently deplored his death and criticised the vigour of public discipline shown in his case, and abused the administrator of the kingdom and called him a murderer because of the execution of a pestilence and a killer.9 Even after his death it became clear to what extent that man had attracted the minds of the impious by his daring and enormous plans and had kept the common people spellbound by posing as a pious and foreseeing provider, for they artfully tried to turn him into a glorious martyr in order to whitewash him of the shame of being a conspirator punished according to the law and in order to represent those who had condemned him as impious people. Ultimately, it was said that some priest related to him placed the chain with which he had been fettered on a person who suffered from a fever and with impudent vanity pretended that recovery soon followed. As this rumour spread, the silly people believed that that man had suffered with dignity for justice and had died in piety and started to venerate him as a martyr. The gibbet on which he was hanged was removed stealthily and during the night from the place of execution so that it could be honoured in a secret place and the earth underneath, as if it were consecrated by the blood of the hanged man and a sacred object to be used for healing, was scraped away by the fools in small bits until a considerable ditch was formed. As his fame circulated widely, herds of stupid- "whose number is infinite", as Solomon said- and of curious people flocked to that place, to whom were added those who happened to have come to London for their own business from several provinces of England. Thus the foolish multitude continually kept watch there and in so far as they honoured the 6 Hoveden agrees with Newburgh here. Diceto (ii. 143) has the improbable story that Longbeard himself was the incendiary. The fact that an archbishop ordered a church to be set on fire caused a great stir (Hoved. v. 6), and the dean's courtier-like spirit refuses to charge the prelate with the deed. I Hoveden says eight, but the Ann. Winton-Waverley (Liebermann, p. 183) °[ F. Liebermann, Ungedruckte anglo-normandische Geschichtsquellen, Strasbourg, 1879]o say nine. Gervase 1[= GERVASE OF CANTERBURY Chron.]0 (i. 533) contributes the date, April 6. 8 This phrase has some interest. See Vol. i. p. 172, note 2. '[Concerns the variant novorum regum which one sometimes meets in the manuscripts.]' 9 Hoveden (iv. 5) and even Diceto (ii. 143) testify to the unequal taxation of rich and poor at this date. Matthew Paris, too, shows much sympathy with Longbeard.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 690 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

dead man, they incriminated him by whom he had been executed and this very vain error became so strong that it could have misled even the wise, who were fascinated by those rumours, if the truth about that man had not been more cautiously recalled. Except for the fact that, as we explained before, he had committed a homicide shortly before his death, which should by itself be sufficient reason for every wise person not to consider him a martyr because he was executed, his own confession at death's door should, if they had just blood in their body, forcefully confound all those who made a martyr out of him. For, as we learned from trustworthy men, when he was admonished in the course of his execution by some people to give glory to God even at that late moment by a humble confession of his sins, he confessed that he had with his semen polluted the church which he had entered with his own concubine as he was fleeing his pursuers and staying there waiting in vain for help, and he also confessed, which is much worse and horrible to report, that when his enemies launched their attack and nobody came to his rescue, he had denied the Son of Mary, because he did not liberate him, and had invoked the devil, so that he would be freed even by him. His defenders, however, contradicted this, saying that it was maliciously invented to harm their martyr, but this controversy was soon settled by the downfall of the vain fabrication: "truth is solid and gets stronger with time but the fabricated falsehood contains nothing solid and soon disappears" Therefore the administrator of the realm punished with suitable ecclesiastical severity the priest who was at the head of the whole superstition and sent an armed guard to chase away the multitude of rustics and, if by chance any of them insisted on staying there, to arrest them and put them in a royal prison. He also ordered an armed guard to be continually kept in that place so as to keep away the silly mob which came to pray and also those who were attracted by curiosity, and after this had been done for a few days that whole machine of invented superstition collapsed and popular opinion came to rest.

B. The narrative in Gervase of Canterbury's Chronicle. In the meantime in the city of London a very bad sedition was caused by a poor little man called William, whom I mention with shame for, although of contemptible appearance, he was most eloquent and he brought the unexperienced mob to such obstinacy that it considered him in everything as its spokesman against the leaders of the city and preferred to obey his command rather than that of the prefect of the city of London. As a consequence all the citizens nourished

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 691 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

thoughts of deceit and mischief against each other so that bit by bit the subversion of the city seemed to be approaching. Day and night the richer people of the city protected themselves with arms and vigilance for fear of being killed by the common people and when this insanity had reached the point where this aforesaid William caused homicides to be committed in the city and that he with a few companions fled to the tower next to the church of St. Mary le Bow and brought food and arms to it, Archbishop Hubert of Canterbury, who at that time occupied the highest place in English justice, asked the other justices and also the bishops and abbots of England who were gathered in London what was to be done to prevent the shameful fall of such a large and opulent city. They all thought of the authentic proverb of Solomon: "Cast out the scorner, and contention shall go out with him" So the archbishop of Canterbury sent respectable messengers to admonish William to come down from the tower, leave the church and stand ecclesiastical trial, his life and limbs being safe. This William refused, proffering menaces and himself undergoing threats which failed to move him, since his loquacity and popularity made him so audacious that he feared nobody. The archbishop of Canterbury spoke to the citizens of London in public and in private and out of loyalty to the king and for the maintenance of the peace requested and received hostages. After this was done he gathered a considerable band of armed knights whom he ordered to guard the wards of the city and the streets to prevent the citizens from breaching their undertaking and performing the business that had to be done for the good of the peace. A fire was started in the tower and church of St. Mary on the Saturday of the Passion of the Lord, [6] April, and finally William was captured with his associates and brought before the archbishop at the Tower of London, where he received by common counsel a sentence of condemnation. He was dragged, with his feet attached to the collar of a horse, from the aforesaid Tower through the centre of the city to the elms, his flesh was demolished and spread all over the pavement and, fettered with a chain, he was hanged that same day on the elms with his associates and died. But after his body had been removed, a sudden rumour spread through the city that William was a new martyr and shone through miracles. However, an ambush was laid and those who came at night-time to pray were whipped and so the miracles stopped at once and visitors stayed away.

C. The narrative in Ralph de Diceto's Imagines historiarum. Around that time I noticed often that there was bad feeling and conflict in the city of London between rich and poor concerning the apportionment of the taxes payable to the treasury according to everyone's means, which, as many

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 692 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

maintained, was often made unequally. The standard-bearer of this dissension was a certain William fitz Osbert who often gathered the people against the dignity of the king and bound many to himself by oath. He also in his meetings pursued to the death his carnal brother and two other men of good repute as if they were guilty of betraying the king. Ultimately he repeatedly excited sedition, acclaim and tumult in the church of Paul, the teacher of the nations, but when he realized that he deservedly incurred the indignation of public authority, he locked himself up in the tower of a certain church which belonged specially to the archbishop and turned the sacred place into a castle. Afterwards, seeing that a large number of armed men was gathering, he tried to avoid imminent death by setting fire to the temple of the glorious Virgin and caused the building that was consecrated to the Lord to be partly burned down by sweeping flames. He was taken from the church and brought to the Tower of London and, undergoing the final condemnation so that his punishment might deter many, he was by the common sentence of the magnates deprived of his clothes, had his hands tied behind his back and his feet fettered with long ropes and was dragged through the centre of the city to the gallows at Tyburn. And so he was hanged, attached with iron chains to stop [the corpse] coming down fast. With him nine others who shared the same condemnation were hanged so that those who were similarly polluted by their crime should undergo the same punishment. And in order to ensure and keep the peace more carefully and securely and by a decree of the chief justice, the sons and kinsmen of numerous men of the middle class were given as hostages to be imprisoned in various strongholds throughout the country; the poor gave adequate satisfaction according to the assessment of the neighbours.

D. The narrative in Roger of Hoveden's Chronicle. In that same year strife originated amongst the citizens of London, for not inconsiderable aids were imposed more often than usual because of the king's imprisonment and other incidents, and in order to spare their own purses the rich wanted the poor to pay everything. As a man versed in the law, called William the Bearded, the son of Osbert, saw this, he was driven by his thirst for justice and equity and became the spokesman of the poor. He wanted everyone, rich and poor, to contribute to the general business of the city according to his chattels and wealth, and travelling to the king overseas he obtained his peace for himself and the people. Hence Hubert Walter, the archbishop of Canterbury and the king's justice, was moved to great anger and ordered the capture of anyone from the common people who was found outside the city as an enemy of the king and the kingdom, and so it happened at Mid-Lent [31 March] that at Stamford Fair some merchants from the common people of London were arrested by command of the king's justice. Afterwards the same justice ordered the aforesaid William the

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 693 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Bearded to be brought to him even against his will and as a citizen called Geoffrey arrived to take him, the aforesaid William the Bearded killed him, and as others tried to arrest him he fled with some of his followers and they locked themselves up in the church that is called St. Mary le Bow.' As they refused to leave, an attack was launched against them and as even then they refused to surrender, a fire was started at the command of the archbishop of Canterbury, the king's justice, to drive them out with the smoke and vapour of the fire and as the aforesaid William came out, somebody drew his knife and wounded him in the stomach and so he was taken to the Tower of London and there condemned to be hanged. Tied therefore to the tail of a horse, he was dragged through the wards and streets of the city to the gallows and there hanged with his eight associates. The other citizens of London, however, who had followed him put themselves in the king's mercy and gave hostages to the king and the realm to keep the peace. But the monks of Holy Trinity at Canterbury, learning that their London church called St. Mary le Bow was thus violated at the command of their archbishop who, even as he was serving the king should nevertheless have kept ecclesiastical rights intact, were indignant and they had a heavy heart against him, and peaceful conversation with him was impossible.2

645 Notification by Walter de Kingsford that he has given up the claim concerning Wolverley and Kingsford, which he had brought against the monks of Worcester Cathedral by royal writ in the shire court. To all those who will receive the present writing, Walter de Kingsford, greeting. Know that Prior Senatus and the convent of Worcester have granted me and my heirs the meadow along the Smallbrook which they had in demesne and the meadow along the Smallbrook' which Turkil de Blakeshall 2 held from them for 6 d. and the whole meadow along the Smallbrook which Edric de Blakeshall held for two stooks [of hay] and all the land which was cultivated at the time of Walter my father, along the Smallbrook between the aforesaid meadows and the wood. All this is to be held from them in fee and heredity for 2 s. per year payable to the church of Worcester at two terms, i.e. 12 d. at the feast of St. Mary in March and 12 d. at Michaelmas, and they have received my homage thereon. And I have given up to them all the claim which I had against them concerning the wood and 644D I Gervase gives the date of the catastrophe, April 6, c. 1195 O[=R. Twysden, Historiae Scriptores X, London, 1652.]' Anglicanae 0 2 [Brooke, London, 48 49; J.B. Given, Society and Homicide in Thirteenth-century England, Stanford, 1977, p. 184.10 645 '2 Presumably name of a tributary of the R. Stour. Blakeshall inthe Wolverley.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 694 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

the boundaries between Wolverley and Kingsford for which I had brought a writ of the lord king to the county court of Worcester, and I shall have the common in the wood like the other free men of Wolverley. Witnesses, etc.

646 Dispute between Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds and his knights of whom full service is demanded. Originally the abbey owed the king the service of forty knights, but fifty were enfeoffed. When, however, the king taxes the abbey on the real number of knights, the abbot decides that his knights should also contribute on the basis of their real number of fifty and not as hitherto on the basis of forty. The abbot wins his case first in his own court and then in that of the king, where separate records are established for the knights concerned. Several knights try to evade the courts and in one case it is even necessary to exert pressure by a seizure of goods. Abbot Samson entered on a dispute with his knights,' himself against all, and all against him. He put to them that they ought to do him full service of fifty knights in respect of scutages, aids and the like, since, as he said, they held so many knights' fees; why should ten of those fifty2 knights do no service, or for what reason and by whose authority should those forty receive the service of ten knights. They all replied with one voice that it had always been the custom for ten of them to help the forty, and they neither would nor ought to be answerable nor to be called into court on this matter. So when they had been summoned to answer for this in the king's court, some of them deliberately excused themselves, while others appeared out of guile, saying that they would not answer in the absence of their peers. On another occasion those presented themselves who had previously been absent, and they likewise said that they ought not to answer in the absence of their peers, who were concerned in the same dispute. And when they had thus many times baffled the abbot and had vexed him with great and heavy expenses, he complained to Archbishop Hubert who was then justiciar; and he answered in full council that every knight ought to speak for himself and for his own holding. And he said openly that the abbot had both the knowledge and the power to make good the claim of his church against each and all. Therefore Earl Roger Bigod, first of them all, of his free will acknowledged in court that he owed his lord the abbot full service of three knights in reliefs, 3 scutages and aids, but he was silent about the 646

See Appendix 0 °[=BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron, 152 153.]o 2 This may be regarded as a round number, or alternatively we may assume that at least duo has dropped out. The correct number was 52. The statement below that the abbot's profit will be £12 when £1 per knight is demanded, implies a total of 52 knights. It may be noted that a little later when he deals with the problem of castleward at Norwich, he again speaks of the total as 50. Sums paid by tenants' heirs to their lord on coming into their inheritance; see PM 1. p. 308 1[= F. Pollock and W. Maitland, History of English Law, 1898.]

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 695 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

performance of castleward at Norwich. After him there came first two knights, and then three, more later, and finally almost all, and following the example of the earl they acknowledged that they owed the same service; and because their acknowledgement of this in the court of St. Edmund was not sufficient, the abbot took them all to London at his own expense, and their wives as well and such women as were heiresses of lands, that they might make their acknowledgement in the king's court; and each of them received separate chirographs. Aubrey de Vere and William de Hastings and two others were absent on service of the king across the sea, when these things were done, and therefore the plea concerning them had to be postponed. Aubrey de Vere was the last who resisted the abbot, but the abbot seized and sold his beasts, so that he was forced to come to the court and answer like his peers; and so after taking counsel, he at last acknowledged the right of St. Edmund and the abbot. So by this victory over all his knights the abbot will be the gainer by the following amount, unless he desire to spare some of them: as often as twenty shillings is placed upon the shield, the abbot will be left with a surplus of twelve pounds, while if more or less should be exacted, more or less will accrue to him in due proportion. The abbot and his predecessors used also at the end of twenty weeks to pay seven shillings for castleward 4 at Norwich out of their own purse owing to the default of three knights whom Earl Roger Bigod holds of St. Edmund; and each knight of the four constabularies used to pay twenty-eight pence, when they entered on their turn of castleward, and one penny to the marshal who collected the money; and they paid twenty-eight pence and no more, because the ten knights of the fifth constabulary used to help the other forty, so that, whereas they ought to pay three shillings in full, they gave only twenty-nine pence, while those who ought to enter on their turn at the end of four months did so at the end of twenty weeks. But now each knight pays his three shillings in full, and there is left to the abbot the surplus over twenty-nine pence, whence he will be able to reimburse himself for the aforesaid seven shillings. Lo now, you may clearly see the meaning of the abbot's 5 threats, which he uttered on the first day when he received homage from his knights, as has been set down above, when each knight promised him twenty shillings, and then immediately withdrew, refusing to give him a total sum of more than forty pounds, and saying that ten knights should help the other forty in aids and performance of castleward and all such levies.6

See Appendix P o[= BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 153-154.]0 '[Samson became abbot and received homage from his knights in 1182, see on this and on the number of knights' fees BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., p. 27 n. 1.]O 6 '[Translation almost verbatim taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 65-67.]o 4

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 696 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

647 On the death of Aaron, the Jew of Lincoln, the king has taken over all his claims, among which one against the monks of the abbey of Meaux, who had taken over the debts of William Fossard. As the monks pretend to have paid all their debts and produce a quitclaim by Aaron, the barons of the exchequer give judgment in their favour; the new abbot, Alexander, obtains against payment the transcription of this decision in the Pipe Roll. In the meantime Aaron the Jew of Lincoln, whom we have mentioned before, died and we were forced by royal command to pay at short notice to the lord king everything which we owed him because of William Fossard. After this was done, certain deeds were furthermore found in the chests of Aaron on the basis of which the king claimed more than five hundred pounds from William Fossard, who maintained that we were bound to pay all his debts to the aforesaid Aaron the Jew. We, however, said on the contrary that we had already paid all the debts for which we were bound because of him and finally, after many payments and expenses, the deed of Aaron giving quittance of the whole debt was searched for and found. It was read before the barons of the exchequer in London and transcribed in some roll, but not in the great roll- afterwards Alexander, the fourth abbot, had it transcribed 1 in the great roll - and in accordance with this quittance the aforesaid barons judged that nothing was to be demanded of the debt which was claimed from the said William Fossard because of Aaron's debt. 2

647

The letters of release of Aaron of Lincoln are entered on the Great Roll of the Pipe for the year 9 Richard I. A copy is given by Geo. Oliver in his History of Beverley, 4to., 1829, p. 536. 2 '[See MEAUX Chron., xxvi-xxvii; Richardson, op. cit., 89-90; YORKSHIRE Charters,ii. 390 391 ]o

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 697 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

648 The town of Bury St. Edmunds contained, besides the old borough depending on the abbey's sacrist, a territory outside the gate depending on the abbey's cellarer. The burgesses who lived within the borough were exempt from judicial combat, the others not. After one of the latter is hanged for robbery after a duel, the urban community protests against this form of discrimination. Thereupon the abbot decides to place the two parts of the town under one common police and jurisdiction, exercised by both the sacrist and the cellarer. Also there was a great dispute between Roger the cellarer and Hugh the sacrist concerning the appurtenances of their offices, in that the sacrist refused to lend the cellarer the use of the town prison for the safe custody of thieves who were taken in the cellarer's fee. Consequently the cellarer was often in trouble and, when thieves escaped, was abused for default of justice. Now it happened that a free tenant of the cellarer, Ketel by name, who dwelt without the gate, was accused of robbery and, being vanquished in the duel, was hanged. And the convent was grieved because of the reproaches of the burgesses who said that, if the man had dwelt within the borough, he would not have been forced to do battle, but would have acquitted himself by the oaths of his neighbours according to the liberty belonging to those who dwell within the borough.' Therefore when the abbot and the sounder portion of the convent saw this and recognised that, whether they live within the borough or without, the men are equally our men and ought all of them to enjoy the same liberty within the bounds of the four crosses, excepting always the lancetti2 of Hardwick and their like, they wisely took steps to put this into effect. And so the abbot desiring strictly to define the offices of the sacrist and the cellarer and to end their disputes, gave his support to the sacrist, as it seemed, and ordered that the servants of the reeve of the town and the servants of the cellarer should enter the cellarer's fee together for the purpose of taking thieves and evildoers, and that the reeve should have half the profit derived from their imprisonment and custody and for his own labour, and that the court of the cellarer should come to the portmanmoot, and that those to be tried should be tried there by the two courts in common counsel. It was also decreed that the cellarer's men should come to the toll-house with the rest, renew their pledges3 there and be set down on the reeve's roll and there pay him the penny known as 648 1 As in other boroughs (e.g. London, Winchester, Lincoln), the burgesses had the privilege of not submitting themselves to trial by battle; see Bigelow, History of Procedure,p. 307.

A Latinization of A.S. landsetta("tenant"); like tillanusthe word suffered degradation and came to imply servile tenure. The name is rarely found outside East Anglia. These lancettiwere ascript to the soil, and held their land by various services. 3 At the view of frankpledge, which was normally conducted by the sheriff. Within the liberty of St. Edmund his place is taken by the abbot, who appoints a deputy to carry out the duties; the plegii are the men who stand as sureties for their tithing (a group of 10- 12 men). '[Hence borthselver could be rendered as "frankpledge-fee".]O 2

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 698 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

"borth-selver", and that the cellarer should have half of this sum. But now the cellarer receives nothing at all from this payment, though this was all of it done that everyone might enjoy equal liberties. But the burgesses still assert that those living in the suburbs should not be exempt from toll in the market, unless they belong to the guild of merchants4 ; while the reeve, with the connivance of the abbot, nowadays claims for himself all the pleas and forfeitures of the cellarer's fee. The ancient customs of the cellarer, which we have seen in our day, were as follows: the cellarer had a messuage and barns 5 near Scurun's Well, where he used in all due state to hold his court for the trial of robbers and the hearing of all pleas and disputes, and there also he used to place his men in frankpledge, to enroll them and re-enter them every year, and to make profit thereby such as the reeve made at 6 the portmanmoot.

649 The men of Thanet complain that the abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, unjustly forces them to come to his court. On the appointed day in the king's court, the plaintiffs retract and are amerced for false claim; their two leaders, who have entered the church armed, are kept in prison.

In the year of the Lord 1198 in the tenth year of King Richard, the men of Thanet complained at Westminster before Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, Richard, bishop of London, Geoffrey fitz Peter and their fellows, who were then justices of the lord king, that the abbot of St. Augustine in Canterbury demanded services and customs from them which they did not owe and mainly that he made them do suit to his court of St. Augustine and plead and stand trial there, which they said they should not be obliged to do there, but in Thanet at Minster. They came and appointed in their name to gain or to lose thirty men who were associated in this claim against the abbot. After a day had been given to both parties, those thirty men came before Easter in the name of the other men of Thanet, but they did not maintain their claim against the abbot and retracted. They were amerced for false claim and Samuel and Norman stay in prison because they entered the church armed.1

4 This guild was clearly of some importance, but nothing is known of its constitution. See L pp. 72 and 75. [= M.D. Lobel, The Borough of St. Edmunds, Oxford, 1935.]0 5 Known as the Grange of St. Edmund, or Eastgate Barns (see L pp. 18, 19); Scurun's Well was 0probably on this land. 6 [Translation from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 100 101.10 649 1 '[See the very detailed accounts in CURIA REGIS ROLLS, vii, 1935, pp. 341-342 and 343. - For previous litigation with the men of Thanet see our no. 488.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 699 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

650 Hugh de la Cuntre claims land as free dowry of his wife against Osbern fitz Warin of Hadleigh and his brother Adam, and loses his case in the abbey court at Canterbury, where the land is recognised as servile by the oath of the vill of Hadleigh. Nevertheless, he complains of novel disseisin to the justices in eyre and regains seisin, although Osbern and Adam call the court of Canterbury as warrantor. Thereupon the case is brought before royal justices at the exchequer, where the court of Canterbury testifies in favour of Osbem and Adam; Hugh puts himself in the mercy of the abbey for false complaint and makes a sworn quitclaim. Geoffrey, the prior, and the convent of Christ Church Canterbury to the hallmoot of Hadleigh and all their men, French and English, whom this writing will reach, greeting. We want it to be brought to your notice that after Hugh de la Cuntre had claimed against Osbern fitz Warin of Hadleigh and his brother Adam eight and a half acres of the free dowry of his wife Alice, as he maintained, i.e. four acres of their old land and four and a half acres in the field of Benetun, the aforesaid Osbern and Adam deraigned all that land against the aforesaid Hugh in our court at Canterbury by the judgment of the court, as it was often recognised by the oath of the vill of Hadleigh to be servile. However, the aforesaid Hugh complained of novel disseisin to the justices in eyre and obtained a writ of recognition, while Osbern and Adam resisted and called our court of Canterbury as warrantor, in spite of which Hugh regained seisin on the strength of the writ of recognition. As we heard this we sent our court of Canterbury before the lord Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, the chiefjusticiar and Geoffrey fitz Peter, William de Warenne and William d'Aubigny, justices of the exchequer at London, to testify that Osbern and Adam had deraigned that land by the judgment of our court, wherefore Hugh put himself before the justices in our mercy for the false complaint which he had made to the justices, and repeated this afterwards in our court at Canterbury before our prior and the whole court, swearing that he would never lay claim to that land against our will and consent. To prevent this fact from falling into oblivion, we decided to insert it in this written document secured with our seal, testifying the right of the aforesaid Osbern and Adam and wanting the deraignment which was made in their favour to be valid and firm. Witnesses: Roger de Northbourne, steward of our court, Thomas de Dene, Alan de Craythorne, John de Leigh, William his brother, Roger de Leigh, Stephen de Makinbrooke, Robert de Godmersham, Bertelot de Northbourne, the young John de Eastry, John de Wells,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 700 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

Ralph de Groton, Walter fitz Ralph, Nicholas fitz Roger, Nicholas fitz Goding, Adam fitz Herbert, Gerard de Preestebrugg',Terric brother of Hugh de la Cuntre, William fitz Richard and many others.

651 Final concord in the court of William de Muntchensy, recorded in the county court, between Prior William and the monks of Luffield and John son of Roger Enginur concerning land in Silverstone, which the priory had deraigned in the court of Richard de Hinton by royal writ. This is the final concord made in the court of William de Muntchensy at Towcester between the prior and monks of Luffield and John son of Roger Enginur and subsequently recorded in the county of Northamptonshire before Simon de Pattishall, who was then sheriff, and other lieges of the lord king who were then present, in the ninth year of the reign of King Richard that this John recognized and quitclaimed to God and St. Mary of Luffield and the monks of that place all the land of Silverstone, with the appurtenances of the fee of Towcester, which John held from Richard de Hinton, i.e. that land which the aforesaid prior and monks deraigned by a writ of the lord king in the court of the said Richard de Hinton as their right. For this recognition and quitclaim the aforesaid prior and monks granted to the said John and his heirs one half of that land, except for the tenement of Hawisa, to be held free and quit except for foreign services and reliefs, from the said prior and monks against the yearly payment for 4 s.and 6 d. on two terms, i.e. 3 s. 6 d. at the feast of St. Peter's Chains and 12 d. at Michaelmas. Furthermore the said prior and monks granted to the said John the messuage in which his father Roger lives and half a meadow which Osbert the reeve held. The said John shall neither give, sell or give in gage the aforesaid land, messuage and meadow without the consent and assent of the said prior and monks. The said John pledged and confirmed by oath to hold this firmly and conserve it constantly and corroborated it with the muniment of his seal. The said prior and monks similarly confirmed it with their faithful word and their seal. Witnesses: Simon de Pattishall, sheriff, Robert de Preston, Robert de Culworth, Ralph de Tinchebrai, Richard de Hinton, Geoffrey de Ludlow, William de Caldecot, John de Towcester, Henry de Silverstone, William de Silverstone, John de Eynsham, Thomas de Abthorpe, Henry his son and others.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 701 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

652 Notification by Richard son of Helias de Hinton that he has granted to Luffield Priory his land in Silverstone of the fee of Towcester, which the monks had deraigned in his court by royal writ. To all sons of Holy Mother Church whom this writing will reach, Richard son of Helias de Hinton, greeting. I want you all to know that I have given and granted to God and St. Mary of Luffield and the monks who serve God there all my land of Silverstone, of the fee of Towcester, with all appurtenances, which they deraigned in my court by a writ of the lord king, that they held it and had to hold it free and quit of all secular service and payments in perpetual alms because of the gift of my father Helias, against the yearly payment of 9 s., i.e. 7 s. in my name to the lord of Towcester on the feast of St. Peter's Chains and 2 s. to Robert de Botlindon, which my father Helias gave him in free dowry from that land when he married my sister Hueline, to be paid at Michaelmas. And to insure that this donation and concession shall remain valid and unshaken I have corroborated it with the muniment of my present seal. Witnesses: Alan, prior of the hospital of Brackley, Jordan, chaplain of Hinton, Robert de Botlindon, knight, William Baivel, Roger fitz Azor, Hugh de Evershaw, Robert de Wancy and Robert de Turville, knights, Robert de Codstowe, John Enginur, John de Eynsham, Osbert de Hinton, Hugh de Hinton, Robert de Ponte, Ralph de Langeport, Geoffrey l'Angevin and William de Walton.

653 Letter of Archbishop Hubert of Canterbury to the justices on the bench at Westminster about a fine made before him, when he was chief justice, between Philip, the miller of Barrington, and the prior of Llanthony, whose villein Philip was: the justices are requested to see to it that the fine shall be observed. Hubert, by the grace of God archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, to his beloved sons in Christ and his dearest friends, the justices of the bench at Westminster, greeting and unfeigned blessing. This is to let you know that, when we held the office of justiciar, Philip the miller of Barrington made before us a fine with our beloved prior of Llanthony, his lord, whose villein he was, so that he might remove from his land with his brood and chattels. And since, after the fine made before us, the said Philip will not remove from the land as he agreed,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 702 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

we pray that you will see that what was on that occasion enacted before us shall be observed and will distrain the said Philip to surrender the land peacefully to the prior, as is right. And, we pray you, speed the prior's business in this matter and we shall owe you many thanks on his behalf. You know with what affection I regard the prior and his house. Farewell.'

654 Notification by Ranulf, treasurer of Salisbury, concerning the case of Geoffrey Talbot and the abbey of Forde. Geoffrey Talbot has given land in Street to the monks of Forde with the warranty clause that if they lost it, they would be entitled to land in Heathfield in exchange. Richard de Lexonia claims the land in Street and the monks call Geoffrey Talbot to warranty. The case is heard before Ranulf de Glanvill and the justices of the exchequer, where Geoffrey Talbot and his son put themselves on the grand assize and lose. The monks demand Heathfield in compensation and the case comes before Archbishop Walter of Rouen and the barons of the exchequer, who send a record of the case to John, count of Mortain, for justice to be done in his court. To all those whom the present writing will reach Ranulf the treasurer of the church of Salisbury, greeting in the Lord. Know you all that in the 3 4th year of the reign of King Henry, King Richard's father, when the lord Ranulf de Glanvill was justiciar and I his clerk, a charter made by Geoffrey Talbot in favour of the monks of Forde concerning the land of Street and the exchange of the land of Heathfield was read before this same Ranulf de Glanvill and the justices of the exchequer in my presence and in my hearing and that this same charter was warranted there by this same Geoffrey and his son and heir Helias before everybody and the case registered on the roll of the king as follows. Geoffrey Talbot and his son Helias came before the justices of the lord king at Westminster and gave warranty to the abbot and monks of Forde for their charter which they have concerning the land of Street and this charter was read there before the justices and, according to its content, warranty was there given against Richard de Lexonia, and the aforesaid Geoffrey and his son Helias put themselves on the grand assize concerning that land against the aforesaid Richard de Lexonia. And know that I have been present in the time of the lord King Richard, where this case was recorded by the barons of the exchequer before the lord Walter, archbishop of Rouen, who was then justiciar, and a record of the court of the lord king was sent to the court of the lord John, count of Mortain, in the prescribed form so that on its basis judgment 653 1' 0[Translation taken from Richardson and Sayles, Law and Legislation, 140.10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 703 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

should be given in the said court to the aforesaid monks concerning the land of Heathfield, which they claimed against Geoffrey Talbot in exchange for the land of Street which Geoffrey was said to have lost against the aforesaid Richard de Lexonia by the grand assize. Farewell in the Lord.'

655 Will of Richard Orival, apparently made during a serious illness, giving up a claim to land, which he had made against Rufford Abbey by royal writ.

Let all those present and future know that this is the devise of Richard Orival of Kelham. I, Richard Orival, have given and devised and quitclaimed to God and St. Mary and the monks of Rufford, when I gave myself to them for burial, whether I shall live or die, all that plot of land, situated amongst their furlongs, which I have claimed against the aforesaid monks by royal writ. Moreover I have given them three roods of land situated before their sheepfold free and quit, as far as I and my heirs are concerned, of all temporal service and custom which is due to the king or any man. All this I have given them in perpetual alms with the grant and goodwill of Henry, my heir, and my other children. And Henry, my firstborn, and my other children have promised to maintain this almoin and to warrant it forever against all men. Witnesses: Prior Roger of Rufford, William de St. Paul, a monk of the same place, Henry de Wildebof, Alexander the priest of Kelham and Peter de Kelham.

656 Notification by Henry de Longchamp that he has confirmed the soke of Clare to the monks of Earls Colne, after lawful men of the court of Lamarsh had recognised that it belonged to them. Henry de Longchamp to all whom this document will reach, greeting. Know that I have granted and by this my charter confirmed to the church of Colne and the monks of that place the whole soke of Clare which Richard de Beauchamp gave and confirmed to them by one charter and his son Stephen after him, except for that land which is now in my demesne. And it was thus recognised before me by the testimony of lawful men and their suits in the court of Lamarsh that the aforesaid soke belonged to the right of the aforesaid monks. Therefore I will and 654 1 '[B. Kemp, "The Exchequer and Bench in the later twelfth century", E.H.R., lxxxviii (1973), 567-569.] °

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 704 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

order that the monks shall have and hold the soke well and peacefully and freely and quietly and honourably as their charters testify. Witnesses: William the priest, Richard de Beauchamp, Geoffrey de Bedford, Robert de Campis, a knight of the earl, William fitz Randulf, Robert fitz William de Bures, Robert and Elias, servants of the prior and several others.

657 After Sewal de Walkfares and his wife Sabina had claimed the land of David de Doddesbroc, an agreement was concluded between them and Abbot Walter of Waltham, stipulating that if the plaintiffs were successful in the courts, the abbot would pay them a capital sum of three marks silver and they and their heirs would pay the abbey a yearly rent of fifty shillings. Having won their case, Sewal and Sabina notify all free men and their fellow tenants of Waltham Abbey that they have received the said capital sum and promise to pay the said rent. Sewal de Walkfares and Sabina his wife, to all their free men and peers who live on the fee of Holy Cross of Waltham and all men, greeting. Be it known to you all that when we claimed the land of David de Doddesbroc, the following agreement was reached between Abbot Walter of Waltham and the convent and us, that if we could deraign the aforesaid land, then the aforesaid abbot would have to give us three marks of silver and we and our heirs would have to pay the church of Waltham forever 50 s. a year for the aforesaid land, as we could not obtain the aforesaid land otherwise. We therefore want it to be certain and indubitable to everyone that we have received three marks of silver from the aforesaid abbot and convent from the money of their church in obedience to our agreement and this money we received from them after we deraigned our land. Therefore we and our heirs shall because of this agreement pay forever to the church of Waltham 50 s. per year for the aforesaid church, viz. at Christmas 12 s. 6 d., at Easter 12 s. 6 d., at the feast of St. John 12 s. 6 d. and at Michaelmas 12 s. 6 d. I have sworn to the church of Waltham to keep this agreement forever firmly, without fraud or malice for myself, my wife and my heirs, and to ensure that this agreement shall forever stand firm between the church of Waltham and us and our heirs we have confirmed it by the attachment of our seals. Witnesses: William the hosteler, Robert the staller, Walter the janitor, Brother Roger the almoner, William Faucillon and his son John, Maurice de Boreham and his brother Walter, Gilbert Mauduit, Richard Bataille and many others.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 705 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

658 Stephen de la Lawe gives up to the monks of Worcester Cathedral every claim to land in Wribbenhall, as he promised before the officials of the bishopric of Worcester and afterwards in the county court, and he restores and quitclaims the charter by which he held it. Be it known to all those present and future that I, Stephen de la Lawe, have restored to God and St. Mary of Worcester and the monks of St. Mary all the land and appurtenances which I held in Wribbenhall from the said monks of Worcester, viz. half a hide of land. And therefore I will and command that the monks of Worcester shall have and hold the said land forever, with all appurtenances, free and quit and without any claim or contradiction so that I or my heirs shall never be able to claim any right in that land. And in the presence of the officials of the see of Worcester and afterwards in the county court of Worcester I confirmed my oath and pledged my faith that I would observe this forever. And the charter, which I had concerning my holding of that land from the said monks, I restored and quitclaimed to them, so that if by any chance that charter returned to me or my heirs in any way, I do not want that it serves any purpose or that I or my heirs might claim any right through it for myself or my heirs. For this grant, however, Prior Peter and the monks of Worcester gave me one mark of silver, and to ensure that this shall remain valid and unshaken I have confirmed the present writing by the attachment of my seal. Witnesses: John de la Lawe etc.

659 Quitclaim in the county court of Yorkshire in a plea on a writ of right by Andrew de Herthum to Agnes de Percy of his right in land in Buckden.

Be it known to all present and future that I Andrew de Herthum have quitclaimed forever for me and my heirs to Agnes de Percy and her heirs all the right and claim which I had and claimed in halfa carrucate of land in Buckden with appurtenances, for which there was a plea between us in the county of York by a writ of right of the lord chancellor. And for that quitclaim the aforesaid Agnes gave me six marks of silver. Witnesses.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 706 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

660 Letter from a jury notifying Geoffrey, bishop of Coventry, that it has reached a verdict concerning the church of Flixton on the basis of a royal writ (of darrein presentment). To our venerable father in Christ, Geoffrey, dearest bishop of Coventry, his devoted Richard de Worsley, Roger de Middleton, Hugh Norreys, Elias de Pemb'ri,Henry de Bury, William de Radcliffe, Alexander de Pilkington, Richard le Waleys, William Blundel, Henry Travers, Ralph de Standish, Henry de Trafford, eternal salvation in the Lord. Be it known to your excellency that we have recognised by our oath on order of the lord king that Henry fitz Sywerd last gave the church of Flixton in time of peace, to whom Roger fitz Henry and Henry fitz Bernard succeed by hereditary right. The right of advowson of that church belongs to them and they also as true patrons present to the church of Flixton, which is vacant, the clerk Henry fitz Richard, whom they previously presented before master Richard, a clerk of the lord king, Philip de Orby, justiciar of Chester and Gilbert fitz Reinfrid and ourselves. We therefore advise and admonish your excellency that you admit him to their presentation for the sake of divine charity and as you are bound to do according to the constitution of the realm. Farewell to your highness.

661 Description of Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds as a judge in secular cases.

Seven months had not passed since his election, when lo and behold! letters of the lord Pope were brought to him appointing him as judge' for the hearing of causes, a task of which he had neither knowledge nor experience, though he was learned in the liberal arts and in the Holy Scriptures, being a literate man, brought up in the schools and once a schoolmaster,2 well known and approved in his country.3 He forthwith called to him two clerks skilled in the law and associated them with himself, making use of their counsel in ecclesiastical business, and 661 ' "Judge delegate' appointed by Lucius III. 2 He had been admitted to the school of William of Diss, when he was a poor clerk and had later studied in Paris, after which he became a schoolmaster. This should strictly mean Norfolk, but may well be used here in the wider sense of E. Anglia. By 1159 he had come to Bury, and was probably a schoolmaster there, when the monks sent him on his adventurous journey to Rome. He did not make his profession as a monk till 1165 or 1166.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 707 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

studying the decrees and decretal letters, 4 whenever he had time, so that within a short time by reading of books and practice in causes he came to be regarded as a wise judge, proceeding in court according to the form of law. Wherefore one said: "A curse upon the court of this abbot, where neither gold or silver may help me for the confounding of my adversary!" In process of time when he had acquired some practice in secular cases, being guided by his native power of reasoning, he showed himself so subtle of understanding, that all marvelled, and the Undersheriff Osbert5 fitz Hervey said of him: "This abbot is a disputer: if he goes on as he has begun, he will blind us all, every one". And having approved himself in causes of this kind, he was made a justice errant,6 though he erred not, but was careful not to wander from the right way. But "envy assails earth's highest!"7 When his men complained to him in the court of St. Edmund, because he would not give judgment hastily nor "believe every spirit", 8 but proceeded in the order prescribed by law, knowing that the merits of causes are revealed by the statements of the parties, it was said that he was unwilling to do justice to any complainant, unless money were first given or promised; and because his glance was sharp and penetrating, and his brow worthy of Cato and rarely relaxed into a smile, he was said to be more inclined to severity than kindness. And when he took amercements for any offence, he was said to exalt justice above mercy,9 because, as it seemed to many, when it was a matter of getting money, he rarely remitted what he might 0 justly receive.'

662 Description of Abbot Samson of Bury St. Edmunds in the pursuit of his rights of jurisdiction.

4 Decreta refers to the corpus of canon law made by Gratian (1138-42), Decretals are subsequent papal pronouncements. One of the king's justices at Westminster in 1196. '[The editor here confuses the undersheriff with his namesake at Westminster, who became ajustice there in 1191 and remained until 1206; see R. V. Turner, The English Judiciaryin the Age of Glanvilland Bracton,Cambridge, 1985, pp. 80 and 92.] 6 A justice in eyre. Here the less common term "justice errant" has been used in the translation to preserve the play upon words. '[Abbot Samson appears as a justice in eyre in Norfolk and Suffolk, Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire, Essex and Hertfordshire in 1194, see Stenton, Pleas, iii, p. xcviii.] ° 7 Ovid, Renedia Amoris 369. 8 John iv. 1. 9 A jesting allusion to James ii. 13, superexaltatmisericordiajudicium,"mercy exalteth itself over judgment". Samson is said to reverse the process, owing to his love of fines (rnisericordiis). 0 [Translation almost verbatim taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 33-34.]°

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 708 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

And when I asked him 1 what things I had suppressed and of what kind they were, he replied: "Do you not see that the abbot gives away escheats 2 from the domain-land of the convent and bestows girls 3 and widows4 who are heiresses of lands, both in the town of St. Edmund and without, according to his good pleasure? Do you not see how the abbot appropriates to himself suits and pleas of persons who claim by the king's writ lands which are of the convent's fee, and above all those suits which are productive of profit, whereas he assigns those which bring in no such profit to the cellarer, the sacrist or other officials?" To this I replied according to my knowledge, perhaps well, perhaps ill, that every lord of a fief owed homage ought of right to have an escheat, when it occurs in a fief from which he himself has received homage; and likewise he is entitled to a general aid from the burgesses and to wardships of boys and bestowal of widows and girls in those fiefs whence he has received homage - all of which privileges seem to belong to the abbot alone, unless the abbacy should chance to be vacant. But in the town of St. Edmund a custom has arisen in virtue of its being a borough, that the next of kin should have wardship of a boy together with his inheritance until he has reached years of discretion. Again with regard to suits and pleas I answered that I had never seen the abbot usurp our pleas, save when there was default ofjustice on our part; but that I had seen the abbot take money, that by the intervention of his authority suits and pleas might be settled as they ought to be. I have also at times seen pleas, which were our concern, dealt with in the abbot's court, because there 5 was not anyone to claim jurisdiction for the convent at the opening of the suit.

663 Quitclaim by Reginald son of Ellis de Sothill to the monks of Monk Bretton of land in Swallow Hill, concerning which a plea was moved in the court of Roger de Lacy of Pontefract, constable of Chester. Let those present and future know that I, Reginald son of Ellis de Sothill, have quitclaimed for me and my heirs 20 acres of land, those namely which William the smith held in Swallow Hill and that which Swane de Hoyland gave to the monks of Bretton in pure and perpetual alms, concerning which a plea was held between me 662 1 0[Jocelin of Brakelond refers here to a real or imaginary conversation with a critic.]' 2 Land escheats to the lord, when the tenant commits a felony or dies heirless. Cp. the case of Adam of Cockfield's daughter, p. 123. o[ = BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron. 123-124; see also CURIA REGIS ROLLS i. 430 for the decision which was reached at Tewkesbury in 120 1.]o The widow of a military tenant is allowed at most only a third of her husband's land as a dower; if she has children, they and the rest of the land are held in ward by the fuedal lord. Her marriage may be sold by the lord, just as may her children's. Cp. PM I. p. 325. 0[= F. Pollock and F.W. Maitland, History of English Law, I, 1898.]0 0 [Translation taken from BURY ST. EDMUNDS Chron., 105-106.]'

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 709 1991

FROM WILLIAM I TO RICHARD I

and the monks of Bretton in the court of Roger of Chester of Pontefract by royal writ; all my right and claim on the said monks [I have given up] for three marks, which the monks gave me. Witnesses: Robert le Waleys, Adam de Raineville, William de Stapleton, John de Birkin, Ivo de Lungvillers, John Malherbe, John Tyrrell, Ralph de la Mare, Robert Poitevin and William de Lungvillers.

664 Denise de Darlaston quitclaims to the canons of Stone Priory Robert son of Ranulf of Darlaston with his off-spring and chattels, whom she had claimed by royal writ in the county court of Staffordshire. Let all present and future know that I, Denise de Darlaston, have granted and quitclaimed forever to God and the church of St. Wulfadus of Stone and the canons who serve God there, for me and my heirs, Robert son of Ranulf of. Darlaston with all his off-spring and all his chattels, whom I claimed as my naif, in the county of Staffordshire by precept of the lord king. And for this grant and quitclaim the aforesaid canons gave me 5 s. 8 d. in the county of Staffordshire. Witnesses: Thomas de Erdinton then sheriff, Henry de Verdun, Robert de Aston and others.'

664I 0[G. Wrotnesley, Stone chartulary: an abstract of its contents, London, 1885 (William Salt Archaeological Society. Collections for the history of Staffordshire, vi, 1), p. 8 with edition of fragments of this charter.]0

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 710 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES The index refers to the case numbers

A., monk of St. Cuthbert, Durham, 361 Aaron, Jew of Lincoln, 647 Abberton (Essex), 308 Abbey, Ralph, priest, 392 Abbotsham (Devon), 475 Abetot, Osbert, 507 Abingdon (Berks), 164, 169, 406 abbey, 43,49, 133, 145, 148, 164,165,169,171, 192, 246, 363,379, 380, 400,406,418,424, 481,528, 617 abbot of, see Adelelm, Faritius, Geoffrey, Ingulf, Ordric, Reginald, Vincent, Walkelin cellarer of, see Ralph chamberlain of, see Ralph monk of, see William Abingdon, Alexander of, 301 Abington Pigotts (Cambs), 52 Abitot, Urse of, sheriff of Worcestershire, 10, 15, 50, 134, 154 Absalom, prior of St. Cuthbert, Durham (11541158), 361 Absalon, 512 Abthorpe, Henry de, 651 Thomas de, 651 Achard, Robert, 579 Acius, abbot of Vaudey (1155-1184), 448 Acton (Worcs), 10 Ada, daughter of William of Engaine, 330 Adam abbot of Evesham (1161-1189), 558 bishop of St. Asaph (1175-1180/81), 481, 494 brother of Eudo, steward of King William I, 15 cellarer of St. Albans, 405 the chamberlain, 498 the clerk, 417 sheriff of Berkshire and Oxfordshire, see Catmer the steward, 295 vice-chancellor of Henry fitz Roi, 490 Addingrove (Bucks), 391 Adelaide, wife of Odo of Champagne, 143 Adelard, 238 Adelelm abbot of Abingdon (1071-1084), 4, 164, 185 archdeacon of Dorset, 397

Adeliz, wife of Hugh de Grandmesnil, 58 Adelulf, the chamberlain, 57 Adjavin (Devon), 475 Adrian, 488 Adrian IV, pope, 360, 386, 405, 418, 520 Aednoth, monk of Bury St. Edmunds, 295 Aeldred, 35 iElfheah, archbishop of Canterbury (984-1012), 421 Aelfred, 301 AElfric archbishop of Canterbury (990-1005), 146 the priest, 269 kElfsige, abbot of Ramsey (1080-1087), 18, 30, 132, 141,256, 262 Elfwig, bishop of London (1014-c. 1035), 9 Elfwine abbot of Ramsey (1043-1079/80), 9 bishop of Winchester (1032-1047), 9 ,Elfwold, abbot of St. Benet of Hulme (10641089), 18 Aelmer, 81 Aelmer de Stoke, 488 kElsi, see Elfsige, abbot of Ramsey Aelward, 321 Aertold, 219 ,Ethelbert I, king of Kent (560-616), 11 Ethelfrid, king of Bernicia (593 616), 143 ifthelric, bishop of Chichester, see jEthelric, bishop of Selsey )Ethelric II, bishop of Selsey (1058-1070), 5 IEthelwig, abbot of Evesham (1059-1077), 10, 13 Aethelwold, 25 Aethelwold, the reeve, 403 Aethelwulf, bishop of Carlisle (1133- 1157), 283 Aforeillun, Ralph, 163 Agemund, 365 Agnes daughter of Sibyl, 575 mother of Hamo, 526 Agreda (Spain), 494 Aguillon, Manasser, 397 Aigle, Gilbert de 1', 177, 181 Aignel, Adam, 539 Ailbricht, 471 Aileva, nun of Shaftesbury, 228

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 711 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Ailmar, 477 prior of St. Sepulchre, Warwick, 402 Ailred abbot of Rievaulx (1147-1167), 405, 412 Ailric archdeacon, 15 Ailward archdeacon of Colchester, 308 peasant of Westoning, 471 Ailwin, 291, 301 son of Lefstan, 329 Radumf, 291 Aimar, prior of St. Pancras, Lewes, 321 Aimunderby, Geoffrey de, 483 Aincourt, Ralph de, 166 Aislaby Arnald de, 384 Walter de, 384 Aitard, 96, 108, 120 Aiulf, sheriff of Dorset, 228 Akebrant, 307 Alan, 254 Alan, 271 Alan, 365 Alan, 465 Alan the cleric, 325 count of Brittany, 48, 68, 85, 86, 100, 111, 134, 156, 163 master of the hospital of Jerusalem in England, 637 the priest of Wilne, 365 prior of Christ Church, Canterbury (1179-1186), 552, 573 the hospital of Brackley (Northants), 652 son in law of Enisan, 275 son of Frodo, 318 Theobald, 555 steward, 175 undersheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, 256 Alava (Spain), 494 Albemarle, William of, earl, 494 Alberic, bishop of Ostia, legate (1138-1139), 296, 408 master, 329 Albert goldsmith, 329 lorimer, 447 Alberville, William de, 532 Albini, see Aubigny d' Alciston (Sussex), 196 Aldburgh (Yorks N), 368

Aldenham (Herts), 8, 423 Alderi, William of, 143 Aldford (Ches), 474 Aldith, 301 Aldred the priest and nephew of Blakeman, 425 son of Siward, 242 Aldsworth (Glos), 508 Aldwin, abbot of Ramsey (1091-1102), 141, 256 Alenqon, William de, 639 Alestan, 106, 245 Alestan, butler, 329 Alewi, 301 Alexander, 507 abbot of Meaux (1197-1210), 647 the bailiff of the abbot of St. Peter's, Gloucester, 499 bishop of Lincoln (1123-1148), 246, 254, 268, 276, 283, 296, 299, 319 the chamberlain of Ramsey, 385 II, pope (1061-1073), 3, 5, 9 1II, pope (1159-1181), 396, 402, 418, 419, 478, 499, 520, 552 the porter, 579 the priest, 392 priest of Kelham, 655 prior of Stanley (Wilts), 499 son of Toki, 439 steward of Maurice de Craon, 546 Alfonso king of Leon and Castile (1072-1109), 494 I el Batallador, king of Aragon (1104-1134), 494 VII el Emperador, king of Leon and Castile (1112-1157), 494 VIII, king of Castile (1158-1214), 494 Alfred, 507 the cleric of Wheathampstead, 465 king of the West-Saxons (871-899), 11 Alfric, 271 Alfsi, reeve of Sutton Courtenay, 12 Alfwin, monk of Bishop Remigius of Lincoln, 15 Alfwold, 53 Alfword son of Blacman, 254 son of Elwold, 254 Algar, 329 bishop of Coutances (1132-1150), 291 the priest, 310 Alger, 85 Alice, wife of John, count of Eu, 573 Allerston Geoffrey de, 384 Torphin de, 384

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 712 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Allerston Beck, river (Yorks N), 384, 387 Allerton, Jukel de, 453 Almar, 52 Almondsbury (Glos), 478 Almora S., 494 Almoravit E., 494 Alneto, William de, 623 Alno, Alexander de, 226 Alost, Thomas de, 538 Alresford (Essex), 91 Alric, son of Swany, 307 Alryk, 307 Alsi, 37, 291 Alton (Hants), 29 Aluric, 72 sheriff of Northumberland, 188 Alvered butler, 228 master, 347, 579 porter, 484 Alveston (Warws), 59 Alvieth, 163 Alvred, 39, 97 abbot of Abingdon (1184-1189), 617 Dorchester (1146-1182), 332 Alvred the Spaniard, 9 Alvric, the reeve, 167 Alwin, 172 Alwin, son of Turber, 39 Alwington (Devon), 475 Alwold, the reeve, 579 Alwyn, the priest, 281 Ambrose, master, 337, 408 Amesbury (Wilts), abbey abbess, see Beatrice Ameyugo (Spain), 494 Amfreville, Walter de, 248 Amfrid, alderman of Oxford, 533 Amiens, Hugh of, archbishop of Rouen (11301164), 310 Amundeville John de, 636 Walter de, 439 William de, 448 Anagni (Italy), 396, 402 Andevill, Robert de, 234 Andover (Hants), 167 priory, 167 Andressey (Staffs), 517 Andrew, 252 abbot of Cirencester (1149- 1176), 347, 579 the mason, 329 master, 308 Anesy, William de, 189

Angers (France), 352 St. Nicholas, Abbey of, 641 Angevin Geoffrey 1', 652 Oliver 1', 450, 482 Angus, earl of Moray, 265 Anketil, 163Anketil, 301 monk of Sibton, 608 Anne, wife of John [de] Tregoz, 529, 530 Annesley, Ralph de, 439 Annington, Edwin de, 198 Anschil, 43 Ansculf, 27 Anselm abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1121-1148), 295, 318, 394, 569, 630 archbishop of Canterbury (1093-1109), 154, 178, 254, 319, 421,499 Ansfrid, steward, 212 Ansfrida, mistress of King Henry I, 218 Ansger, abbot of Reading (1130-1135), 282 Ansgot, 219 Anskill, 133 Anstey (Herts), 408 (Wilts), 444 Anstey John of, 408 Richard of, 408 Anthony, prior of St. Sepulchre, Warwick, 402 Apalgard, near Kirkby Moorside (Yorks N), 455 Appelhanger, in Goring (Oxon), 604 Appledore (Kent), 573 Applestead (Hants), 343 Appleton (Yorks), 497 Appleton Wiske (Yorks N), 554 Appleton, Roger de, 554 Apps Court (Surrey), 26 Apsancre, unidentified, 343 Arald, archdeacon, 226 Arasuri, P. de, 494 Arblast', Robert de, 340 Arbo, Ralph, 329 Arborarius, Henry, 278 Arches Osbern de, 65 Thurstan de, 482 William de, 345 Archibald, Robert, 579 Arden (Yorks N), 591 Arden Gilbert de, 397 Ralph de, 596, 606, 609, 610, 632 Thomas de, 397

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 713 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Arderne, Thomas de, 563 Ardington (Berks), 45 Ardwin, 439 Arescy, Jocelin de, 555 Arfast, see Herfast, bishop of Thetford Argentan (Normandy), 284, 490 Arias, Pedro, 494 Armingford (Cambs), 52 Arnedo (Spain), 494 Arnold, 488 archdeacon of Exeter, 266 Arnost, bishop of Rochester (1075-1076), 5 Arnulf archdeacon of S~ez, 291 chamberlain, 175 Arques, William of, 5 Arrow (Warws), 10 Arsic, Manasser, 184 Arundel Robert de, 228, 266, 267 Roger, 554, 566, 599 William de, earl of Sussex, 494 Asa, wife of Bernulf, 64 Ascan, son of Jeffe, 307 Ascelin, bishop of Rochester (1142- 1148), 394 Aschetil, the reeve, 240 Aschil, 77 Aschuil, 291 Ascur, the priest, 557 Asgar, the constable, 46 Asgarby (Lincs), 264, 299 Ashbury (Berks), 257 Ashdon, Thomas de, 340 Ashfield (Suffolk), 126 Ashford Geoffrey de, 488 Thomas de, 488 William de, 340, 488 Ashleworth (Glos), 478, 616 Askeledic, unidentified, 584 Asketil, 259 Asketin, 488 Asketur, William, 254 Askham (Westmoreland), 307 Aspall (Suffolk), 129 Asper, William de, 314 Aspley (Warws), 326 Aston Bampton (Oxon), 511 Aston, Robert de, 664 Athelstan, king of the West-Saxons (926-939), 3, 172 Athene, 569 Atselina, 294 Atsere, 10

Atsur, sheriff of Oxfordshire, 336 Attleborough (Norfolk), 415 Aubigny Nigel d', 166, 181, 188,202,221,224, 225,245, 263 Richard d', abbot of St. Albans (1097-1119), 405,415 Samson d', 368 William d', 141, 155, 163, 177, 203, 246 William I d', called Pincerna, 268, 415 William 1Id', earl of Arundel, 405, 415 William III d', earl of Arundel, 574 William d', earl of Sussex, 595 William d', 641, 650 William I d', Brito, 246, 268, 272, 275 Aubrey, earl of Northumberland, 223 Auco John de, 329 Robert de, 329 Auda, 307 Audin, chaplain, 168 Audley, Adam de, 325 Audouen, bishop of Evreux (1113-1139), 223 Auger, prior of Newnham (1170-1198), 561 Augustine, prior of Newburgh (1142/43-1154), 345 Aumale, Stephen of, 143 Aumari, Gilbert de, 549 Aunay Herbert de, 266, 267 Ralph d', archdeacon of York, 566 Ausejo (Spain), 494 Autol (Spain), 494 Auvers, Ruelent de, 559 Auvillar (France), 408 Avalon, Hugh of, bishop of Lincoln (1186-1200), 637 Avenel, 638 Gervase, 638 William, 430 Avice, 633 wife of Avenel, 638 Robert II de Stafford, 459 Avranches Hugh d', earl of Chester (died 1101), 62, 67, 70, 75, 126, 143 Rualon d', 160, 225, 254, 263 Thurgis d', 263, 301, 338 Axe, river (Somerset), 258 Aycliffe (Durham), 181 Aylesbury (Bucks), 593 Aylworth (Glos), 549, 610 Ayton, Gilbert de, 384

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 714 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Azo alderman of London, 329 dean of Salisbury, 297 Azor, steward of King Edward the Confessor, 45 Backwell, Thomas de, 226 Bacon, Alwin, 232 Badbury (Wilts), 228 Badlesmere (Kent), 22 Bagley Wood (Berks), 12 Bagendon, Richard de, 579 Bagot Hervey, 459, 543 Hervey, son of Hervey, 459 Hugh, 598 Ivetta, 543 John, 459 Richard, son of John, 459 Robert, 325, 459 Roger, 459, 543 William, 459 William, son of John, 459 Bainard Geoffrey, 143 Ralph, 117 Robert, 108 Baivel, William, 652 Balby, William de, 566 Balca, unidentified, 252 Baldric, archdeacon of Leicestershire, 465 Baldwin, 61 Baldwin, 310 abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1065-1097/8), 9, 18, 140, 630 Forde (1161-1180), 499 Tavistock (1174-1184), 475 bishop of Worcester, see Ford (Baldwin de) archbishop of Canterbury, see Ford (Baldwin de) the canon, 329 canon of St. Paul's, London, 449 the clerk, 367 the clerk of Roger de Mowbray, 454, 455 nephew of Roger fitz Richard, lord of Clare, 225 son of Fike, 254 Balford, 301 Balle, Godwin, 291 Balliol Gilbert de, 377 William de, 453, 486 Withelard de, 377 Ballon, Winebald de, 226 Banham, Robert of, 501

Barator, Robert, 533 Bardfield, Great (Essex), 470 Bardney (Lincs), 79 abbey of, 485 Bardulf Hugh, 513, 571, 572, 585, 591, 592, 596, 597, 608, 621,632, 633 sheriff of Wiltshire, 607 Thomas, 485 Walter, 384 Barentin, Alexander de, 552 Barfleur (Normandy), 641 Barham (Suffolk), 18 Barking (Essex), abbey, 90, 289 Barking, Ralph de, 318 Barkston wapentake (Yorks W), 65 Barkston, William de, 527 Barling, John de, 640 Barlings (Lincs), abbey, 551 Barnack, Gilbert de, 214 Barnes (Surrey), 393 Barney (Norfolk), 118, 408 Barnhorne, in Bexhill (Sussex), 377, 404 Barningham (Suffolk), 569 Barningham Berard de, 295 Leomar de, 295 Ordmer de, 19 Barnoldswick (Yorks W), 492 Barnston (Essex), 94 Barr', Roger, 455 Barre, Richard, archdeacon of Ely, 641 Barri, Stephen, 555 Barrington (Glos), 653 Bartholomew bishop of Exeter (1161-1184), 405, 421, 452, 460, 477, 478, 494, 499 nephew of the abbot of Dorchester, 332 the priest, 329 the steward, 552 Barthorpe, William de, 542 Bartley Green (Worcs), 51 Barton (Suffolk), 318 Barton (Westmorland), 307 Basing, 172 Basingstoke, hundred of (Hants), 37 Basset [Pain], 160 Basset Ralph, 163, 172, 189, 195, 204, 205, 215, 221, 237, 244, 246, 287, 424 Ralph, brother of Geoffrey II Ridel (died c. 1163), 388 Richard, 246, 424 Robert, 557 Simon, 515

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 715 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Basset (contd) Thomas, 478, 513 Turstin, 424 William, 388, 473, 485, 518, 538, 545-547, 561 sheriff of Lincolnshire, 551 Bassingbourn, Warin de, sheriff of Cambridgeshire, 462 Baston (Lincs), 560 Bataille, Richard, 657 Bath, diocese, bishop of, see Villula (John de) Batsford (in Warbleton) (Sussex), 196 Battle (Sussex) abbey, 174, 196, 234, 320, 360, 377, 404, 445, 458 abbots of, see Henry, Lucy (Walter de), Ralph, Warner Batun, 291 Baumber (Lincs), 74 Baunton, Hamo de, 579 Bayeux bishop of, see Odo John de, chaplain, 168 Richard de, 163 Thomas de, archbishop of York (1070-1100), 2, 3, 9, 20, 76-78, 134, 138, 163, 223 Baylham, Thomas de, 592 Baynard, Juga, 186 Ralph, 46, 186 William, 185 Beanfulk, Richard de, 311 Beatrice abbess of Amesbury (deposed 1177), 386 wife of Robert Starrlett, 625 Beauchamp Hugh I de, 54, 55, 58 Nicholas de, sheriff of Staffordshire, 517 Richard de, 635, 656 Robert de, 455 Simon I de, 268, 271 Simon II de, 623 Stephen de, 517, 656 sheriff of Hertfordshire, 451 William de, 579 Beaufai, William de, bishop of Thetford (10861091), 111, 126 Beaufou, Ralph de, 177 Beaumais, Robert de, 240 Beaumont Henry de, earl of Warwick, 134, 163, 165, 180, 190 Hugh de, 134 Robert I de, earl of Leicester, 491 Robert II de, earl of Leicester, 239, 268, 283, 294,312,316,317,349,360,364,382,396,

405, 406,408,415,421,423,444,447,449, 491 Robert III de, earl of Leicester, 487, 491, 499, 579 Robert I de, count of Meulan, 153, 180, 181, 184, 190, 203, 239 Waleran de, count of Meulan, 239 Beaunay, Adam de, 304 Bebba, queen, wife of Aethelfrid of Bernicia, 143 Bec (Normandy), abbey, 316 Bec Gilaberd de, 307 Hugh de, 620 Martin of, abbot of Peterborough (11321155), 283, 302 Theobald of, archbishop of Canterbury (11381161), 296, 297, 303, 311, 336, 354, 355, 359,360, 371,383,386,389,393-396,405, 408, 411,420, 520 William de, 620 Beche, Everard de, sheriff of Cambridgeshire, 462 Beckenham (Kent), 275, 325, 580 Becket, Thomas, 311, 330 archbishop of Canterbury (1162-1170), 405, 407,409-411,415,416,418,420-422,438, 457 chancellor, 349, 352, 357, 358, 360, 372, 383, 401,405 martyr, 461, 463, 464, 471, 472, 502, 503, 581 Beckley (Oxon), 145 Bedeford, Ralph de, prior of Worcester cathedral (1146-1189), 507, 512 Bedford (Beds), 471, 472 Bedford, Geoffrey de, 656 Bee, Robert, 641 Beeding (Sussex), 163 Beedon (Berks), 145, 164 Beeford (Yorks E), 541 Bekerug, Peter de, 635 Bekesbourne (Kent), 620 Beler Hamo, 367, 368 Robert, 454 Belet Geoffrey, 507 Michael, 507, 537, 539, 545, 547, 569, 571, 572, 577, 583, 585, 587, 590, 596, 600, 608 Belfou, Alan de, 458 Ralph de, lord of Hockering (died c. 1122), 18, 200, 256 Roger de, 458 Beliardis, widow of Sturnell, 380 Bella Aqua, Geoffrey de, 559 Belleville, Ranulf de, 596

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 716 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Bellun Nicholas de, 453 Ralph de, 368 Belmeis Philip de, 273, 312 Ranulf de, 387 Richard I de, bishop of London (1108-1127), 181,189, 202, 203,216, 225,242, 243,273 Richard II de, archdeacon of Middlesex, 308, 329 bishop of London (1152-1162), 360, 520 Walter de, 329 William de, archdeacon of London, 325 Belnai, Adam de, 291 Belorado (Spain), 494 Belsanta, 622 Belvoir Ralph de, 453-455 Robert de, 453-455 Bendinges, William de, 511, 513 Benedict, 217 abbot of Peterborough (1177-1193), 551, 585, 612, 629, 641 Selby (1069/70- 1096/97), 149 the Jew of London, 408 prior of Christ Church Canterbury (11751177), 498 son of Thowi, 362 Benefeld, Robert de, 453 Benefield, in Ravensden (Beds), 623 Beneit, Robert, 522 Benetun, unidentified, 650 Bengeworth (Worcs), 10, 15, 50 Beningbrough (Yorks N), 345 Bennington Gilbert son of Justi, 641 Reginald de, 641 Bensington Walter de, 332 Benson (Oxon), 372, 511 Beorhtheah, bishop of Worcester (1033-1038), 10 Beovill, Roger de, 616 Berard, 318 Bere, Reginald le, 575 Berengar, 128 Berenger, 307 Berkamstead (Herts), 421 Berkeley (Glos), 341, 478 Berkeley Hernesse (Glos), 478, 499 Berkeley Maurice de, 478, 606, 609, 610 Richard de, 478 Robert de, 478 Roger de, 228

Berkesden Green (Herts), 48 Berkshire, Robert de, 397 Berman, 291 Bernard, 281 Bernard, 569 abbot of Burton-upon-Trent (1160-1175), 517 Ramsey (1 102-1107), 175, 182 bishop of St. David's (I 115- 1148), 225, 241, 248,274, 284 the cleric, 605 the forester, 167 king's scribe, 266, 267 sheriff of Cornwall, 322 Berner, the steward, 311 Berneri, Garcia, 494 Berners Hugh de, 18, 94 Ralph de, 440 Berners Roding (Essex), 94 Bernolvescroft, unidentified, 584 Bersiestona, unidentified, 304 Berwick, Saric de, 232 Besing, 505 Bessacarr (Yorks W), 584 Bessacarr, Peter de, 584 Besthorpe Roger de, 521 Walter de, 594 Bethune, Robert de, 226 bishop of Hereford (1131 -1148), 281,301,414 Betteshanger, Peter de, 488 Betton Abbots (Salop), 273, 387 Beuvrifre, Drew de la, 66, 83, 84, 103 Beverley (Yorks E), 172 Church of St. John the Baptist, 66, 172, 490 Beverston (Glos), 478 Bevington (Warws), 10 Bewick (Northumberland), 497 Bicester, Gilbert de, 559 Bicker (Lincs), 85 Biddisham (Somerset), 603 Biddlesden (Bucks), abbey, 317 Bideford (Devon), 475 Bidford (Warws), 10 Bidun, Robert de, 509 Bienfait, Richard de, 7 Bigod Hugh I, earl of Norfolk, 268, 291, 294, 331, 349, 578 Hugh II, earl of Norfolk, 405, 492, 495 Roger I, 9, 96, 105-109, 115, 120,121,123, 124, 126, 127, 134, 137, 141,156, 163, 168, 169, 171, 180, 256 sheriff of Norfolk, 173, 180

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 717 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Bigod (contd) Roger II, earl of Norfolk (1177-1221), 494, 495, 513, 578, 627, 634, 641,646 William, 200, 203 Bilibio (Spain), 494 Binham (Norfolk), 177 Priory, 415 Binham, Stephen de, master, 408 Binsey, 301 Binstand, Richard, 433 Birdforth, wapentake of (Yorks N), 591 Birkin, John de, 663 Birmingham, Peter de, 459 Birthwaite, Adam de, 566 Bisbrooke (Leics), 319 Biset, Manasser, the steward, 349, 374, 376, 400, 441 Bishop, William, 198 Bittering (Norfolk), 99 Bixley (Norfolk), 105, 121, 358 Black Bourton (Oxon), 466, 518 Blackfurlong, unidentified, 343 Blackmarston (Hereford), 281 Blacsune, 254 Blakeman, 343, 425 Blakenham, Benedict de, 318 Blakeshall Edric de, 645 Turkil de, 645 Blanchmains, Robert II, earl of Leicester, 574 Blandford (Dorset), 228 Blean, Simon de, 488 Blidworth (Notts), 439 Bloet, Robert, bishop of Lincoln (1093-1123), 138, 154, 168, 172, 184, 189, 197,203,205, 215, 221,225, 231,233, 405 Blois, Henry of, abbot of Glastonbury (11261171), 257, 258, 292 bishop of Winchester (1129-1171), 292, 297, 334, 335, 342, 377, 405, 408, 420, 421, 637 Blore, Robert de, 459 Blosseville, Jordan de, 331 sheriff of Lincolnshire, 362 Bloworth, in Bransdale (Yorks N), 455 Blund Edward, 529, 530 Robert, 120 Blundel Ralph, 325 William, 660 Blundeville, Ranulf III, earl of Chester, 574 Blyborough (Lincs), 496, 522 Blyth (Notts), 439 Blythburgh (Suffolk), 216

Boarhunt Alexander de, 343 Bernard de, 343 Henry de, 343 Herbert de, 343 Ralph de, 343 Reinelm de, 343 Reiner de, 343 Richard de, 343 Boar's Hill (Berks), 378 Boarzell, in Ticehurst (Sussex), 196 Boby, Hugh de, 546 Bocland Hugh de, 156, 160, 164 sheriff of Berkshire, 169, 171, 185, 199 sheriff of Hertfordshire, 168 Stephen de, 452 Wido de, 452 William de, sheriff of Berkshire, 215, 218 see also Buckland Bocombe, Richard de, 475 Bodes, Richard de, 163 Bohun Humphrey de, 163, 181, 228 Humphrey de, the constable, 525, 578 Jocelin de, bishop of Salisbury (1142-1184), 374, 377,395, 397, 416,421,494,520, 548, 628 Boie, Hugh, 384 Bola, Haldan, 307 Bolbec Hugh II de, 391 Walter I de, 271 Bolingbroke (Lincs), 307 Bolingbroke, Lucy de, wife of Ranulf I de Gernons or le Meschin, earl of Chester, 376 Bolloc, Terric, 447 Boltby Guy de, 323 Ivo de, 453 Bonde, Ralph, 431 Bondo, 107 Bonefeld, Robert de, 384 Bon-Enfaunt, the Jew, 408 Bootham, Fulk de, 392 Boothby, Hugh de, 641 Bordin, 112 Boreham (Essex), 92 Boreham, Maurice de, 657 Borhard, Ralph de, 271 Borstal (Kent), 394 Borstal, Ralph de, 394 Bosco Adam de, 569

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 718 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Alan de, 579 Ernald de, 317 Robert de, 465 Bosmere (Hants), 30, 123, 124 Boso, 388 Bossington, Florent de, 340 Boston, St. Botolph (Lincs), 546, 608 Bosworth, see Market Bosworth Botevilein, Robert de, dean of York, 455 see also Butevilein Botley (Berks), 133 Botlindon, Robert de, 652 Botolph Bridge, Ralph de, 219 Boughton, William de, 338 Boulers, Robert de, 592 Boulogne, Eustace of, count, 342 Boulton, Arnwin de, 365 Bountisborough, hundred of (Hants), 34 Bourges, Hervey de, landowner in Suffolk, 18 Bourn (Cambs), lord of, see Picot Bourton, Hugh de, 518 Bovo, the cleric, 267 Bowforth (Yorks N), 453, 455, 486 Boxford (Suffolk), 568 Boxted (Suffolk), 601 Bozun Richard, 452 William, 452 Bracebridge, Richard of, 641 Bracewell (Yorks), 450 Bracy, Gilbert de, 571 Bradewade Edmund de, 428 William de, 428 Bradfield (Yorks W), 595 Bradford (Wilts), 228 Bradwell (Bucks), 558 Brai, Osbert de, 433 Brail, in Eakring (Notts), 527 Braiseworth, Hubert de, 582, 592, 640 Brakelond, Jocelin de, cellarer of Bury St. Edmunds, 648, 662 Bramber (Sussex), 163 Brambleden (Sussex), 198 Bramerton (Norfolk), 97, 120 Bramhope, Baldwin de, 450, 482 Brampton (Hants), 187, 205, 268, 276 Brancaster (Norfolk), 141, 256 Brand, Ralph, 529, 530, 550 Brandish Wood (Herts), 385 Brandon, Jocelin de, 527 Branford (Suffolk), 458 Bransford (Worcs), 10 Brantham (Suffolk), 458

Braose Philip de, 163, 198 Robert de, 163 Robert de, 509 William de, 163 William de, 513 Bras, Geoffrey, 325, 459 Brathay, river in Lancs and Westmorland, 364 Bratton (Wilts), 228 Bray, William de, 642, 643 Braybrooke (Leics), 319 Braytoft, Walter of, 641 Breadsall (Derbyshire), 365 Breckles (Norfolk), 95 Bredy, Ailward de, 232 Brembreshoc, unidentified, 196 Brent Marsh (Somerset), 258 Bret, Walter le, 563 Bretford, Walter de, 514 Brian, 295 Bricmar, 127 Bricstan, 204 Brictred, 291 Bridgnorth (Salop), 243, 361 Bridlington (Yorks E) Augustinian canons, 538 prior, see Gregory Bridlington, Ernald de, 486 Bridport (Dorset), 232 Bridport John de, master, 631 Tedwi de, 232 Bridsall (Yorks E), 516 Bridsor, unidentified, 228 Briewerre, William, 597, 641 Brightwalton (Berks), 444 Brimbley (Dorset), 228 Brimham (Yorks W), 367 Brimou, Rainer de, 70, 78 Bristol (Glos) St. Augustine's abbey, 478, 499, 616 abbot of, see Richard Bristol, Ralph of, 594 Brito, 246 Hamo, 391 John, 329 Mainfenin, sheriff of Bedfordshire, 249 Nicholas, 606, 609, 610 Ralph, 329, 362, 408, 424, 529, 530 Ralph, the clerk, 550 Richard, 327 Richard, 528 Richard, 579

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 719 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Brito (contd) Richard, archdeacon of Coventry, 597 Walter II, 514, 515 William, 215, 318 Brixton (Surrey), 25, 27 Brixworth Peter of, 431 Simon de, 338, 431 Broadwas (Worcs), 632 Broadwas Alan de, 605 Walter de, 605 Broadwater, hundred of (Herts), 47 Broadway, in St. Paul's, Walden (Herts), 435 Broadway, Nicholas de, 605 Broc Nigel de, 363, 369 Robert de, 509 Broder, priest, 174 Brodgte, Roger, 301 Brodsworth Adam de, 566, 567 Vincent de, 566 Broi Philip de, canon of St. Paul's, Bedford, 411 Robert de, 271 Bromcroft, unidentified, 634 Bromham (Wilts), 444 Bromham, Thomas de, 509 Bromley (Staffs), 252 Bromley, Ranulf de, 394 Brompton (Yorks E), 483 Brompton-on-Swale (Yorks N), 526 Bromsgrove, Walter de, 507 Brook (Kent), 5 Broom, see King's Broom Broomsthorpe, in East Rudham (Norfolk), 578 Broughton (Hants), 39 (Hunts), 262 Broxted (Essex), 18 Bruges, William de, 559 Bruman, reeve at Canterbury, 17 Brun Geoffrey le, 397 Roger, the steward, 308 Brunman, son of Lemay, 254 Bruno, the Jew, 408 Brus, Robert de, 181, 223, 268 Brusard, 275 Brushfield (Derbys), 638 Bryanston (Dorset), 228

PLACES

Buccuinte Andrew, 270, 291 Andrew, 493 Geoffrey, 447, 550 Humphrey, sheriff of London, 447 John, 447, 529, 530, 550 Laurence, 308 Ralph, 270 Randulf, 270 Bucherell, Andrew, 529, 530 Buckby, Hugh de, 422 Buckden (Yorks W), 659 Buckenham, Ralph de, 295 Buckholt (Sussex), 377 Buckingham, Hugh de, abbot of Osney (11841205), 571, 589, 643 Buckland (Berks), 42 Buckland Henry de, 477 Robert de, 477 Wulfwig of, 254 see also Bockland Bucy, sheriff of the rape of Bramber in Sussex, 198 Buich Odo, 242 Rainald, 242 Richard, 242 Turstin, 242 Buistard, Walter, 175 Bukerel, William, 270 Bulmer Ansketil de, reeve, 172 Stephen de, 361 Buncton (Sussex), 583 Buncton, Richard de, 583 Burchard, 122 Burci, Serlo de, 228 Burdelin, Leoveric, 232 Burdon (Durham), 181 Burdun Geoffrey, 272 Roger, 636 Burel, William, 488 Bures (Essex), 656 Burgato, Picot de, 228 Burgegate, unidentified, 254 Burgh, Philip de, 598 Burghley, William de, 205, 214, 272 Burguignun, John le, 529, 530 Burnes Eustace de, 620 Robert de, 620 Burnham (Norfolk), 203

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 720 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Buron (Spain), 494 Burton Saric de, 232 Torgot de, 232 Burton Bradstock (Dorset), 232 Burton-upon-Trent (Staffs), abbey, 252, 517, 598 abbot of, see Geoffrey Burun Erneis de, 75, 134 Hugh de, 439 Burwell (Cambs), 175 Burwell, Guy de, 175 Bury (Hunts), 203 Bury, Henry de, 660 Bury St. Edmunds (Suffolk), 295, 358, 359, 501, 581 abbey, 125, 126, 128, 331, 446, 520, 582, 592, 615, 630, 634 abbot of, see Anselm, Baldwin, Hugh I, Leofstan, Ording, Samson, Ufi prior of, see Talbot Buscy, Robert de, 367, 453-455 But, Walter, 269 Butevilein Robert, 431 William, 431 see also Botevilein Butieres, 343 Bycarrs dike, river (Notts), 439 Byfield (Northants), 477 Byland (Yorks N) abbey, 323, 591 abbot of, see Roger Byscop, Ralph, 307 Byseleger, Robert de, 301 Caen (Normandy), 383, 540 St. Stephen's abbey, 232 abbot of, see William II John de, 517 Serlo de, 447 Cahagnes Ralph de, 256 William de, sheriff of Northamptonshire, 132 sheriff of Warwickshire, 164 Caillewey Hugh de, 610 Philip de, 549 Caister (Norfolk), 355 Caldecot, William de, 651 Caldwell, David de, 598 Calixtus II, pope (1119-1124), 405 III, pope (1168-1178), 564

Caine Ebrard de, 397 Reginald de, 316 William de, 329, 607 Calva, Walter de, master, 602 Cam (Glos), 499 Cambridge (Glos), 160 Camera, Ralph de, 486 Camerton (Somerset), 619 Campis, Robert de, 656 Camville Gerard de, 525, 578 sheriff of Lincolnshire, 641 Henry de, 465 Richard de, 574, 595 Candleshoe (Lincs), 79 Cannel, Ralph, 254 Cannock, Alured de, 543 Canonsleigh, Ralph de, 475 Canteloup Robert de, 307 Walter de, 307 Canterbury (Kent), 408, 411, 458, 464, 650 Christ Church cathedral priory, 17, 254, 289, 311,340, 552, 573, 618 monk of, see Osbern St. Augustine's abbey, 17, 201, 254, 285, 488 abbots of, see Clarembald, Flori (Hugh de), Guy (Wido), Roger, Scotland, Silvester, Trottescleve (Hugh de) St. Gregory, Augustinian canons, 620 Canterbury, province, archbishops of, see klfheah, Ffric, Anselm, Bec (Theobald of), Becket (Thomas), Corbeil (William of), Dover (Richard of), Escures (Ralph d'), Lanfranc, Stigand Canterbury, John de, treasurer of St. Peter's chapter, York, 371 Cantilupo, Walter de, 440 Capel Ailbric de, 295 Samson, 488 William, 488 Capes, William de, 552 Cappe Robert, 459 Simon, 459 Cardif, John de, deputy for Robert fitz Bernard, sheriff of Kent, 488 Cardinli, Herbert, 281 Cardonville, Robert de, 579 Careville, Hugh de, 452 Carleton (Durham), 181

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 721 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Carlisle, diocese, bishop of, see Aethelwulf Carlton Cog de, 625 Jordan de, 509 Walter de, 368 William de, 509 Caron, William de, 54 Carter, Martin, 447 Castel, Richard, 340 Castle Acre (Norfolk) abbey, 438 Castle Baynard, honour of, see London Cary (Somerset), 328 Holdgate, called Stanton, in Tugford (Salop), 242 Castor, Geoffrey de, 214 Catmer, Adam de, sheriff of Berkshire and Oxfordshire, 406, 424 Catton (Yorks W), 510 Caundle, Roger de, 397 Cauz Hugh de, 496 Walter de, 511 Cawston (Norfolk), 98 Cawthorne, Hugh de, dean of Doncaster, 566, 567 Caythorpe (Lincs), 82 Celestine II, pope (1143-1144), 405 III, pope (1191-1198), 637 Cellorigo (Spain), 494 Cenwulf, king of Mercia (796-821), 3 Cepehan, John, 301 Cepel, Warin, 175 Cereville, Gilbert de, 407 Cerezo (Spain), 494 Cerisi, Robert de, 397 Cerisy, Walter de, abbot of Evesham (10771104), 10, 15, 50 Cerney, Miles de, 579 Chacombe, Hugh de, 632, 633 Chaddleworth (Berks), 424 Chalcroft (Hants), 343 Chalderbeach (Hunts), 314 Chalez, Aznar de, 494 Chalgrave Egilwin de, 208 Godric de, 208 Chamberlain Geoffrey, 447 Robert, 447 Safrid, 527 William, 296, 436, 447

PLACES

Champains, Robert de, 547 Chandos, Nicholas de, 408 Chaorciis, Patricius de, 226 Chardstock (Devon), 374 Charford (Hants), 31 Charing Adam de, 488, 573, 618 Ivo de, 488 Charwelton (Northants), 158, 187 Charybdis, 421 Chastill', Henry de, 641 Chastleton (Oxon), 10 Chatteris (Cambs), 204 Chaucumb, Hugh de, sheriff of Staffordshire, 632 Chaureth, Ralph de, 470 Chedgrave (Norfolk), 117 Cheich, Alfric, 291 Chelmsford (Essex), 446 Chelworth (Worcs), 607 Cheney Longville (Salop), 242 Chenp, Ulvric, 42 Cherbourg (Normandy), 523 Chernet, William de, 31 Chertsey (Surrey), abbey of abbot, see Wulfwold Cherwell (Northants), 477 Cheselbourne, William de, 228 Chesney John, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, 321 Ralph de, 511 Robert de, bishop of Lincoln (1148-1166), 279, 336-338,349,352, 360, 364, 371,399,405, 408, 411,427, 437-439, 621 Walter de, 296 William de, 594 sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, 331, 358 Chester, city of (Ches), 474 a bishop of, 51 diocese, bishops of, see Coventry diocese, see Clinton (Roger de), Durdent (Walter), Peche (Robert), Peter, Limesey (Robert de), Robert earls of, see Avranches, Gernon, Kevelioc Chesterfield (Derby), 369 Chesterton Ralph de, 348 William de, 193 Chichester, diocese, bishops of, see Greenford, John of, Luffa (Ralph), Hilary Chichester, William of, chaplain, 397 Chieveley (Berks), 164 Chiffin (Essex), 484 Chilbolton (Hants), 250

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 722 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Chilham Fulbert de, 174 Hugh de, 254 Chillenden, Wulfword, 254 Chilton (Berks and Wilts), 617 Chilton, Robert de, reeve, 174 Chilworth, William de, sheriff of Buckinghamshire, 593 Chimai, Robert de, master, 408 Chingenot, Edward, 232 Chippenham, Edward de, 19 Chivelstone, William de, 397 Chofin, Ralph, 488 Cholieresway, unidentified, 606 Cholsey (Berks), 215 Christ Church, see Canterbury (Kent), Christ Church cathedral priory Christchurch, Twinham (Hants), priory of, 430, 597 Christian bishop of Galloway (1154- 1186), 494 moneyer in Durham, 469 Christina, 270 Christina, 550 Church Coniston (Lancs), 364 Churchfurlong, unidentified, 343, 521 Churston, Richard de, 397 Chut, 307 Cimmay, Gilbert de, 296 Cincovillas (Spain), 494 Cioches, Anselm de, 338 Cirencester (Glos), 626 abbey, 328, 347, 579 abbot of, see Andrew Cirencester Hugh de, 579 William de, 347, 579 Clackclose, hundred of (Norfolk), 113 Clafford, Wulfun de, 167 Clandon, Ralph de, 431 Clare (Suffolk), 656 Clare Gilbert de, 636 earl of Clare, 296 Pembroke, 296 Richard III de, earl of Hertford (1173-1217), 470, 523, 634 Roger de, earl of Hertford, 407 Clarembald abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury (11631173), 488 the physician, 266 Clarendon (Wilts), 376, 377, 416-418, 421, 432, 445, 501,582

Clatinges (Hants), 31 Clavering (Norfolk), 107 Clavijo (Spain), 494 Clement, abbot of St. Mary, York (1161-1184), 405 Clenchwarton (Norfolk), 114 Clere, Roger de, 555 Clermont (France), 402 Clethale, in Westwood Park (Worcs), 507 Cleveland (Yorks N), 455, 591 Cliffe, Ailwin de, 340 Cliffsend, Aelmer, 488 Clinton Geoffrey de, 221, 240, 246, 250, 254, 260-262, 265, 268, 317, 344 Geoffrey de, son of Geoffrey, 275 Roger de, bishop of Chester (1129-1148), 275, 325, 339, 369 William de, 240, 275, 344 Cloevile, Robert de, 340 Clopton, Walter de, 187 Cnut, king of England (c. 995-1035), 9, 254, 256 Coates, Walter de, 579 Cobba, Engelramus, 447 Cobham, Algor de, 267 Coc, Robert, 450, 482 Cockfield (Suffolk), 627 Cockfield Adam de, 318, 627, 662 Robert de, 569, 581, 627 Cockington (Devon), 475 Coddenham, Robert of, 601 Code, 78 Coding, in Hove (Sussex), 196 Codstowe, Robert de, 652 Coffin Perinnus, 475 Ralph, 254 Richard, 475 Colban, 365 Colchester (Essex), 360, 446 abbey, 640 abbot of, see Gilbert Colchester, Odo de, 329 Cold Norton (Oxon), priory of, 466 Colemore (Hants), 343 Colesborne Almaric de, 579 Walter de, 579 Coleshill (Wales), 407 Coleville Alger de, 641 Thomas de, 453 William fitz Gilbert de, 640 Colneford (Essex), 484

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 723 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Coin Rogers (Glos), 248 Colstan, 366 Colston (Notts), 388 Colston, W. de, 388 Colswein, knight, 18 Colton, Walter de, 527 Columbers, Philip, son of Philip de, 596 Colwalton (Staffs), 275, 325 Colworth, William de, sheriff of Bedfordshire, 509 Combe, Sired de, 488 Compton (Hants), 35 Conan, son of Elias, 641 Coneres, Roger de, 636 Congham, John de, 529, 530 Conisbrough (Yorks W), 566, 567 Conred, king of Mercia (704-709), 3 Constable, Geoffrey, 329 Conteville Robert de, 134 Simon de, 163 Cook Adam, 343 John, 546 Coppenhall, Helias de, 459 Coppingford (Hunts), 286 Coppingfordmere (Hunts), 286 Corbeil, William of, archbishop of Canterbury (1123-1136), 248, 254, 273, 289 Corbert Robert, lord of Cauz, 242 Roger I, lord of Cauz, 242 Corbet, Ralph, 586 Cormeilles, Hugh de, 167 Cornard (Suffolk), 394 Cornhill, Gervase de, 425, 465, 532, 539, 544-546 Cornuvilla, Robert de, 320 Cornwall, Samson de, 367, 454 Cornwell (Oxon), 10 Cosford (Suffolk), 627 Cosham, Peter de, 343 Cospatric, Edgar, 497 Cossington, William de, 488 Costa Beck, river (Yorks N), 384, 487 Cotele, Richard, 619 Cotes, William de, 397 Coton-in-the Elms (Derby), 517 Cottenham (Cambs), 287 Cottesbrooke (Northants), 431 Cottesbrooke, Hernald de, 431 Cottingham (Yorks E), 516 Cotton, Roger de, 640 Cottons (Derbyshire), 365 Cottrehage, in Eakring (Notts), 527 Courbepine, Ralph de, 5

Courcelles, Roger de, 163 Courcy Richard de, 134, 151, 152 Robert de, 291, 304 William I de, 189 William III de, 420 Court, Richard, 343 Courtenay, Reginald de, 478, 487, 513, 523 Coutances, bishop of, see Geoffrey Coutances, Walter de, master, archdeacon of Oxford, 489, 523 Coveney (Cambs), 287 Coventry (Warws), 514, 536 Coventry, diocese, bishops of, see Durdent (Walter), Peche (Richard) Cowldyke (Yorks N), 453, 455, 486 Coxwold (Yorks N), 323 Crake (Lancs), 364 Cramaville, Henry de, 488 Cranfield (Beds), 249, 271 Cransley, Robert de, 338 Craon Alan de, 302, 546 Guy de, 546 Maurice de, 546 Wido de, 84-86 Cratley (Notts), 448 Crawley (Beds), 268, 271 Cray, Ralph de, 488 Craythorne Alan de, 650 William de, 488 Crediton (Devon), 130 Cressy, Hugh de, 477, 478, 497, 578 Cretingham (Suffolk), 596 Cretingham, William de, 596 Crevecoeur, Robert de, 225 Cricklade Robert de, prior of St. Frideswide, Oxford, 316, 336 Waleran de, 533 Criol, Peter de, 377 Crispin abbot of Winchcombe (1181-1182), 536 Gilbert, abbot of Westminster (1085(?)- 1117/ 18), 61, 136, 154, 156, 181, 204 Milo, 156, 559 Croft (Yorks N), 526 Cromhall (Glos), 478 Crooks House in Bracewell (Yorks W), 450, 482 Cropthorn (Worcs), 15 Cropwell Butler (Notts), 60 Crowland (Lincs) abbey, 641 abbot, see Robert, Wulfketel

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 724 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Crowmarsh, Hugh de, 559 Croxden (Staffs), Cistercian abbey, 643 Croxton, Richard de, 439 Croyland, see Crowland Crutch (Worcs), 507 Cudefo (Spain), 494 Cuelin (Llewellyn), Alexander, 421 Cugel, Elfret, 291 Cuhic, Edmund de, 266 Culford (Suffolk), 318 Culfrefurlong, in Doddenham (Worcs), 605 Culbam (Berks), 185 Culworth, Robert de, 651 Cumberworth (Lincs), 70 Cumbray Alured de, 474 Roger de, 474 Cumin John, 511,522 William, 311 Cumnor (Berks), 12 Cundy, Roger de, 367 Cuntre Hugh de la, 650 Terric de la, 650 Curson Robert de, 446, 524 William de, 263, 446 Curthose, Robert, duke of Normandy, 134, 164 Cuserugge, Thomas de, 579 Cuthbert bishop of Lindisfarne (685-687), 134, 181, 223, 432, 468, 469, 496 Cuxton (Kent), 394 Cynewuif, king of Wessex (755-786), 226 Dagenham, Ailward de, 232 Dagun, Fulk, 533 Daiville, Robert de, 323, 345, 428, 453-455 Dale Town (Yorks N), 323 Dalton le Moor (Yorks N), 534 Damasus, 421 Dammartin, Stephen de, 470 Danby, William de, 566 Daniel abbot of St. Benet of Hulme (c. 1141-46; c. 1150-53), 331 monk of Ramsey, 272 Daningawurde, unidentified, 196 Dapifer, William, 214 Darfield (Yorks W), 566 Darfield, Reiner de, 566 Darlaston Denise de, 664 Robert, son of Ranulf, 664

PLACES

Darley (Derbys), St. Mary, Augustinian canons, 600 Darmsden (Suffolk), 287 Daugleddau (Pembroke), 284 Dauney, Henry, 475 Daventry (Northants), Priory of St. Augustine, 319 Daventry, Philip de, 423 David, earl of Huntingdon and Northampton, 203,231,235 see also David I, king of Scotland the lardiner, 453 David I, king of Scotland, 235, 249, 265, 268, 271 Daylesford (Glos), 10 Dean, Humphrey, 559 Dean Prior (Devon), 564 Deane Godfrey de la, 498 Nicholas de la, 498 Thomas de la, 498 William de la, 498 Dee, river (Ches), 474 Deeping (Lincs), 641 Deerhurst, Robert de, 465 Deingt', Elias de, 226 Delce Geoffrey de, 238 Herbert de, 238 Dene Simon fitz Ralph de, 557 Thomas de, 650 Deneys, William, 475 Denge Marsh, see Dunge Marsh Denis, abbot of Robertsbridge, 573 Denston, Geoffrey de, 517 Denton (Kent), 5 Denton, Simon de, 488 Deopham (Norfolk), 311 Deorefald, unidentified, 606 Depwade (Norfolk), 110 Derby (Derbyshire), 365, 517 Church of St. Peter, 365 St. Mary, see Darley Derby, William, 430 Dereham, Elias de, 498 Derneheygate, unidentified, 286 Derwent, river (Yorks N), 487 Desborough (Northants), 431 Despenser, Walter, 628 Detling (Kent), 5 Devizes (Wilts), 607 Devizes, Ernald de, 395 Dewsbury, Thomas de, 566 Diaz, Lope, 494

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 725 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Diceto, Ralph de, archdeacon of London, 421, 434 Dieu-la-Cresse, the Jew, 408 Dinisius, the clerk, 389 Dionisia, wife of John Buccuinte, 550 Ditchcroft, unidentified, 343 Dive Robert de, 488 William de, monk of Vaudey, 448 Divina (Spain), 494 Dod William, 453 Wulfwine, 254 Doddenham (Worcs), 605 Dodderhill (Worcs), 507 Doddesbroc, David de, 657 Doddington (Lincs), 61 Doddington, Hugh de, 498 Dodleston (Ches), 474 Dol, Walter de, priest, 125, 126 Dolfin, the rural dean, 566 Domerham (Somerset), 619 Domne, 130 Doncaster (Yorks W), 566 Donhead (Wilts), 228 Donington (Lincs), 524 Dorchester (Oxon) abbey abbot of, see Alvred Dornford (Oxon), 10 Dorset, the archdeacon of, 597 Dorsington (Glos), 10 Doulting (Somerset), 619 Dover (Kent), 254, 375 St. Martin's priory, 178 Dover Fulbert de, 174, 225 Hugh de, sheriff of Kent, 420 Rainald de, 447 Richard of, archbishop of Canterbury (11731184), 472, 478, 479, 494, 552 Richard de, 447 Robert de, 238 Dover Beck, river (Notts), 439 Dowgate, ward of, in London, 529, 530 Downing, 343 Draycott, Sired de, 590 Drayton (Lincs), 85 Dringwell (Devon), 475 Drogo, 233 the chaplain, 168 the forester, 368 Dromar, Robert de, 397 Drugell, William, 605 Druval, Thomas de, 559, 604

Duc, Roger le, 550 Ducchet Eustace, 329 Richard, 329 Duckmanton (Derbs), 388 Dudemettune, Seuugel de, 488 Dudland, Ketel de, 482 Dumbleton (Glos), 146, 192, 195, 481 Dumeitune, Jordan de, 488 Dunard, the chaplain, 167 Duncan, 228 chaplain, 397 Dunfermline (Forthriff), Abbey, 396 Dunge Marsh (Kent), 303 Dunham, Thomas de, 473 Dunhevet (Cornwall), 322 Dunmow (Essex), 473 Dunnington (Yorks E), 541 Dunstable (Beds), 274, 405 Dunstan, bishop of Worcester (957-959), 3, 16 Dunstanville Hugh de, 322 Reginald de, earl of Cornwall, 226, 323, 341, 349, 361,395, 421,459 Robert de, 322, 341 William de, 397 Durand, 224 monk of Burton-upon-Trent Abbey, 252 sheriff of Gloucestershire, 10 Durango (Spain), 494 Durant, 301 Durdent Walter, prior of Christchurch Canterbury, 311 bishop of Chester and Coventry (1149-1159), 325 Durham, 134, 437, 469, 472 Cathedral Priory of St. Cuthbert, 172, 361, 432, 496, 522 diocese, bishop of, 403 see Flambard (Ranulf), Puiset (Hugh de), St. Carilef (William of), Walcher Durham, Reginald de, 412 Durvassal, William, 536 Each End Alfwine of, 254 Eadwin of, 254 Eadgiva, 253 Eadild, sister of Orgar, 329 Eadwine, the clerk, 254 Eakring (Notts), 356, 527, 625 Ealdred, archbishop of York (1062-1069), 1, 3, 20, 66 Earls Colne (Essex), Benedictine abbey of, 484, 656

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 726 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Earnigcote (Oxon), 206 Earsham (Norfolk), 109 Easby (Yorks N), Abbey of St. Agatha, 526 Easington (Yorks N), 572 East Brent (Somerset), 619 Eastbrook, river (Oxon), 440 Eastbury, in Hallow (Worcs), 10 East Ham (Essex), 245 Easton (Hunts), 54 Eastry, John de, the young, 650 East Weld (Oxon), 511 Eaton (Ches), 474 (Norfolk), 263 Ebberston Norman de, 384 William de, 384 Ebruin, 271 Ecclesfield (Yorks W), 595 Ecclesfield, Jeremy de, 595 Eccleston (Ches), 474 Ecgwin, bishop of Worcester (693-717), 14, 15 Edgar, king of England (957-975), 3, 11, 18 Edingale (Staffs), 459 Edith, the widow, 301 Edlington (Lincs), 485 Edmund, 343 monk of Jarrow, 223 the physician, 622 Saint, king of East Anglia (died 870), 331, 501 Edred king of the West-Saxons (946-955), 3 monk of Jarrow, 223 Edric, 15, 43, 97, 120 Edstone, in Wootton Waven (Warws), 10 Edulf, the cleric, 556 Edward, 167 Edward, 431 the chamberlain, 168 citizen of London, 253 the Confessor, king of England (1042-1066), 4, 5,7, 10,11, 13,15,17,18,20,21-23,25,28, 32, 34, 35, 40,42-44,47,49, 52, 54, 56, 57, 69, 72-74, 78, 92, 93, 95, 97-99, 104, 108, 110, 112, 113, 121,122,130,131,144, 152, 163, 167, 197,246,253,285,349,405, 570, 581,582 the Elder, king of the West-Saxons (899-924), 3, 11 knight, 316 prior, 499 Edwin, 38 Edwin, 271 Edwin, 533 king of Northumbria (616-632), 11

priest, 215 reeve, 167 Edwinstree, hundred of (Herts), 48 Edymarsh in Pickering (Yorks N), 384, 487 Effrad, 307 Eglingham (Northumberland), 497 Egremont, William de, 364 Eilaf, 365 Eilric, 82 Eleanor daughter of King Henry II of England, 494 queen of England (1154-1204), 382, 386, 396, 408 Eleazar, the Jew, 321 Eleigh (Suffolk), 581 Elfwen, wife of William Peche, 261 Elgar, 343 Elham (Kent), 532 Elias, 656 Elias abbot of Rufford (1149-1174), 527 clerk, 555 priest, 484 Eling (Hants), 228, 249 Ellesmere (Salop), 346 Ellington, Godric de, 175, 233 Elmbridge, hundred of (Surrey), 26 Elmham, see Thetford (later Norwich) Elmstone Hardwicke (Glos), 626 Elsfield, Hugh de, 333 Elterwater (Lancs), 364 Elton (Hunts), 224 Elverton, in Stone next Faversham (Kent), 340 Elwald, canon of Durham, 223 Elwi, son of Snelling, 344 Elworth (Dorset), 228 Ely (Cambs) abbey of, 18, 87, 113 abbots, see Richard, Simeon, Thurstan monk, see Godfrey diocese, bishops of, see Hervey, Nigel Ely, William de, 447 Emma abbess of Shaftesbury, 228 daughter of Grimbald the physician, 294 Henry, 556 William fitz Osbern, 7 queen, daughter of Richard I, duke of Normandy, 30 Engaine, Eudo son of Ralph, 623 Engaine, Vitalis, 224 Enginur John, 652 John, son of Roger, 651

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 727 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Enham, William de, 167 Enisan, 275 Entrena (Spain), 494 Epaselcrofte, unidentified, 286 Erdinton, Thomas de, sheriff of Staffordshire, 664 Erga (Spain), 494 Erith (Kent), 5 Ermelina, abbess of Malling, 389 Ermenold, 209 Ernald, 392 weaver, 301 Ernegrim, 10 Ernisius, 477 Ernulf abbot of Peterborough (1107-1114), 214, 220 bishop of Rochester (1115-1124), 225, 394 Errichi, the reeve of Weston, 362 Eschalers Hardwin des, 48 Hugh des, 175 Stephen des, 175 Eschaulande, Jordan de, 636 Escrop, see Fitz Richard, Osbern Escures Matthew d', 597 Ralph d', archbishop of Canterbury (11141122), 225, 229, 311, 394, 405 Esgar, 93 Eskeling, John, 610 Espec, Walter, 223, 255, 268, 437 Essartis, Walter de, 641 Essele, Ralph de, 488 Essex, Henry de, constable of England, 304, 360, 373, 407 Estella (Spain), 494 Estibaliz (Spain), 494 Estmund, 291 Estre Richard del, 430 Roger del, 430 Simon del, 430 Estrilda, 293 Esturmi Roger, 343 William, 250 Ethelbald, king of Mercia (716-757), 3 Ethelred, king of Mercia (674-704), 3, 18 Ethelwold, St., 18 Ethelwulf, king of the West-Saxons (839-858), 11 Eu (Normandy), 341 Eu John de, lord of Hastings, 377

PLACES

William de, lord of Hastings, 17, 36, 49, 143, 163, 377 Eudo son of Spirewic, 72, 73 steward, 154, 163, 168 Eugenius III, pope (1145-1153), 316, 325, 405 Eulalia, abbess of Shaftesbury, 228 Eurewin, 224 Eustace, 488 Eustace, 615 Eustace II, count of Boulogne, 46, 88, 92 the nephew of Fulcred, 329 sheriff of Huntingdonshire, 18, 53, 132 London,260 Eutropius, son of Herbert, 242 Evaristus, pseudo-pope, 408 Eve, wife of William fitz Geoffrey, 521 Evenlode (Glos), 10 Everard bishop of Norwich (1121-1146), 230, 241, 263, 321 chaplain, 168 son of William, 447 Evershaw, Hugh de, 652 Evesham (Worcs), abbey, 50 abbots of, see Adam, fEthelwig, Cerisy (Walter de) Evreux (Normandy), 93 diocese, bishops of, see Audouen, Rotrou Ewelme (Oxon), 372, 589 Ewelme, Henry de, 559 Exeter (Devon), 452, 464 diocese, 42 bishops of, see Bartholomew, Osbern, Robert II, Warelwast (William) Exhall (Warws), 10 Exning (Suffolk), 7 Exning Heruld of, 19 Leofwine of, 19 Exton, Gilbert de, 343 Extraneus, Guy, sheriff of Shropshire, 499 Eye (Suffolk), 331, 421, 640 Eylward, 326 Eyncourt, Walter d', 134 Eynesford, William de, sheriff of Kent, 212, 213, 254 sheriff of London, 270 Eynsford (Kent), 5, 552 Eynsford Ralph de, 552 William de, 421 William II de, 552

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 728 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

William III de, 552 William IV de, 552 Eynsham (Oxon), abbey of, 462, 604 Eynsham, John de, 651, 652 Facet, William, 425 Fair, Robert the, 447 Fairbourn, Benedict de, 488 Fakenham (Norfolk), 104 Falaise (Normandy), 641 Falaise Walter de, 640 William de, 163 Faldo, Hugh de, 271 Falkenham (Suffolk), 127 Fameng, Thierry, 488 Fantosme, Jordan, master, 311, 408 Faraman, son of Unwin, 368 Farcet (Hunts), 219 Fardenc, Robert, 125 Fareham (Hants), 408 Faritius, abbot of Abingdon (1100-1 117), 162, 164, 169, 185, 189, 191,195, 199, 206-209, 215, 217, 218, 222 Farley (Hants), 36 Farlington, Walter de, 636 Farnborough (Berks), 406 Farncombe (Surrey), 24 Farndon (Northants), 477 Farndon Ralph de, 477 Richard de, 477 Farnellis, Geoffrey de, 462 Farnham (Dorset), 228 Faucillon John, 657 William, 657 Favarches, Geoffrey de, 230, 256 Faversham Ralph de, 620 Robert de, 343 Roger de, 620 Fawsley (Northants), 187 Fcamp (Normandy), 398 abbey of the Holy Trinity, 163 abbot of, see Ros (William de) prior of, see Hugh Fcamp, Roger de, 301 Feltwell (Norfolk), 101 Fencote (Glos), 481 Ferdinand I el Magno, king of Le6n and Castile (1037-1065), 494 Fernandez, Gutierre, 494 Ferrers Henry de, 15, 41, 44, 163, 517

PLACES

Robert de, 252 Robert de, earl of Derby, 493, 494 William I de, earl of Derby, 593 Ferri~res, Hermer de, 110, 112, 113 Fertecote, in Thonglands (Salop), 242 Fillel, Robert, 174 Filsham (Sussex), 234 Fimber (Yorks E), 599 Fingest (Bucks), 405 Fishborne, Ralph de, 488 Fishersmere, unidentified, 286 Fishlake (Yorks W), 567 Fishtoft (Lincs), 524 Fiskergate, William de, 513 Fiskerton (Lincs), 551 Fitero, abbey of (Spain), 494 Fitz Acelin, Robert, 397 Fitz Acheman, Wulvric, 488 Fitz Adam, Richard, 473 Fitz Adelm, William, royal marshal and steward, 423, 478, 481,487, 497, 499 Fitz fElfwig, John fitz Ralph, 622 Fitz Ailric, Thomas, 533 Fitz Ailward, William, 447 Fitz Ailwin, Henry, 447, 529, 530 Fitz Alan Hugh, 175, 509 Robert, 459, 635 Roger, 529, 530, 550 William, 606, 609, 610 Fitz Alard, Herbert, 527 Fitz Albold, William, 295 Fitz Aldred, Hugh, 439 Fitz Aldwin, Adam, 325 Fitz Alexander, Nigel, 546, 600 Fitz Algar, Richard, the priest, 329 Fitz Alger, Hugh, 362 Fitz Alnod, Harding, 168, 228 Fitz Alured Roger, 559 Fitz Alvred, William, 317 Fitz Anfrid, Alan, 559 Fitz Angot, Richard, 384 Fitz Anketil Hubert, 397 Robert, 322 Fitz Ansculf, William, 27, 51 Fitz Ansfrid Ralph, 340 William, 340 Fitz Ansger Odo, 163 Walter, 163 Fitz Archembald, Stephen, 267 Fitz Arnold, Godwin, 488

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 729 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Fitz Arthur, William, 583 Fitz Asch', Gorra, 362 Fitz Asketil Ralph, 179 Robert, 271 Fitz Audelin, William, 599 Fitz Avicia Elias, 462 Walter, 462 Fitz Azor, Roger, 652 Fitz Baldre, Hugh, 456 Fitz Baldwin Geoffrey, 475 Nicholas, 475 Richard, earl of Clare, 267 William, sheriff of Devon, 144 Fitz Bernard Henry, 660 Robert, sheriff of Kent, 478, 488 Thomas, 478, 513, 525, 532, 534-536, 539, 551, 557, 578 Fitz Berner, Robert, 329 Fitz Bertram, Geoffrey, 613 Fitz Brien, Robert, 271 Fitz Brihtner, Alfwin, 15 Fitz Brithine, Edward, 488 Fitz Bruning, Fulk, 329 Fitz Burewold Gilbert, 622 Roger, 622 Fitz Count Brian, 283 Otuer, 177 Fitz Daniel Ralph, 638 Richard, 343 Walter, 513 Fitz Ebrard, Ralph, 267 Fitz Edith, Richard, 447 Fitz Edward, Stephen, 329 Fitz Eilac, Richard, 569 Fitz Eilnod Benedict, 622 John, 622 William, 622 Fitz Eilric, Thomas, 622 Fitz Elmer, Osward, 488 Fitz Engelram, Randulf, sheriff of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, 369 Fitz Ernald, Ralph, 598 Fitz Eudo, Hugh, sheriff of Lincoln, 298, 331 Fitz Everard, Roger, 597, 607 Fitz Flaald, Alan, 242 Fitz Forne, Ivo, 307

PLACES

Fitz Fromund, Alulf, 550 Fitz Fulchard, Ralph, 266 Fitz Fulcher, Gilbert, 295, 318 Fitz Fulcold, Herbert, 281 Fitz Fulk Alan, 639 William, master, 566, 567 Fitz Gamel, Serlo, priest, 392 Fitz Gamelin, Odo, 228 Fitz Geoffrey Augustine, 622 Hamo, 548 Livia, 521 Robert, 460 William, 521, 597 Fitz Geremund, Ralph, 365 Fitz Gerold Henry, royal chamberlain, 405, 423 Roger, 163, 307 Warin, chamberlain, 349, 354, 355, 360, 374, 375 Fitz Gilbert Baldwin, 163 Ralph, 302 Richard, lord of Clare, 9, 17, 18, 163, 186 Robert, 186 Walter, 315, 334 Fitz Godescal, Osmund, 228 Fitz Godfrey Geoffrey, 465 Robert, 311 William, 470 Wulfric, 362 Fitz Goding, Nicholas, 650 Fitz Godric Hervard, 240 Ralph, 256 Fitz Godwin, William, 622 Fitz Gosbert, William, 329 Fitz Guibert, Robert, 362 Fitz Guse, Richard, 546 Fitz Hacon, William, 527 Fitz Haimfrid, Turstin, 228 Fitz Hamo Andrew, 560 Hamo, 635 Philip, 636 Robert, 459 William, 398, 476 Fitz Harding Henry, archdeacon of Exeter, 478 Lawrence, 622 Fitz Harlewin, Hugh, 271 Fitz Heilnoth, Robert, 488

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 730 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Fitz Helgot, Herbert, 242 Fitz Helto, Richard, 488 Fitz Henry Roger, 325, 660 William, 594 Fitz Herbert Adam, 650 Geoffrey, 189 Herbert, 277 William, 252 William, 638 William, archbishop of York (1141-1154), 504-506, 520 Fitz Herefrid, Reinald, 235 Fitz Herlicon, John, 550 Fitz Hervey Osbert, 641, 661 Robert, 431 William, 582, 592 sheriff of Norfolk, 661 Fitz Hildebrand, Richard, 397 Fitz Holdebert, John, 392 Fitz Hugh Jordan, 607 Osbert, 507 Thomas, 566, 567 W., 388 William, 477 Fitz Isaac, Jordan, 579 Fitz Isabel, William, sheriff of London and Middlesex, 529, 530, 550 Fitz Ivo Herbert, 5 Richard, 364 Fitz Jocelin Henry, 477 Reginald, bishop of Bath (1173-1191), 494,499 Robert, 477 Fitz John Eustace, 255, 263, 294, 384, 437 John, 599 Pain, 182, 275, 288, 293 sheriff of Shropshire, 243, 263 Simon, priest, 329 William, 363, 366, 370, 376, 424 Fitz Juhel, Ralph, 240 Fitz Kenewold, William, 488 Fitz Ketel, William, 384 Fitz Lambert, Thomas, 362 Fitz Lefstan, Henry, 550 Fitz Leofstan, Alfwin, 270 Fitz Living, Richard, 232 Fitz Luke, John, bishop of Evreux (1181-1189), 523 Fitz Martin, Reginald, 515

PLACES

Fitz Matfried, Walter, 546 Fitz Meinbod, Picot, 329 Fitz Meinfelin Alan, 635 Hamo, 593 Fitz Neal Richard, royal treasurer, 423, 518, 532, 538, 539, 544, 547,561,564,569, 571,572, 591, 592, 601 bishop of London (1189- 1198), 621,637,649 William, brother of the royal treasurer, 569 Fitz Nicholas, John, 447 Fitz Nigel Alured, 362 Henry, 561 Richard, 593 William, 252 William, 488 Fitz Odo Alan, 256 Geoffrey, 163 Richard, 636 William, 248 Fitz Oliver, Hugh, 474 Fitz Onwin, Alwin, 232 Fitz Orm, Gospatric, 364 Fitz Osbern, William, earl of Hereford, 2 Fitz Osbert Gerard, canon, 392 Hugh, 333, 604 John, 448 William, 430, 644 Fitz Ospac, Bernard, 163 Fitz Oter, Walter, 156 Fitz Par, Peter, 484 Fitz Paulin, Thomas, canon of York Cathedral, 428 Fitz Payn, Robert, 325 Fitz Peter Adam, 566 Arnulf, 376 Geoffrey, 585, 595, 596, 600, 608, 641,649, 650 Peter, 600 Ranulf, 362 Simon royal justice, 473 royal marshal, 423, 433 sheriff of Bedfordshire, 383, 411 Walter, 214, 362 William, 295 Fitz Ralph Gilbert, 569 Hugh, 448, 527 John, 559 Roger, 240

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 731 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Fitz Ralph (contd) Walter, 650 William, 459, 552 bailiff of Osney, 622 royal justice, 477, 485 sheriff of Nottingham, 499 Fitz Randulf, William, 656 Fitz Reginald Roger, 521 William, 579, 636 Fitz Reiner Berengar, 268 Richard, 529, 530, 550 Fitz Reinfrid Gilbert, 574, 660 Roger, 473, 477, 518, 532, 537, 539, 544-547, 560, 578, 583, 587, 590, 592, 608,620, 621 Fitz Reinger, Ralph, 448 Fitz Richard Amfrid, 624 Geoffrey, 636 Gervase, 388, 439 Gilbert, 163, 177 Henry, the clerk, 660 Hugh, 271, 326, 333 Osbern, 15 Robert, 225 Robert, 362 Robert, 474 Robert, 498 Roger, lord of Clare, 177, 225, 263, 375 Symon, 439 Thomas, 459 W., 388 Walter, 168, 225, 263 William, 326 William, 624, 650 William, sheriff of Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire, 471 Fitz Richer, Hugh, 604 Fitz Robert Richard, 621 Walter, 331 Walter, 532, 595 William, 304, 482, 510, 593 Fitz Roger Hugh, 439 Nicholas, 650 Robert, 378 Walter, 49 Fitz Rostune, William, 384 Fitz Rovi, Alward, 362 Fitz Roy, Geoffrey, duke of Brittany (11581186), 432, 494, 578

PLACES

Reginald, earl of Cornwall, 517 Fitz Sabeline, William, 550 Fitz Saric, Edwin, 232 Fitz Saswal, Henry, 252 Fitz Saveric, Ralph, 397 Fitz Sawin, Robert, 338 Fitz Segrim Adam, 622 Henry, 622 Fitz Semer, Alfred, 605 Fitz Serlo, Serlo, 392 Fitz Sideflet, Alvric, 232 Fitz Simon Peter, 557 Robert, 527 Turstin, 363, 442 royal dispenser, 429 royal justice, 579 William, 473, 527 Fitz Siwat, Thowi, 362 Fitz Stephen Eustace, 513 Ralph, sheriff of Gloucestershire, 462 royal chamberlain, 481, 513 royal justice, 563, 597 William, 452 royal justice, 609, 610 sheriff of Gloucestershire, 579, 616 Fitz Suain, Henry, 364 Fitz Sueting, William, 622 Fitz Swanehild, Hugh, 488 Fitz Sywerd, Henry, 660 Fitz Tengui, Walter, 362 Fitz Tetbald, Robert, 163 Fitz Thomas de Ashdon, Robert, 488 de Bockingfold, Hugh, 340 Fitz Turchil, Siward, 240 Fitz Turstan, William, 477 Fitz Turstin, Thomas, 589 Fitz Ulgar Hugh, 329 John, 329 Fitz Ulvred, Simon, 329 Fitz Victor, Robert, 486 Fitz Vitalis Haimo, 174 Jordan, 319 Robert, 319 Fitz Waleran, Ralph, 18 Fitz Walter Fulk, 260 John, 256 Peter, 640

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 732 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Ralph, 192 Robert, sheriff of Suffolk and Norfolk, 216, 241,256 Fitz Warin Adam, 650 Osbern, 650 Ralph, 474 Fitz Warner, Hugh, 465 Fitz Wibert Robert, 318, 331 William, 234 Fitz Wichtgar, Henry, 488 Fitz Wido, Helgot, 459 Fitz William Henry, 268 Hugh, 281 Hugh, 428, 594 Nicholas, 631 Otho, 560 Peter, 240 Ralph, 252 Ralph, 428 Robert, 656 Roger, 465, 524, 546 fitz Viel, Hamo, 488 Fitz Wimarc, Robert, 622 Fitz Wimund, Robert, 163 Fitz Wulf, Hugh, 439 Flambard, Ranulf, royal chaplain, 142, 148 bishop of Durham (1099-1128), 153, 154, 159, 168, 181, 188, 223, 255, 405, 437 Flamville Robert de, 601 Roger de, 454, 455 Flavia Tertulla, 408 Flawold, 488 Fleet (Lincs), 438 Fleet, Richard of, 515, 641 Fleet Hith (Middlesex), 278 Fleg, Roger de, 263 Fleming Archembald the, 267 Henry the, 431 Richard the, 563 Robert fitz Walter the, 292 Turstin the, 163 Walter the, 56 Walter the, 640 William the, 431 Flixton (Lancs), 660 Flokes, Hugh de, 234 Flori, Hugh de, abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury (1099- 1124), 178, 184, 201,225,227, 285

Flot, Ralph, 370 Folet Roger, 340 William, 443 Folia, Roger de, 397 Folie, William de la, 248 Foliot Gilbert, bishop of Hereford (1148-1163), 327, 337, 402, 413, 414, 520 bishop of London (1163-1187), 420, 421, 425,434, 443, 445, 449, 478, 494 Helias, 271 Pain, 271 Robert, 271 archdeacon of Oxford, 466 bishop of Hereford (1173-1186), 477, 478, 494, 558, 574 Fontevrault (Normandy), abbey of, 507 Ford, Baldwin of, bishop of Worcester (11801184), 553, 574 archbishop of Canterbury (1184-1190), 574, 581,618 Forde (Dorset) abbey,654 abbot of, see Baldwin Fordwich (Kent), 577 Forne, son of Sigulf, 223 Fornham St. Genevieve (Suffolk), 634 Forno, 172 Fort, Sampson le, 509 Fosbury (Wilts), 228 Foscote, Ralph de, 167 Fossard Geoffrey, 453 Nigel, 516 Robert, 516 William I, 516, 542 William II (died 1195), 647 Fosse Way (Notts), 439 Foston (Norfolk), 113 Fotherby (Lincs), 456, 555 Fotherby Damme of, 555 William son of Damme, 555 Foucarmont (Normandy), 163 Fountains (Yorks W), abbey, 368, 534 Four-Shire-Stone (Worcs), 10 Foxley, Alvred de, 228 Foxton (Leics), 319 Fragate, unidentified, 455 Fraisthorpe (Yorks E), 538 Framingham (Norfolk), 358 Frampton, Alestan of, 85 Franc, William, 329

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 733 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Franceis Osbert, 488 William, 557 Francheville Mabel de, 408 William de, 582, 592 Fraxineto, William de, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, 331 Fraxino, William de, 635 Freckenham (Suffolk), 5, 19 Frederick, 103 abbot of St. Albans (c. 1070-1077), 8 the clerk, 15 I, emperor, 494 Frenchman, Nicholas the, 447 Frenger, priest, 172 Frescheville, Eustace de, 466 Fresenat, 431 Freshwater (Isle of Wight), 597 Fresne, Robert de, 256 Fressingfield (Suffolk), 537 Freville, Richard de, 639 Frieston (Lincs), 546 Frindshaw, in Benefield (Northants), 629 Frodo, brother of Abbot Baldwin of Bury St. Edmunds, 18 Froger archdeacon of Derby, 365 sheriff, 185 Fromund, 447 Froyle (Hants), 386 Fulbert, the archdeacon, 163 Fulcher, 252 Fulchered, abbot of Shrewsbury (1087-1113), 242 Fulgentius, 11 Fulk, 471 canon of Salisbury, 397 chaplain, 157 lorimer, 622 nephew of Sheriff Gilbert of Huntingdon, 233 sheriff of Huntingdon, 272 reeve of Westoning, 471 Fulletby, William de, 641 Fulney Elfric de, 641 Siwat de, 362 Funes (Spain), 494 Furnellis, Alan de, 511, 534-536, 538, 539, 551, 561, 571 Furness (Lancs), abbey of, 364 Furness, Robert de, 408 Furness Fells (Lancs), 364 Fylingdales (Yorks N), 62

PLACES

G., count, 494 Gael, Ralph de, earl of Norfolk, 7, 95-99, 101, 102, 105, 107, 111, 114, 118-121, 129 Gaerst, Hugh de, 511 Galenus, 9 Gallow (Norfolk), 104 Galon, monk, 448 Gamel son of Grim, 172 Ormi, 172 Swartecol, 172 miller, 185 priest, 307 rustic, 307 Ganfield (Berks), 42 Gant, see Ghent Gant, Walter de, abbot of Waltham (1184-1201), 657 Ganton, Richard de, 384 Garcia Gomes, 494 Ordofio, 494 Garcia Sanchez III, king of Navarre and Ngjera (1035-1054), 494 Garcias, Garcia, 494 Garden, Richard de, 579 Gare, unidentified, 332 Garet, 301 Garlic, William, 447 Garmund, 228 Garveston (Norfolk), 112 Gedding, Ranulf de, 522, 538, 539, 544, 545, 547, 574, 577, 581,591 Geddington (Northants), 497, 595 Geldewin, 254 Gelle, Robert, 302 Gentilis, 552 Geoffrey, 163 Geoffrey, 488 abbot of Abingdon (1164-1175), 442 Burton-upon-Trent (1114-1150), 252 St. Albans, see Gorham (Geoffrey de) St. Wandrille, 595 archdeacon of Colchester, 408 bishop of Coutances (1049-1093), 2, 5, 15, 18, 56, 134, 163 Ely, see Ridel (Geoffrey) Winchester, see Lucy, Geoffrey de brother of King Henry II, 371 chamberlain, 37 chamberlain, 507 chancellor, see Rufus

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 734 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

chaplain, 602 cleric, 329 cleric of Lubbenham, 431 count, see Fitz Roy (Geoffrey) count of Anjou, 421 dispenser, 507 duke of Brittany, see Fitz Roy goldsmith, son of William, 447 master, 519 prior of Christ Church, Canterbury (1191-1213), 498, 650 Holme, 360 provost of the collegiate church of Saint John at Beverley, 490 sacrist of Bury St. Edmunds, 318 son of Thowi, 362 Unwin, 368 subprior of Christ Church, Canterbury (11891191), 618 Gerald, 291 reeve, 167 Gerard, 219 archbishop of York (1100 1108), 172, 180 Geresbert, Robert, 607 German, prior of Durham, 496, 522 Germany, 630, 641 Gernon Ranulf I, earl of Chester, 376 Ranulf II, earl of Chester, 326 Robert, lord of Stansted Mountfitchet, 18 Gernun, Richard, 576 Geroldin, 163 Gerseworthe, unidentified, 343 Gert, 108 Gervase, abbot of Westminster (1138-c. 1157), 451 clerk, 270, 329 Ghent Baldwin de, 527 Gilbert I de, 69, 71, 74, 79, 82 Gilbert II de, 233, 324, 336, 356, 448, 527 Robert de, 233 Robert de, 339, 356 Walter de, 264 Walter de, 527, 625 see also Gant Giffard chaplain, 254 Robert, 460 Walter, 15, 162 Walter, son of Robert, 460 William, chancellor, 153, 154

bishop of Winchester (1100- 1129), 168, 180, 210, 224, 225, 229, 248, 517 Gila, lay sister of Marg6re, nun at Harrold, 509 Gilbert, 465 Gilbert, 507 abbot of Colchester (1117-1140), 408 bishop of Limerick (Ireland) (1107-1145), 405 canon of Bridlington, 486 St. Paul's, London, 434 dean of Chichester, 234 clerk, 163 constable of the Tower of London, 529, 530 earl of Hertford, 336 priest, 566 sheriff of Huntingdonshire, 203, 205, 224, 233 steward of Bury St. Edmunds, 531 the Universal, bishop of London (1128- 1134), 282 Gild beorch, boundary mark of Evenlode (Worcs), 50 Gildus, 329 Gille, Leofwine, 254 Gillinges, Alan de, 175 Gimingham, Reiner de, 569 Girald, 163 Girbert, archdeacon of Bath, 226 Girmund, abbot of Winchcombe (1095-1122), 195 Giroie, Roger de, 256 Girton (Hunts), 182 Gisburn (Yorks W), 482 Gisleham (Suffolk), 19 Gisleham, Eadric de, 19 Gisneis, Roger de, 187 Gisors (Normandy), 476 Gissing Hugh de, 295 Roger de, 295 Glanvill, Gilbert, bishop of Rochester (11851214), 585, 621 Hervey de, 331 Osbert de, 544, 550, 608 Ranulf de, 408, 439, 454, 477, 488, 497, 511, 513,518,522-525,532,538,539,544-546, 550,553,559,564, 569 572, 585, 592, 595, 596, 601, 602, 614, 641, 654 Robert de, 331 Glastonbury (Somerset), 408 abbey, 619 abbots of, see Blois (Henry of), Herluin, Seffrid, Thurstan

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 735 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Gleu, 56 Glinton (Northants), 476 Glinton, William de, 641 Gloucester, 5, 134, 376, 609, 610, 616 church of St. Oswald, 138 St. Peter's Abbey, 248, 353, 499 abbots of, see Hamelin, Peter, Serlo Gloucester Miles de, 246, 248, 275, 284, 288 Richard de, master, 397 Robert, earl of, 494 Walter de, 189, 203, 205, 242, 243, 263 Glympton, Geoffrey de, see Clinton, Geoffrey de Gocelin, marshal, 316 Godalming (Surrey), 24 Godevert, 72, 73 Godfrey abbot of Shrewsbury (1115-1128), 242, 243 archdeacon of Worcester, 402 bishop of St. Asaph (Wales) (1160-1175), 405 master, 507 monk of Ely (1075/6-1082), 18 priest, 254 treasurer of St. Paul's, London, 434 Godhese, 488 Godin, 494 Godmer, 271 Godmersham, Robert de, 650 Godramson, Athelstan, 85 Godric, 18, 41, 44, 95, 98, 99, 101, 102, 105, 107, 121, 125 Godric, 271 St., hermit of Finchale, 403, 412 reeve, 171 Godstow, Adam de, 332 Godwin, 365 earl of Wessex, 5, 21, 25 knight, 18, 76, 77, 109 monk of St. Remi at Rheims, 197 priest, 318, 321 smith, 254 Goiz Ralph, 201 Richard, 163 Gold, Elwius, 266 Goldedernia, 301 Goldewynethild, 301 Goldington (Beds), 561 Goldiva, 633 Goldstan, son of Bruning, 254 Goldwyn, monk of Christ Church Canterbury, 311 G6mez, count, 494 Good Easter (Essex), 309

PLACES

Gorham Geoffrey de, abbot of St. Albans (1119-1146), 396 Henry de, 415 Goring (Oxon), 604 Gorron (Cornwall), 641 Gorron Geoffrey de, 539 Geoffrey de, abbot of St. Albans (1119-1146), 311 Robert de, abbot of St. Albans (1151-1166), 396, 405, 415, 417, 423, 435, 436, 451 Gorstella (Ches), 474 Gosberton, 86 Goscelin, lorimer, 87 Gotso, chamberlain, 297 Gousele, Hervey de, 448 Grafton (Warws), 10 Grainville, Robert de, 264, 299 Grandmesnil Hugh de, 58, 491 Ivo de, 190 Grafion (Spain), 494 Gransden (Cambs), 287 Graundpount, William de, 622 Gray, Richard de, 195 Great Alne (Warws), 536 Great Dunmow (Essex), 94 Great Fanton Hall (Essex), 89 Greave, Walter, priest, 392 Greeneway (Northants), 477 Greenford, John of, bishop of Chichester (11731180), 494, 499 Greenhill, Richard de, 605 Greenhoe North (Norfolk), 118 Greetwell Gilbert de, 613 Robert de, priest, 613 Gregory abbot of Malmesbury, 405 I, the Great, pope (590-604), 408 VII, pope (1073-1085), 134 priest of Sandridge, 451 prior of Bridlington (1154-1181), 486, 527 Grenehyrst, unidentified, 286 Grenet, William, 163 Grenta, 226 Gresley, Aubert de, 364 Gric, Alfric, 462 Griffin, William, 431 Grim, reeve of Freckenham, 18 Grimbald physician, 165, 171, 294 Robert, 338

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 736 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

steward, 158 Walter, 585 Grimley (Worcs), 633 Grimley, Alelm de, 633 Grimsby, Walter de, sheriff of Lincolnshire, 485, 496 Grimshoe (Norfolk), 116 Grindale, Robert de, 392 Grislon, Robert, 163 Gristhorpe (Yorks N), 384 Griston (Norfolk), 102 Gross, Siward, 242 Groton (Suffolk), 627 Groton, Ralph de, 650 Grull, Hugh, monk of Crowland, 641 Guarin, sheriff of Cornwall, 144 Gubewin, Ralph, 333 Gubiun Hugh, 338, 348 Ralph, abbot of St. Albans (1146-1151), 405 Guerd, 86 Guerris, Aelard de, 309 Guildford (Surrey), 221 Guillevast, Roger de, 553 Guing, Robert de, 641 Guinge, Elfwin, 488 Guisborough (Yorks N), priory, 572 Guizenboeth, William, 192 Gulafre, Robert, 331 Gulbert, 65 Gumer, 223 Gumley (Leics), 319 Gundeville, Hugh de, 473, 477, 485 Gundred, daughter of Roger, earl of Warwick, 495 Gundreda, 228 widow of Nigel de Albini, 323 Gundulf, bishop of Rochester (1077-1108), 5, 19, 136, 394 Gunnora, 473 Gunore, 430 Gunter, abbot of Thorney (1085-1112), 158, 187, 194, 235, 251,272 Gunthorpe, Geoffrey de, 205, 214 Gurnay, Ralph de, 163 Gussage (Dorset), 228 Gutierre, R., 494 Guy, prior of Harrold, 509 Guy (Wido), abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury (1087-1093), 134, 137 Gweres, William de, 440 Gwion, bishop of Bangor (Wales) (1177-1190), 494 Gytha, countess, 144

H., lay brother of the Hospitallers, 436 Hackington, John de, 620 Hadleigh (Suffolk), 650 Hadleigh, Alan de, 543 Haget, Geoffrey, 554, 599 Haia, Richard de, 438 Haiaga (Spain), 494 Haignord, Wolfric, 333 Haimo I, steward, sheriff of Kent, 5, 18, 136, 157 II, steward, sheriff of Kent, 168, 178, 200-202 Hainton (Lincs), 75 Hakelot, Jew, 408 Haket, 507 William, 605 Haldan, 307 Halefalga, unidentified, 326 Hales (Norfolk), 106 Haligwercsfolc, see Holyworkfolk Hallen, Alfwin, 291 Hallewat, unidentified, 455 Hailing (Kent), 394 Halsart, William, 198 Halselin Geoffrey, 252 Ralph, 439 Haltain, Everard, 428 Halton (Bucks), 5 Halton, Walter de, 482 Hambledon (Hants), 343 Hambledon Reginald de, 343 Simon de, 343 Hamby, Walter Rufus of, 641 Hamelin, 343 abbot of St. Peter's, Gloucester (1148-1179), 351,353, 499, 508 earl of Warenne, 523 Hammerton (Yorks W), 535 Hammerton, Fulk de, 345 Hamo chaplain, 254 son of Meinfelin, 558 Vitalis, 174, 212, 254 Wynoch, 526 see also Haimo Hamond, 465 cleric of Kingston, 465 Hampstead Marshall (Oxon), 511 Hampton (Worcs), 10, 15 Hampton Ralph de, 564 Roger de, 459

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 737 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Handsex, William, 484 Hanley, Gilbert de, 605 Hansard, Gilbert, 636 Happisburgh (Norfolk), 415 Harcourt Philip de, chancellor, 301 Robert de, 639 Harding, 517 priest, 191 Hardres Gerard de, 340 Robert de, 600 Harduin, knight, 18 Hardwick (Suffolk), 648 Hardwick, in Hartlebury (Worcs), 512 Hare, Walter le, 465 Harel, Edwin, 343 Hareng, Walkelin, 466 Harlow (Essex), 615 Harlow, Geoffrey de, 615 Harold, 93 Godwinson, king of England (1066), 144 Harome, Drew de, 453 Harpham, Robert I de, abbot of St. Mary at York (c. 1186-1195), 599 Harpole, Ralph de, 477 Harpsden, Ralph de, 559 Harrold (Beds), 509 Harrow (Middlesex), 5 Hart, Richard, 579 Hartismere (Suffolk), 122, 125 Hartlebury (Worcs), 512 Hartlevill, Roger de, 215 Harum, William de, 486 Haseley, Robert de, 606, 609, 610, 632, 633 Hastings (Sussex), Holy Trinity, Augustinian canons, 620 Hastings Henry de, 531 Siward de, 377 Thomas de, 440, 531 William de, 646 Haswell, Geoffrey de, 636 Hatch (Hants), 37 (Wilts), 228 Hatfield Hugh de, 566 Walter de, 615 Hatton (Warws), 326 Haugh (Lincs), 456 Hausvill, William de, 240 Haverhill Symond de, 447 William de, 529, 530, 550 Haversham, Hugh de, 635

Hawarden (Wales), 407 Hawisa, 651 widow of Philip de Caillewey, 549 wife of William, earl of Gloucester, 549 William II de Roumare, earl of Lincoln, 307 Hawold (Yorks E), 307 Hawstead (Suffolk), 318, 544 Hawstead Ralph de, 331 Robert de, 295, 318 Roger de, 331 Hay Gilbert de la, 605 Roger de la, 625 Hayes (Middlesex), 5 Hayling Island (Hants), 30 Haymeric, son of Quintin, 447 Hayrun, Hugh, 271 Headington (Oxon), 316 Heatherslaw (Northumberland), 361 Heathfield (Somerset), 654 Heckingham (Norfolk), 107 Hedon (Yorks E), 541 Hedwin, 392 Heigham (Norfolk), 370 Heilnoth, reeve, 340 Heinfrid, 103 Helewis, 301 Helgot, archdeacon, 163 Helhoughton (Norfolk), 103 Helias, 481 cleric, 388, 639 Helstene, Augustine de, 488 Helto, 613 Helton, Alexander de, 636 Hemingstone (Suffolk), 124 Hemmiger, 301 Hempnall (Norfolk), 331 Hempstead (Norfolk), 545 Hempstead Hamo de, 545 Simon de, 545 Hemsworth, Gilbert de, 554 Hencott (Salop), 606 Henlawe, Geoffrey de, prior of Llanthony, (c. 1189-1203), 653 Henry, 254 abbot of Battle (1096-1102), 174 Waverley (c. 1161-1182), 499 Winchcombe (1171-1181), 525 archdeacon of Berkshire, 397 Exeter, see Fitz Harding (Henry)

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 738 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

brother of Abbot Hugh of Bury St. Edmunds, 519 cleric, 343, 639 count of Eu, 573 duke of Saxony, 494 earl of Warwick, 517 janitor, 329 I, king of England (1100-1135), 137, 141, 158, 160,161,163-171,173, 176-180,182, 183, 185,187,190-192,195-197,199-205,216, 219-222,225,227-232,234, 236, 239-242, 244-250,252,254,255,260-265,268,271275,277-280,283-287,290-292,300, 305, 306,313,317, 322, 328,339, 342, 343,349, 352, 358,360, 366, 375,377, 391,394, 398, 400,415,424,425,427,435,437,439,442, 452, 487, 491, 499, 517, 579, 604 II, king of England (1154-1189), 254, 337, 341, 347,349,351,352,354,355,357-361,363366, 369-376,378,383,386,390, 393,394, 396-402,405,406,408-410,417-424,427, 429,432,433,441-443,445,446,451,452, 459,461-463,476,478-481,485,487-490, 492,494,495,497,499,500,507,510,511, 513,516-518, 520, 522, 525,528, 540, 552, 558,570, 574, 579, 581,595, 604, 612,634, 641 son of King Henry II, 490 III, king of England (1216-1272), 137, 172 master, 329 monk of Evesham, 641 Hens, Ralph, 301 Henstead (Norfolk), 96, 97, 108, 121 Hepworth. Hervey de, 569 Walter de, 569 Herard, 615 Herbert, 224, 331 abbot of St. Peter's Westminster (1121 c. 1136), 277 archdeacon of Canterbury, see Poer (Herbert le) bishop of Norwich, see Losinga chamberlain, 189, 253 cleric, 546 dean of Bramber, 163 master, 385 master, 602 prior of Spalding (1148-1157), 362 St. Neots (1152-1195), 467 son of Herbert, 242 Remi, 36

Herding, 326 Hereford, 293 diocese, bishops of, see Bethune (Robert de), Foliot (Gilbert), Foliot (Robert), Losinga (Robert), Melun (Robert de), Reinhelm Hereford John de, 428 Matilda de, 625 Ralph de, 527 Herfast, bishop of Thetford (1070-? 1085), 9 Hergod, 254 Heringham, Robert de, 439 Herion, Tihel de, 18 Heriz Robert de, 252 William de, 439 Herlewin, priest, 392 Herluin, abbot of Glastonbury (1100-1118), 258 Hermer, 113 Herold, 72 Heroville, Ralph de, 439 Herriard, Richard de, 631, 641 Herst Ebrard de la, 397 Roger de la, 397 Herstead (Norfolk), 105 Hert, Alfwin, 384 Herthum, Andrew de, 659 Hervey, 167 archdeacon of Rochester, 238 bishop of Ely (1109-1131), 181, 182, 204, 405 sacrist of Bury St. Edmunds, 295 Hesdin Arnulf de, 143 Avelina de, 263 Ernald de, 228 Reiner de, 254 Heslerton (Yorks E), 483 Heslinges, Ralph de, 488 Hethe, Adam de, 254 Hevenden (Kent), 5 Hewingham (Norfolk), 98 Hexham (Northumberland) church St. Andrew, 172 Heyford (Northants), 587 Hidcote (Glos), 10 Higham, Godfrey de, 470 Higney, Isle of (Hunts), 286 Hilary, bishop of Chichester (1147-1169), 320, 360, 396, 405, 408, 411, 421, 520 Hildewine, 301 Hill (Warws), 165 Hillborough (Warws), 10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 739 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Hillingdon (Middlesex), 10 Hinderclay Peter de, 569 Ralph de, 569 Hindlip, Edric de, 15 Hinfold, unidentified, 252 Hinton (Northants), 652 Hinton, unidentified, 395 Helias de, 652 Hugh de, 652 Osbert de, 652 Richard de, 651 Richard son of Helias de, 652 Hinton on the Green (Glos), 353 Hippocrates, 9 Histon (Cambs), 462 Hitchell Wood, in Bessacarr (Yorks W), 584 Hitchells, in Bessacarr (Yorks W), 584 Hoche', Richard, 484 Hockering (Norfolk), lord of, see Belfou Hocont, Godwin, 301 Hoe, Robert de, 343 Hoel, 163 Hoewood (Sussex), 163 Hogeles, 301 Holbeach (Lincs), 641 Holcombe (Oxon), 332, 372 Hole Beck (Yorks N), 455 Holeford, unidentified, 606 Holestok, unidentified, 286 Holland (Lincs), 641 Hollingbourne (Kent), 357, 618 Holm, in Kirkdale (Yorks N), 455 Holme (Dorset) priory of, 360 Holme next the Sea (Norfolk), 602 Holme, Robert de, 569 Holy Trinity abbey, see Fecamp cathedral priory, see Norwich Holyworkfolk, 437 Hommet, Richard de, see Humez Honington (Suffolk), 568 Hopton (Suffolk), 569 Hopton Hervey de, 569 Ranulf de, 569 Horbling, Simon de, 613 Horeapeldre, unidentified, 343 Horley, Hugh de, 252 Hormead (Herts), 46 Hormer (Berks), 199, 246 Horncastle (Lincs), 72 Hornepite, Peter, 329

Horringer, Adam de, 331 Horsepath (Oxon), 576 Horsley, Albert de, 365 Horton (Northumberland), 450 (Yorks W), 482 Horwood (Bucks or Devon), 539 Hose Atselin, 226 Miles, 607 Hoser, Robert, 622 Hospitali Peter de, cleric, 392 Ralph de, cleric, 392 Robert de, priest, 392 Hostesli, Durand de, 568 Hottot, William de, 579 Houghton (Beds), 58, 417 (Hants), 32 (Hunts), 224 Houghton, William de, 158, 182, 203, 249 Hoveton (Yorks N), 453, 454 Howden (Yorks E), 134 Howe, William de, 331 Howest, Walter de, abbot of Bardney (11551181), 527 Howick (Lancs), 10 Howthorpe, Hugh de, 453 Hoxne (Suffolk), 129 Hubert, prior of Wallingford, 192 Hueline, 652 Hugh, 252 Hugh, 370 Hugh, 505 I, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1157-1180), 446, 519, 569, 630 abbot of Muchelney (Somerset), 499 Reading (1186-1199), 628, 637 Wardon (1173-1181), 467 archdeacon of Lisieux, 465 butler, 488 chaplain, 338 chaplain, 638 cleric, 600 cleric of Derby, 517 dean of Derby, 365 fisherman of Brompton, 483 miller, 641 monk of Frcamp, 163 St. Albans, 396 Thorney, 235 priest, 158

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 740 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES prior of Bury St. Edmunds, 446 F6camp, 163 sacrist of Bury St. Edmunds, 648 sheriff of Leicestershire and Northamptonshire, 187, 205, 221 son of Baldric, 34 Jernegan, 368 Thowi, 362 watchman, 275, 325 Hughenden, Peter de, 604 Hugwell, Alver de, 641 Huitdeniers, Osbert, 580 Hulme, see St. Benet of Hulme Hulric, monk of F~camp, 163 Humbleyard (Norfolk), 370 Humez Richard de, constable of Normandy, 349, 360, 374, 405, 517 Robert de, 405 William de, constable, 595 Humphrey brother of Anselm, 338 chamberlain, 141, 142, 155 knight, 569 monk, 238 porter, 238 reeve, 555 Hundehoge, unidentified, 237 Huntingdon (Hunts), 233, 376, 479 priory of St. Mary, 231 Huntingdon Autin de, 233 Baldwin de, 233 Henry of, archdeacon of Huntingdon, historian, 233, 234, 272 Henry de, monk of Thorney Abbey, 251 Ralph de, 233 Robert de, 251 Huntingfield (Suffolk), 524, 546 Huntingfield, Roger de, 640, 641 Hunton, R. de, 343 Hurst Robert de, 488 Walter de, 488 Hurstbourne (Hants), 229 Hurstbourne, Thomas de, see Husseburne Hurugonda, 314 Huscal, 362 Huse, Walter, sheriff of Wiltshire, 169 Husseburne, Thomas de, 562, 570-572, 592, 597, 620, 621,631 Hwicce, ruler of, see Oshere Hythe (Kent), 5

Ickburgh (Norfolk), 116 Icklesham, Robert de, 404 Rand (Dorset), 228 Ilbert, sheriff, 18 llchester (Somerset), 328 Ilchester, Richard of, archdeacon of Poitiers, 405, 417, 423, 432, 446, 458, 473 bishop of Winchester (1173/74-1188), 477, 478,487,497,524, 532,538,539, 544, 547, 603 Ildeberg, see Gild beorch Imber Pain de, 465 Ralph de, 465 Impington (Cambs), 18, 287 Inet, 541 Infans Regis, Edward, 397 Ingelran, 377 Ingelrand, 163 Ingelric, 92 Ingelry, 301 Inglesham Osbert de, canon of Salisbury, 397 Robert de, 560, 563, 571, 572 Inglethorpe (Norfolk), 585 Ingram, 439 Ingulf abbot of Abingdon (1130-1158), 378, 381,390, 418 monk of Reading, 326 Inkberrow (Worcs), 574 Innocent II, pope (1130-1143), 408 Insula, Henry de, 488 Ireland, 462 Isaac, 119 Isham (Northants), 132 Isle of Grain (Kent), 5 Isle, Otuel, son of Otuel de 1', 580 Itchen Abbas (Hants), 34 Ivo, 430 Ivoi Geoffrey de, 332, 333, 372 Hainel de, 332 Hugh de, 332 Ivry, Robert de, 15 Jacob, Jew of Newport, 408 Januarius, bishop of Cagliari (591-604), 421 Jarrow, a cell of Durham, 223 Jeremy, archdeacon of Cleveland, 566 Jernegan, son of Hugh, son of Jernegan, 368 Jerusalem, 176, 421, 641 Jervaulx (Yorks N), abbey, 323 Jim6nez de los Cameros, Diego, 494

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 741 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Jocelin archdeacon of Chichester, 571, 572, 584, 586, 592, 600, 621 monk of Bury St. Edmunds, 295, 318 prior of Montacute, 588 Johel, archdeacon of Salisbury, 226 John, 477, 566 bishop of Chichester, see Greenford (John of) Lisieux (1107-1141), 241 Norwich, see Oxford (John of) I, Rochester (1125-1137), 254, 394 Worcester, see Pagham (John of) the bishop's son, 163 chaplain of Daventry, 319 St. John of Bedford, 471 clerk of the dean of Lewes, 567 constable of Chester, 364 king of England (1199-1216), 137, 579 count of Mortain, 640, 641, 654 monk of Burton-upon-Trent abbey, 252 prior of Luffield, 558 sheriff, see Chesney sheriff's clerk, 529, 530 smith, 271 son of Fulk, 535 Gerold, 447 Segar, 622 undersheriff of London, 270 Joie, Robert, 486 Jordan, 254 chamberlain, 473 chaplain of Hinton, 652 cleric, 507 prior of Castle Acre, 438 treasurer of Salisbury, 386, 397 Juan I, Frontin, bishop of Tarazona (1172-1194), 494 Judith, countess, widow of earl Waltheof, 81,286, 314 Julian, chaplain, 527 Julitta, lay sister of Boulogne, 509 Jumi~ges, abbey, 30 Jumi~ges, William de, 164 Kaines Richard de, 377, 587 William I de, 491 Kalvismore, unidentified, 474 Keevil (Wilts), 228 Kelham (Notts), 655 Kelham, Peter de, 655

PLACES

Kempsey (Worcs), 574 Kenardington, Stephen de, 340 Kendal (Westmorland), 364 Kenford (Devon), 459 Kenilworth (Warws) Augustinian priory, 240, 275, 514 Kenswick Alexander de, 605 Walter de, 605 Kentford (Staffs), 459 (Suffolk), 18, 256 Kenward, Cnut, 254 Kepeharm Hugh, 533 John, 533, 622 Kesteven (Lincs), 81, 83, 641 Keston (Kent), 340 Kete, Aelniath, 488 Ketel, 128 Ketel, 648 reeve of Masham, 368 Kettering (Northants), 431 Kevelioc, Hugh de, earl of Chester (died 1181), 376, 474, 494 Keyston (Hunts), 53 Kilburn (Yorks N), 323 Kilham, Stephen de, 453 Kilmington, unidentified, 228 Kimble, Richard de, 391 Kineward, sheriff of Worcs, 15 King's Broom, in Bidford (Warws), 10 Kingsclere, hundred of (Hants), 33 King's Cliffe (Northants), 272, 424, 517, 641 Kingsford (Worcs), 645 Kingsford, Walter de, 645 Kingsfrith, forest (Berks), 400 King's Somborne (Hants), 28, 32, 35 Kingston (Somerset), 588 (Suffolk), 287 (Surrey), 465 Kingthorpe, Liulf de, 384 Kinwarton (Warws), 10 Kiptoftsyke, Kiptoftissich (Yorks N), 384, 487 Kirk Sandall (Yorks W), 566, 567 Kirkstall (Yorks W), abbey of, 492, 584 Kirkstead (Lincs), abbey, 613 Kirton, Conan de, 641 Knapwell, Gudred de, 175 Knave, Wlward, 343 Knettishall, Gilbert de, 569 Kote, Reginald, 608 Kyme, Philip de, 494, 527, 551

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 742 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Lacy Gilbert de, 327 Ilbert I de, 60, 65, 190 Ilbert II de, 306 Robert de, 161, 181, 190 Roger de, constable of Chester, 663 Ladane, Edward de, 488 Lamarsh (Essex), 656 Lambert, 314 alderman of Oxford, 533 cordwainer, 622 master, 566, 567, 602 prior of Ramsey, 385 son of Tovi, 622 Lambeth (Surrey), 289, 408 Lamerton (Devon), 460 Lamport (Northants), 431 Lancaster Gilbert de, 364 William I de, 364 Lancell, Jocelin de, 475 Lancing, William de, 163 Landelles, Roland de, 368 Landric, cellarer of Byland, 454, 455 Landwade, Wulfwine de, 19 Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury (10701089),2-5,9, 10,17,21,134-136,163,254, 396, 421 Langaran, near Kirkby Moorside (Yorks N), 455 Langeport, Ralph de, 652 Langford (Berks), 218 Langdale (Westmorland), 364 Langdon (Kent), 184 Langford, Ralph de, dean of St. Paul's, London, 329 Langham (Norfolk), 177 Langley (Herts), 405 Langley, R. de, cellarer of Cirencester, 579 Langport (Kent), 5 Langton (Lincs), 73, 74 Lantar6n (Spain), 494 Lanval, William de, 513 Lanvaley, Oliver de, 588 Laon, Ralph de, 226 Lapley (Staffs), 197 Lateran, 637 Latimer, Jocelin le, 175 Launceston (Cornwall), 267 priory, 322 Launde (Leics) priory, 388 Laurence abbot of Westminster (c. 1158- 1173), 405,408, 423, 451,465 archdeacon of Bedford, 566

PLACES

Lawe John de la, 658 Stephen de la, 658 Laycock (Wilts), 163 Lea (Berks), 164 Leach (Glos), 2 Leach, river (Berks), 133 Leadenham, Eustace de, sheriff of Lincolnshire, 641 Leckhampstead (Berks), 147 Ledall Cottage, in Waterperry (Oxon), 590 Ledsham (Yorks W), 392 Lee (Salop), 346 Lee Robert de la, 431 Stephen de la, 431 Lefdiacre, in Doddenham (Worcs), 605 Lefremunt, Geoffrey de, 439, 527 Lefstan, son of Orgar, 329 Lefswin, 291 Leguin (Spain), 494 Leia, Peter de, bishop of St. David's (1176- 1198), 494, 574 Leicester, 319, 396 Leicester, William de, 560 Leigh (Essex), 93 Leigh Edith de, 632 Gilbert de, 636 Hamelin de, 475 John de, 650 Roger de, 650 William de, 650 Leighton, in Cowden (Kent), 394 Leighton, Jocelin de, 362 Leighton Buzzard (Beds), 471 Lemmer, 317 Lemoyne, see Moigne Lench, see Sheriff's Lench Lencroe, William, 470 Lenham (Kent), 225 Leo, Reginald, 295 Leofgifu, wife of Odo the goldsmith, 318 Leofric, 271 earl of Mercia (died 1057), 349 Leofstan, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (10441065), 9 Leofwin, 253 Leofwin, 271 brother of Colgrim, 214 Leofwine, 254 bishop of Lichfield (1053-1067), 51 Leominster (Hereford), 414 Lepsi, 252 Lestrange, John, 602

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 743 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Letcomb (Oxon), 424 Leven, river (Lancs), 364 Levenad, 365 Levered, 365 Leverington, Alfred de, 641 Levetus, reeve, 314 Leviet, 163 Lewes (Sussex) priory of St. Pancras, 523, 566, 567, 583 Lewes, Ailric de, 198 Lewin, 57 Lewknor (Oxon), 189 Lewknor Ansger de, 333 Nicholas de, 594 vice-archdeacon of Oxford, 559 Lexonia, Richard de, 654 Libury Hall (Herts), 47, 48 Lichfield (Staffs), 459, 575 bishops of, see Leofwine, Peter, Wulfsige Lichfield, Ralph de, 576 Liddington (Wilts), 228 Lidiard, Henry de, 226 Liedenne, Norman de, 488 Ligulf, 172 Lillechurch, William de, 488 Lilleshall (Salop) St. Mary, Augustinian canons, 606 Lillington, Peverel de, 397 Limber (Lines), 80 Limerick (Ireland), diocese, bishop of, see Gilbert Limesey, Robert de, bishop of Chester (10851117), 163, 180, 181, 197 Lincoln, 366. 427, 441, 496 cathedral chapter, 283, 405, 438 diocese, 405, 494 bishops of, see Alexander, Bloet (Robert), Chesney (Robert de), Remigius Lincoln Alvred de, 56, 163, 168, 181, 197, 228 Turold de, 9 William de, priest, 392 Lindisfarne, bishop of, see Cuthbert Lindsey (Lincs), 138 Linford (Berks), 162 Lire (Normandy), abbey of, 433. 500 Lisieux (Normand.N), diocese, bishop of, see John Lisle Robert de, 134 Walter de, 597 Lisours Fulk de, 348, 629 William de, 205 Littlebury, Peter de, 408 Little Dunmow (Essex), 186

Little Fig, Aldelin, 613 Littlehage. in Eakring (Notts), 527 Little Haswell (Durham), 636 Littlemede, unidentified, 333 Little Munden (Herts), 47 Little Wareham (Dorset), 228 Litulf, 330 Liulf, sheriff of Northumberland, 188 Liverton, Wido de, 488 Livithe, nun of Kenilworth, 240 Llandaff (Wales), diocese, bishop of, see Urban Loccu, near Welburn (Yorks N). 455 Lockinge, Robert de, 379 Loddon (Norfolk), 117, 119 Loddon Ralph de, 295 Richard de, 295 Loerenc Geoffrey, 623 John, 623 Logrofio (Spain), 494 London, city of.134, 137 159, 170, 184 246, 260, 262. 270.274,280. 289. 308, 310. 315,320, 334,385,396,408,411,415,417,420,425. 446,447,457,458,478,493-495,582,641. 644. 650 canons of St. Martin le Grand, 309, 334, 335, 342 St. Paul's. 247, 253, 308. 329, 393, 550 churches All Hallows on the Wall, 282 St. Botolph, 434, 550 St. Margaret, 329 St. Martin, 550 St. Mary le Bow, 5, 410, 644 St. Peter in the Tower, 434 diocese, bishops of, see AElfwig, Belmeis (Richard I de), Belmeis (Richard II de), Foliot (Gilbert). Gilbert the Universal. Maurice, Sigillo (Robert de) honour of Castle Baynard, 186 places Billingsgate, 550 Candlewick Street, 550 Cripplegate, 335 priory of Holy Trinit.,, Aldgate, 282. 425. 580 St. Giles' Hospital, 425 London, Gregory de, 363 Long, Walter, 309 Longchamp Henry de, 656 Hugh de, 500 William, bishop of Ely (1189-1197). 620, 621, 641 Longevin, William de, 546

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 744 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Long Stow (Hunts), 182 Lonure, William, 301 Losinga Herbert, bishop of Thetford (Elmham), later Norwich (1090-1119), 141, 142, 173, 177, 180, 181, 202, 203, 211, 216, 405 Robert, bishop of Hereford (1079-1095), 15, 163 Losuard, 69 Louis VII, king of France (1137-1180), 457 Louth (Lincs), 138 Louth, Thomas de, 456, 555 Louthesk (Lincs), 68 Lovel, Ralph, 384 Lovell, Arnold, 568 Lowick (Northants), 193 Lowick Ralph de, 193, 194 Segbold de, 193 Guy de, 193, 194 Lubbenham (Leics), 319, 431 Lubbenham, William de, 431 Lucius III, pope (1181-1185), 661 Lucius Verus, Roman co-emperor (161-169) of Marcus Aurelius (161-180), 408 Lucton, William de, 635 Lucy, countess, see Bolingbroke Lucy Godfrey de, bishop of Winchester (1189-1204), 637 royal justice, 538, 539, 543, 547, 554, 564, 584-586, 592, 596, 601,602 Richard de, 313, 315, 334, 335, 342, 360, 364, 371,377, 400,405,408,415,421,423,432, 437,473,477,478,481,487,489,493,494, 497, 510 Walter de, abbot of Battle Abbey (1139-1171), 236, 303, 320, 360, 377, 444, 445, 458 Luddesdown, Reginald de, 394 Ludlow, Geoffrey de, 651 Ludwell (Wilts), 228 Lufa, king's reeve, 24 Luffa, Ralph, bishop of Chichester (1091-1123), 168, 196, 234 Luffield (Northants), priory, 558, 587, 652 Lund (Yorks E), 153 in Welburn (Yorks N), 455 Lund Forest (Yorks N), 487 Lungvillers Ivo de, 663 William de, 663 Lusby (Lincs), 299 Lusors, Fulk de, 166 Lusors, Warner de, 315

Luton (Beds), 296, 417, 436 Lutton (Lincs), 438 Luvel, 254 Luvet, Geoffrey, 240 Luvetot Roger de, 262 William de, 166 Lyde, Walter de, 281 Lyme, forest of (Salop), 242 Lyminge (Kent), 5 Lyminster, Ralph de, 163 Lynford (Norfolk), 116 Mabel, mother of Roger de Nonant, 452 Macbeth, Malcolm, 265 Mackworth (Derbyshire), 365 Mael losa 0 Foghludha, archbishop of Cashel (Ireland) (1131-1137), 226 Magnus the Bald, 163 Maidstone (Kent), 408 Mainevilain, Stephen, 384 Mainfenin, the sheriff, see Brito Makinbrooke, Stephen de, 650 Malarteis, Robert, 204 Malcolm III, king of Scotland (1058-1093), 134, 143 Malconduit Geoffrey, 163 William, 163 Maldon (Essex), 315, 334 Maldon, Osward de, 315 Malebisse Geoffrey, 488 Hugh, 323, 345, 453, 454 Richard, 545, 546 Malecake, Ansketell, 384 Malesouvres, Simon, 431 Malet Robert, 64, 129, 168, 189, 295 William, 64, 129 Malfeth, Guy, 205 Malger, 301 monk of Thorney, 348 parson of Gisburn, 482 steward, 266 Malgier, 340 Malherbe, John, 663 Mailing (Kent), 394 abbey, 375, 394 abbess, see Ermelina Malmesbury (Wilts), abbey, 382 abbot of, see Gregory Maloisel, William, 624 Malregard, Malreward, Walter, 546, 641 Malton, Warin de, 483

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 745 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS

Maltravers, William, 306 Malvecin (Spain), 494 Malvern (Worcs), 443 Malzeard Richard de, 368 Uctred de, 368 Maminot, Walchelin, 346 Manatus, John, 592 Manchon, William, 447 Mandeville Geoffrey I de, lord of High Easter (died c. 1100), 18, 94, 156 Geoffrey II de, earl of Essex, 189, 291,294, 309, 313 Geoffrey II1, earl of Essex, 415, 440 Walter de, 440 William II de, earl of Essex, 478, 499 Manechin, 525 Maneshale, unidentified, 633 Maneshou, see Ryedale Manhall, in Saffron Walden (Essex), 519 Mans Simon de, 605 Walter de, 605 William de, 605 Mansel, Ralph, 623 Manshead (Beds), 57 Mantel, Robert, 518 Manuel I, emperor of Constantinople (11431180), 494 Map, Walter, 614 Mapelbusch, unidentified, 455 Mapledurham, William de, 559 Mapleford, unidentified, 277 Marafi6n (Spain), 494 Marc, Alan de, 641 Marcham (Berks), 222, 363, 379, 442 Marchington (Staffs), 365 Marcus Aurelius, Roman emperor (161-180), 408 Marcy Geoffrey de, 408 Ralph de, 253 Richard de, 408 Marden, Roger de, 435 Mare, Geoffrey de la, 641 Ralph de la, 272 Ralph de la, 663 Richard de la, 163 Robert de la, 431, 559 Roger de la, 226 William de la, 549, 605, 610, 616 Mareni, Hugh de, 329 Marford (Herts), 451 Marford, river (Herts), 451

AND PLACES

Margar, Thomas, 340 Margaret wife of Hugh fitz Richard, 326 the young King Henry, son of King Henry II of England, 540 King Garcia Ramirez of Navarre, 494 Peter de Sutton, 529 Marham (Norfolk), 287 Marieland, in Syresham (Northants), 317 Marisco Adam de, 567 Henry de, 545 see also Marsh Markeaton (Derbyshire), 365 Market Bosworth (Leics), 639 Marlborough (Wilts), 577 Marlborough, Robert de, 529, 530 Marmion Geoffrey, 605 Robert II, 485, 497 Robert III, 574, 575 sheriff of Worcestershire, 605 Marmiun, see Marmion Marsh, Henry de, 488 see also Marisco Marshal earl, unidentified, 323 John, 420, 421 John Fitz Gilbert, 294 William, 540, 574, 595 Marston (Lincs), 81 Marston, Aubrey de, 345 Martel Geoffrey, 163 Walter, steward, 294 William, steward, 291, 294, 305, 331 Martell, 441 Martin, 163 Martin, 488 monk, 238 prior of St. Neots (1127-1132), 272 Plympton (1176-1188), 564 reeve, 555 Robert, 175 Rodrigo, 494 steward, 498 Marton Peter de, 482 Theobald de, 384 Marton le Moor (Yorks N), 534 Masculus, Osbert, 308 Masham (Yorks N), 368 Mason, Robert, 269

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 746 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Mathle, Osbert de, 615 Matilda daughter of King Henry I, 184 King William I, 37 mother of Robert of Icklesham, 404 William and Reiner, sons of Fulk, 622 queen of England, wife of Emperor Henry V and of Geoffrey, count of Anjou, daughter of King Henry I, 365 King Henry I, 143, 189, 192, 212, 250 King Stephen, 291, 313, 336 William the Conqueror, 12, 35, 59 wife of Alan de Ryedale, 486 Ranulph II, earl of Chester, 376 Robert, son of Junguin, 533 Matlask (Norfolk), 100 Maton, Roger, 301 Matthew abbot of Peterborough (1102-1103), 220 lay-brother of Osney abbey, 576 son of Reiner, 425 Maud mother of Simon de Beauchamp, 271 wife of William, earl of Warwick, 510 Wulnoth of Walbrook, 270 Mauduit Gilbert, 657 Henry, lord of Porchester, 343 Robert, 151, 152 William, 151, 152 William I, royal chamberlain, 343 William II, royal chamberlain and justice, 423, 522, 538, 545, 546 Maufe, Alexander, 314 Maunby, William de, 453 Maurice, 615 bishop of London (1085-1107), 154, 159, 163, 168 cleric, 507 master, 465 sheriff of Essex, see Tiretot steward, see Windsor Meaux (Yorks E), abbey of, 541, 542, 647 Medley, island of, in Oxford, 336 Medria (Spain), 494 Meinard, 108 Meisnil, Robert de, 483 Melford Elias de, 318 Geoffrey de, 295

PLACES

Melide, Peter de, canon of Lincoln, 408 Mells (Somerset), 619 Melplash, John de, 397 Melun, Robert de abbot of Malmesbury (1189/90-1205), 607, 631 bishop of Hereford (1163-1167), 421, 443 Mendham, Thomas de, 634 Mendlesham (Suffolk), 122, 125, 458 Mepal (Cambs), 287 Meppershall, Robert de, 317 Merewei, unidentified, 252 Meriet, 242 Merkesfliete, unidentified, 254 Merlay, William de, 134 Merle, Hugh de, 613 Meroi, Walter de, 452 Mers (Essex), 484 Merscon, Alan, 641 Merstham (Surrey), 498 Merth', Eutropius de, 615 Merton (Surrey), priory, 210 Meschin, Ranulf le, earl of Chester, 172, 221, 264 Mesnilhermer Hubert de, 242 Richard de, 242 Michael, 158 reeve, 615 serjeant of Tutbury, 517 son of Thurstan, 557 Middlehead, in Farndale (Yorks N), 455 Middleton Roger de, 660 Walter de, 484 Midelhirst, unidentified, 455 Midhope (Yorks W), 468 Midsyke, river (Yorks N), 384, 487 Milborne Port (Somerset), 328 Milcote (Warws), 10 Milden (Suffolk), 581 Millers, Roger de, 415 Milton (Berks), 363 Miners, Gilbert de, 248 Mirabella, Jewess of Newport, 408 Mirable, daughter of Oger the steward, 529, 530 Miranda de Ebro (Spain), 494 Miriel (Spain), 494 Missenden (Bucks), abbey, 391 Missenden Ravening de, 391 Robert de, 391 Mitford (Norfolk), 112 Modbert, 226 Modlievesune, Edric, 291

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 747 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Mohun, Durand de, 266, 267 Moigne Geoffrey le, royal marshal, 423 Hervey le, 175, 187, 268, 269, 272 Oliver le, 385, 462, 515 Reginald le, 224, 233 William le, of Ireland, 385 Monasterio (Spain), 494 Mongeham (Kent), 285 Mongewell (Oxon), 559 Monk Bretton (Yorks W), Cluniac house, 663 Monkmoor, in Shrewsbury (Salop), 242 Monks Eleigh (Suffolk), 581 Monks Risborough (Bucks), 5 Monmouth, Thomas de, monk of Norwich, 321 Montacute (Somerset), abbey, 588 Montacute, Drew de, 228 Montbegon, Ernald de, 541 Monte, Richard de, sheriff of Oxfordshire, 191 Montenegro (Spain), 494 Montes de Oca (Spain), 494 Montfichet, William de, 225 Montfort Henry de, 549 Hugh de, lord of Haughley, 5, 9, 17, 18 Robert de, 176, 240, 407 Thurstan de, 326 Montgomery Ralph de, 252 Roger de, earl of Shrewsbury, 23, 163, 168, 242 Montigni, Roger de, 447 Montpellier, Thierry de, 329 Moorlinch (Somerset), 259 Morcar, 172 earl of Northumbria, 83, 223 More, Thomas de la, 579 Morel John, 391 Robert, priest, 392 Walter, 488 Moreton (Oxon), 521 Moreton, Robert de, 252 Morin, 175 Mortlake (Surrey), 5, 408 Morton, Roger de, 639 Morville (Salop), church of St. Gregory, 242 Morville Hugh de, 330 William de, 343 Morwick, Hugh de, 513, 543, 554, 561, 562, 564, 569 Morz, Richard de, 439 Moseley, in Grimley (Worcs), 633 Moses, master, 507 Mottisfont (Hants), 20

Moulins, Simon de, 177 Moulton Lambert de, 362 Thomas de, 546, 641 Mount Ferrant (Yorks E), 516 Mountsorrel (Lancs), 491 Mowbray Nigel de, 428, 453-455 Nigel de, son of Robert, 367, 368 Robert de, earl of Northumberland, 134, 143, 223 Robert de, son of Roger, 368, 453 Roger de, 134 Roger de, 323, 345, 367, 368, 428, 453-455, 486, 494 Moyses, priest, 329 Muchegros Miles de, 563 William de, 615 Muchelney (Somerset), abbey abbot of, see Hugh Mud, Ulwin, 342 Muggel, Stephen, 640 Mulbarton (Norfolk), 311 Mundford (Norfolk), 578 Mundham (Sussex), 420 Munechelade, unidentified, 641 Munneville, Ralph de, 240 Munsley, Hugh de, 281 Muntchensy, William de, 651 Murdac Hugh, 554 Ralph, 518, 562 Muriel, prioress of Arden, 591 Muschamp Cecily de, 361 Geoffrey, bishop of Coventry (1198-1208), 660 Ranulf de, 361 Robert de, 188, 361 Thomas de, 361 Muskham Andrew de, 527 Hugh de, 527 Muxton (Salop), 575 N., count, 494 Ndjera (Spain), 494 Nanus, Reginald, 329 Navarrete (Spain), 494 Navestock (Essex), 253 Nawton (Yorks N), 428 Nayland (Suffolk), 407 Necton (Norfolk), 115 Needwood (Staffs), 252 Ness (Lincs), 81, 83, 84

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 748 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Neucomen, Walter le, 546 Neufmarch, Bernard de, 163 Neuler, Robert, 447 Neville Alan de, justice of the forest, 444 , royal marshal, 423 Geoffrey de, 554 Hugh de, 448, 641 Turold de, 384, 453 William de, sheriff of Norfolk, 370 Newburgh (Yorks N), priory of, 345 Newburgh Roger de, earl of Warwick, 240 Waleran de, earl of Warwick, 574 Newbury, Gervase of, master, 631 Newby, Richard de, 534 Newcastle-on-Tyne (Northumberland), 143, 437 Newington (Kent), 5, 6, 157, 201, 213 Newland, Samson de, 488 Newnham (Beds), priory, 561 (Herts), 405 Newnham Fulk de, 547 Hervey de, 559 Juliana de, 547 Newnham Murren (Oxon), 559 New Place, now Biggin Hall in Benefield (Northants), 629 Newport (Essex), 88 Newsham, Odo de, 453 Newton (Norfolk), 200 Newton Geoffrey de, 384 Luke de, 384 Robert de, 392 Newton Hall (Essex), 94 Newton St. Cyres (Devon), 130 Newtown (Isle of Wight, Hants), 430 Nicholas archdeacon of London, 401, 434 chaplain, 569 monk, 641 parson of Tadcaster, 482 priest, 301 priest of Foxton, 319 prior of Abingdon, 570 I, prior of Spalding, 641 rural dean of Bedford, 509 senior, 329 sheriff of Hertfordshire, 451 Staffordshire, see Beauchamp (Nicholas de) son of Clement, 329

PLACES

Herbert, 242 Turold, 617 Nidulf, 167 Nigel, 246, 301 abbot of Burton-upon-Trent (1094-1114), 517 bishop of Ely (1133- 1169), 287, 331, 405, 423, 578 clerk of Bishop Remigius of Lincoln, 15 dean of Oxford, 622 nephew of Bishop Roger le Poer of Salisbury, 264 son of Godfrey, 254 Niger Jocelin, 343 Ordric, 15 Noel, Thomas, 544 royal justice, 606, 610 sheriff of Staffordshire, 598 Noiers, William de, 109 Nonant Baldwin de, 452 Henry de, 452 Hugh de, bishop of Chester and Coventry (1185- 1198), 574, 620, 641 Roger I de, 163 Roger II de, 452 Wido de, 452 Norfolk Gilbert de, 456 William de, 488 Norham (Northumberland), 468 Norman, 172 Norman, 238 Norman, 271 Norman, 649 knight, 18, 128 priest, 172 priest, 392 prior of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, London, 291, 425, 434 Gilbert, sheriff of Surrey, 210 son of Mazeline, 345 Normancross, hundred of (Hunts), 231 Normandy, duchy of, 11, 12, 15, 18, 134, 173, 189, 192, 212,218,222,239,323,386, 408,420, 490, 517, 540, 641 Normanton (Derbyshire), 365 Normanton, Ternald de, 566 Normanville, Ralph de, 639 Norreys, Hugh, 660 North, Richard de, 163 Northampton, 171, 201, 227, 312, 361, 396. 405, 408,415,420,445,491,501,517,545,557 St. Andrew's Priory, 338 Northampton, Henry de, cleric, 600

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 749 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Northaw (Herts), 396 North Barsham (Norfolk), 104 Northborough (Northants), 476 Northbourne (Kent), 285 Northbourne Bertelot de, 650 Roger de, 650 Northbrook, Edwin de, 488 North Erpingham (Norfolk), 100 Northolt, William of, bishop of Worcester (11861190), 574 Northorpe (Lincs), 302, 398 North Stoke (Somerset), 226 Northumberland, 255, 437 North Wootton (Dorset), 628 Norton (Herts), 405 (Kent), 547 (Leics), 319 (Oxon), 466, 594 in Hales (Salop), 242 Norton, Horm de, 459 Norwich (Norfolk), 18, 177, 200, 256, 321, 408, 415, 537 diocese, bishops of, see Everard, Oxford (John of), Turbe (William) Holy Trinity, cathedral priory, 200, 358 St. Leonard's priory, 173 Norwich, William de, 321 Nottingham, 181, 480, 486 Nov', Gilbert de, 527 Novers, Simon de, 321 Nowton (Suffolk), 544 Nuers Hugh de, 593 Ralph de, prior of Wymondham, 415 Nuffield (Oxon), 559 Nuffield, Stephen de, 559 Nunburnholme (Yorks E), 307 Nunley Farm (Warws), 326

Oakerthorpe (Derbyshire), 600 Oakhanger (Hants), 38 Ock, river (Berks), 12 Ockendon William de, 308 William de, son of William, 308 Ocker, Orm de, 252 Oc6n (Spain), 494 Oda, 35 Odard, sheriff of Northumberland, 223 Oddington (Glos), 2 Odiham (Hants), 129

Odo, 90 Odo, 343 Odo, 488 abbot of Battle (1175-1200), 489 bishop of Bayeux (1050-1097),5, 10,11, 17, 18, 24,25,48,50,57,67,69,75,77,96,97, 129, 133, 135, 421 count of Champagne, 134, 143 goldsmith, 318 knight, 18 knight, 257 master, 266 moneyer, 254 priest, 555 shoemaker, 447 Offa, king of Mercia (757-796), 3, 405 Offington, Roger de, 515 Offord (Hunts), 269 Oger, 219 steward, 408, 529, 530 Ohard, 569 Oilly Fulk de, 331 Henry de, royal constable, 642 Nicholas de, 559 Nigel de, 164, 206, 207 Robert I de, royal constable, 4, 45 Robert II de, 246, 642 William de, 189 Oiri, Fulk de, 641 Ojacastro (Spain), 494 Olchete, see Orthi Oldberrow (Warws), 10 Oldland, Daniel de, 488 Olifard, Robert, 605 Olifart, William, 187 Olney, unidentified, 229 Ombersley, Philip de, 507 Ongar (Essex), 408 Orbec, William de, 445 Orby, Philip de, 660 Orderic, 271 Ording abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1138/48-1156), 331,630 monk of Bury St. Edmunds, 295 Ordmar, 365 Ordric, abbot of Abingdon (1052-1065), 191 Ordwin, 163 Orgar, 550 monk, 291 Orival Henry, 655 Richard, 655

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 750 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Oriz E. de, 494 G. de, 494 Pedro de, 494 Orlestone Simon de, 488 William de, 488 Orligan, Richard, 579 Ormsby (Lincs), priory, 456, 555 Ormsby, Robert de, 456 Orpington (Kent), 5 Orpington Alexander de, 580 John de, 580 Orreis, 564 Orthi, 19 Osbern, 282 abbot of Colchester (1179-1195), 640 bishop of Exeter (1072- 1103), 42, 130, 144 butler, 295 dean of Bedford, 471 monk of Christ Church, Canterbury, 16 Osbert, 199 archdeacon of Richmond, 520 clerk, 395 prior of Daventry, 319 reeve, 651 rural dean of Bedford, 509 sheriff of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, 168, 172 Oseden, unidentified, 343 Oseville, Sewale de, 440 Oshere, ruler of the Hwicce (before 700), 3 Osmaston (Derbyshire), 365 Osmer, priest of Derby, 365 Osmund, 194 bishop of Salisbury (1078-1099), 134, 163 monk of Battle abbey, 377 Osney (Oxon) -abbey, 344, 372, 466, 571, 576, 589, 590, 642, 643 abbot of, see Buckingham (Hugh of) Ospringe Gervay de, 488 Hervey de, 488 Ostona, unidentified, 600 Oswald, king of Northumbria (633-641), 11,479 Oswaldslow, hundred of (Worcs), 15 Osward, 295 Oswin, St., 223, 497 Otford, Pain de, 389 Othwer, 291 Otto, goldsmith the elder, 253 the younger, 253

Ougrim, forester, 625 Oundle (Northants), 629 Ousefleet (Yorks W), 345 Outwell (Norfolk), 256 Over (Cambs), 261 Overton (Yorks N), 345 Ovingdean (Sussex), 196 Oxendon, Richard de, 338 Oxford, 14, 162, 191,207,209, 244, 288,296, 300, 301,336, 344,406,408,426,449,473,511, 514, 533, 559, 589, 622, 631 Oxford All Saints Church, 297 St. Frideswide, Augustinian priory, 297, 300, 316, 336, 624 St. Mary Magdalene, church, 297 St. Michael's Church, 297 Henry de, 333 sheriff of Berkshire, 363 John de, master, 427, 442 bishop of Norwich (1175-1200), 478, 481, 494, 513,518,523,524, 532, 538, 539, 547, 564, 571, 572, 585, 591, 595, 601, 602 Oxney (Kent), 573 Oxney Nicholas de, 488 William de, 488 P., count, 494 Pagham (Sussex), 420 Pagham, John de, 311 bishop of Worcester (1151-1157), 349 Pagnell Fulk, 499 Ralph, 63 Pain, 343 Pakenham (Suffolk), 562 Pakenham, Richard de, 562 Palmer, Ingemund de, 365 Pampisford (Cambs), 287 Pancorbo (Spain), 494 Pantulf, 343 Hugh, 575, 606, 609, 610 Papilio, Ralph, 214 Papley, Martin de, 205, 214 Parham (Sussex), 277 Park, Richard de, 636 Parndon Ambrose de, 615 Baldwin de, 615 Clement de, 615 Odo de, 615 Robert de, 615 Partney (Lincs), 307

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 751 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Pasci (Lanes), 491 Passelewe Ralph, 155, 256 Richard, 329 Pati, Godwin, 431 Patin Ranulf, 329 Robert, 329 Patrick earl of Salisbury, 360, 397 William, 474 Pattishall, Simon de, royal justice, 632, 633, 641 sheriff of Northamptonshire, 651 Paul, abbot of St. Albans (1077-1093), 136, 223, 396, 405 Paulin, canon, 392 Pax, Osmund, 301 Paxton (Hunts), 467 Payne, abbot of Sawtry, 467 Paynell, Ralph, sheriff of Yorkshire, 134 Pazuengos (Spain), 494 Peak (Hunts), 638 Peak, Richard of the, 560, 632, 633, 638 Pebworth (Glos), 10 Peccebrig, Gilbert de, 641 Peche Aldwin, 343 Geoffrey, 445 Hamo, 445, 462 Richard, bishop of Chester and Coventry (1161 1182), 405,494 Richard, 560, 632, 633, 638 Robert, 168 bishop of Chester and Coventry (11211127), 252, 349 Seman, 343 William, 261 Pedro I, king of Aragon (1094-1104), 494 Pedro Paris, bishop of Pamplona (1167-1193), 494 Pedwold, Hervey, 175 Peencurt, Berenger de, 509 Peisforiere Fulk, 488 Richard, 488 Pel de Lee, Robert, 340 Pelice, Hilbert, canon of Arrouaise, 509 Pemb'ri, Elias de, 660 Pefial~n (Spain), 494 Penenden Heath (Kent), 5, 134 Pennybridge, Ralph de, 163 Pentridge (Dorset), 548 Penwortham (Lanes), 10

PLACES

Perche Geoffrey de, 499 Rotron de la, count, 494 Percy Agnes de, 534, 659 Alan de, 153, 223 Geoffrey de, 482 Gerbert de, 374, 397 Ralph de, priest, 392 William I de, 62, 163 William II de, 397, 450, 482, 510 William de, 607 Perez, Pedro, 494 Perez de Reinoso, Gutierre, 494 Peri Emma de, 590 Herbert de, 576 Nigel de, 576 William de, 590 Periers, Robert de, 439 Pershore (Worcs), abbey abbot of, see Reginald Peter, 167 Peter, 393 abbot of Gloucester (1107-1113), 179, 499 bishop of Lichfield and Chester (1072-1085), 5 canon of Guisborough, 428 chaplain, 620 dean, 392 forester, 484 miller of Colneford, 484 monk of St. Albans, 539 parson of Doncaster, 566, 567 prior of Worcester Cathedral (1196-1203), 658 sheriff of Oxford, 148 sheriff's clerk, 529, 530 son of Meillesme, 447 Simon, 639 Walter, 447 Peterborough (Northants), 283 abbey,276, 314, 476, 551 abbots of, see Bee (Martin of), Ernulf, Matthew, St. Jean d' Ang~li (Henry), SLcz (John de), Turold, Waterville (William de) Peterhouse, Alberic de, 447 Petherton (Somerset), 3 Petit, Ralph, 622 Pevensey (Sussex), 196 Peverel Hamo, 242 Hugh, 235 Pain, 163, 182, 268

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 752 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES Ranulf, 92, 134, 308 William, 168, 235, 252, 268, 346 Philip abbot of Meaux (1160-1182), 541, 542 abbot of Revesby (1155-1181), 527 II August, king of France (1179-1223), 641 baker, 301 butler, 397 chancellor, see Harcourt dean, 392 dean, 527 miller of Barrington, 653 of Alsace, count of Flanders (1157-1191), 494 son of Fulger Nanus, 329 steward, see Kyme (Philip de) Pickburn, Jordan de, 566, 567 Pickering (Yorks N), 384, 487 Pickering Gamel de, 384 Stephen de, 384 Pickering Lythe, wapentake (Yorks N), 487 Picot lord of Bourn (Cambs) and sheriff of Cambridgeshire (died post 1092), 18, 19, 31, 52, 183 Ralph, sheriff of Kent, 340 Robert, 183 Pidley (Hunts), 286 Pieoc, Ralph, 254 Pigaz Geoffrey, 589 Humphrey, 589 Pilatus, Thomas, 527 Pilet, William, 622 Pilkington, Ralph de, 660 Pimley (Salop), 606 Pimley, Stephen de, 606 Pinchbeck (Lincs), 546 Pinellus, Ralph, 127 Pipard Gilbert, 523 Roger, 607 William, 391 Pipewell (Northants), 431 abbey of, 422, 431 Piria, Godric de, 15 Piro, Robert de, sheriff of Staffordshire, 517 Pirot, Alan, 254 Pirton (Worcs), 605 Pistes, Roger de, sheriff of Gloucestershire, 49 Pitley farm, in Great Bardfield (Essex), 470 Pitres, Roger de, 4 Placitor, Ralph, 424 Planeta, John, 421 Pleasley, Serlo de, 638

Plumpton Gilbert de, 553 Peter de, 450, 482 Plympton (Devon), Augustinian canons of, 452, 564 Plympton, Nigel de, 266 Poer Herbert le, archdeacon of Canterbury (c. 11751194), 621 Hugh le, 507 Rainer le, 428 Robert le, 428, 525 Roger le, bishop of Salisbury (1102-1139), 264 Roger le, chancellor, 160, 288, 291, 299, 517 Poitevin, Robert, 663 Poitiers (France), 490 Poitou, Roger de, earl of Shrewsbury, 60, 134 Poll, Hugh, 641 Pomerai, Henry de, 579 Pompam, Roger, 301 Pont-de-l'Arche (Normandy), 641 Pont-de-l'Arche, William de, 196, 246, 250, 268, 278 Pont l'Ev~que, Roger de, archbishop of York (1154-1181), 311, 360, 368, 371, 405, 408, 411,421,437,455,487,490,492,494, 526 Ponte Hereward de, 365 Robert de, 652 Pontefract (Yorks W), 161 priory, 392 Pontefract, Robert de, 190 Ponton (Lincs), 81 Porchester (Hants), 343, 433 Port Adam de, 189, 229, 248, 263, 268 Henry de, 163, 168, 248, 254 sheriff of Hampshire, 167 Hubert de, 126, 129 Hugh de, 31, 32, 35, 134, 163 sheriff of Hampshire, 20 Roger de, 248 William de, 248 Portes, Walter de, 605 Portilla (Spain), 494 Portsmouth (Hants), 188, 349, 523, 641 Postel, Ronald, 232 Potterne James de, 607 Peter de, 397 Poulton (Ches), 474 Poulton Richard de, 488 William de, 488 Poulton-Dieulacres (Staffs), abbey of, 474

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 753 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Poundhurst, William de, 488 Pouyl, Ralph de, 307 Praers, Pain de, 639 Preestebrugg', Gerard de, 650 Preston (Kent), 5 (Northants), 317 Preston, Robert de, 651 Proudfoot, Gilbert, 260, 270 sheriff of London, 329 Puente de la Reina (Spain), 494 Puiher Henry, 605 John, 605 Samson, 605 Simon, 605 William, 605 Puiset Henry du, 636 Hugh du, bishop of Durham (1153-1195), 364, 371,405,408,437, 439,471,472,487,494, 523, 574, 595, 599, 620, 636, 641 Pulcela, 533 Pulcin Albold, 519 Humphrey, 388 Puldre, Roger, 486 Pulford (Ches), 474 Pulford, Richard de, 474 Pulleia, William, 641 Punnant, Richard, 109 Pusey, Henry de, 424 Pynzard, Richard, 608 Pyrford (Surrey), 277 Pyrton (Oxon), 189 Pyrton. Bartholomew de, 559 Pytchley (Northants), 220 Quel (Spain), 494 Quinci, Saher de, 515, 595 Quinton (Glos), 10 R., bishop, 157 Raachc, Robert, 448 Radcliffe, William de, 660 Raddon, Richard de, 322 Radenhurst in Deverell (Somerset?), 619 Rafrid, 114 Ragley Hall (Warws), 10 Raher, 163 Raimbald, knight, 147 Raimes, Roger de, 123, 124 Raimiri S., 494 Raimund, bishop of Palencia, 494

PLACES

Rainald, son of Sywak, 307 Rainbald, 192, 195 Rainer reeve, 242 son of Elieth, 242 Raineville Adam de, 566, 663 Thomas de, 566 Rainold, 254 Ralph, 25 Ralph, 329 Ralph, 505 Ralph abbot of Battle (1107-1124), 174, 377 Winchcombe (1183-1194/95), 609 archdeacon of Colchester, 583, 587, 590, 601, 602 Hereford, 602 Stafford, 325 see also Diceto (Ralph de) brother of Hervic, 447 butler, 332 canon of Lincoln, 299 chaplain, son of Algot, 318 cellarer of Abingdon, 191, 192 chamberlain, 254 chamberlain of Abbot Faritius of Abingdon Abbey, 195, 215 citizen of Canterbury, 464 cleric, 440 cleric of Breadsall, 365 Harlow, 615 constable, 295 dean of St. Paul's, London, 308 Scremby, 527 see also Langford earl of Chester, see Gernon Norwich, 7 knight of Marchington, 365 master of Aubrey de Vere, 484 monk of Thorney Abbey, 193 priest, 329 prior of Guisborough, 572 Launde, 388 St. Sepulchre's, Warwick, 402 Worcester cathedral, see Bedeford (Ralph de) royal physician, 360, 408 sacrist of Bury St. Edmunds, 318

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 754 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

seneschal, 488 sheriff of Essex, 18 son of Aldelin, 368 Asketill, 307 Dolfin, 566 Ketel, 307 Stephen, 641 Wichard, 324 staller, 85 subchanter, 392 Ramirez Pedro, 494 Sancho, 494 de Perola, Sancho, 494 Ramiro 1, king of Aragon (1135-1163), 494 Rampaleya, unidentified, 633 Rampenna, William de, 344 Ramsey (Hunts), 467 abbey, 602 abbots of, see iElfsige, fElfwine, Aldwin, Bernard, Reginald, Walter, William Ramuri, P., 494 Randulf, 477 cellarer of Ramsey, 385 cleric, 338 Ranulf, 325 bishop, see Flambard brother of Ilger, 127 Walter de Cerisy, abbot of Evesham, 15 chancellor, 187, 188, 202, 212, 215, 221, 224, 228 clerk of Nigel, bishop of Ely, 287 earl of Chester, see Meschin monk of Bishop Remigius of Lincoln, 15 Reading, 282 sheriff of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, 365 Surrey, 25 treasurer of Salisbury Cathedral, 654 Ranworth (Norfolk), 354, 359, 366 Ratebury, unidentified, 5 Ratling Alan de, 488 Asketur de, 254 Ravensden (Beds), 623 Reading (Berks), 406 abbey, 310, 341,407, 414, 478, 499 abbots of, see Ansger, Reginald Reading, Alan de, 340 Reasby (Lincs), 613 Reculver (Kent), 5 Redbornstoke (Beds), 58

PLACES

Redover, river (Yorks N), 455, 486 Redvers, Richard de, 163 Regenbald chancellor, 13 dean of Cirencester, 328 Reginald, abbot of Abingdon (1084-1097), 43, 145-148, 164 abbot of Pershore (1162), 405 Ramsey (1113/14-1131), 203, 204, 224, 233, 249, 256, 260, 268-272 Reading (1154-1158), 341 bailiff of the abbot of Reading, 499 bishop of Bath, see Fitz Jocelin (Reginald) canon of Bridlington, 486 clerk of the bishop of Chester, 252 constable of Lincoln castle, 298 earl of Cornwall, see Fitz Roy (Reginald) forester, 384 precentor of Ramsey, 385 priest, 566, 567 steward, 340 Reinberd, 340 Reiner, 343 priest, 301 sheriff of Yorkshire, see Waxham (Reiner de) son of Blakeman, 425 Fulk, 622 Reinhelm, bishop of Hereford (1102 1115), 179, 499 Reling', Asketin de, 340 Remigius, bishop of Lincoln (1067-1092), 15, 18, 68, 163 Repps (Norfolk), 383 Resa (Spain), 494 Rettlynge, see Ratling Revel Andrew, 515 Odo, 235, 272 Rheims, abbey of St. Remi, 197 monk of, see Godwin Rhuddlan, Robert de, 163 Rhys ap Gruffydd, 553 Ribaroia (Spain), 494 Ribout, Sewin, 343 Richard, 254 Richard, 325 Richard, 389 Richard, 430 abbot of Cirencester (1187 1213), 579, 626, 631 Ely (1100- 1107), 168 St. Albans, 154 St. Augustine's, Bristol (1148-1185), 478

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 755 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Richard (contd) archdeacon, see Ruffus (Richard) bishop of London, see Belmeis (Richard) Winchester, see lchester (Richard of) brother of Archdeacon Nicholas of London, 434 butler, 348, 364 chaplain, 507 chaplain, 566, 567 cleric of Wollaton, 638 the cleric, sheriff of Wiltshire, 397 cleric of Malzeard, 367 cousin of Segar, 622 dispenser, 348 earl of Chester, 217 I, king of England (1189-1199), 579, 612, 620, 621,637, 641 knight of Normanton, 365 master, 660 nephew of Roger Fitz Richard, lord of Clare, 225 priest, 301 priest, 343 priest, 576 priest, 620 priest of Wellow, 508 prior of Newborough, 455 sacrist, 378-380 son of Gotse, sheriff of Derbyshire, 517 the priest, 477 Richard the archdeacon of Essex, 329 treasurer, see Fitz Nigel (Richard) Richerio, Baldwin de, 301 Richesey, William de, 340 Richmond (Yorks N), 463 Ridel Geoffrey, 158, 168, 172, 181, 187, 189, 194, 197, 203, 205, 220, 388, 405 Geoffrey, archdeacon of Canterbury, 423, 432, 459 bishop of Ely (1173-1189), 477, 478, 494, 497, 513,518,523, 524,532, 538,539, 547, 564, 571,572, 578, 591,600 Hugh, priest of Kettering, 431 Ridge, the, in Standish (Glos), 351 Ridware (Staffs), 459, 543 Ridware Hugh de, 459 Roger de, 459 William de, 459, 543 Rievaulx (Yorks N) abbey, 428, 453-455, 486, 488 abbot of, see Ailric

Rimiri, Sancho, 494 Ringstead (Norfolk), 141 Ripariis, Jocelin de, 228 Ripon (Yorks W), chapter of St. Peter and Wilfrid, 172 Rippingale, Ralph de, 641 Ripple (Kent), 184 Risbridge (Suffolk), 634 Risby (Lincs), 69 Risby, Walter de, 318 Risfort Gilbert de, 343 Osbert de, 343 Rising (Norfolk), 415 Rivere, Walter de la, 455 Rivers Jocelin de, 145, 164, 165 Walter de, 145 Riwallon, abbot of St. Peter and St. Grimbald abbey at Winchester (1072-1088), 23 Roaldesbi Cospatric de, 384 Gamel de, 384 Robert, 167 Robert, 219 Robert, 226 Robert, 343 Robert, 379 Robert, 639 Robert, 656 abbot of Burton-upon-Trent (1150- 1159), 517 Cirencester (1183 1186), 579 Crowland (1175-1190), 560, 641 Malmesbury, see Melun (Robert of) Ramsey, see Trianel (Robert) St. Albans, see Gorham (Robert de) St. Etienne, Caen (died 1196), 644 St. Mary at York, see Harpham (Robert I de) Shrewsbury (1150/59-1168), 387 I, abbot of Thorney (1113/14- 1151), 193, 194, 204, 219, 235, 272, 305 archdeacon of Oxford, see Foliot (Robert) bishop of Chester, see Limesey (Robert) Coventry, see Peche (Robert) II, bishop of Exeter (1155- 1160), 360, 520 bishop of Hereford, see Foliot (Robert) Lincoln, see Chesney (Robert de) butler, 474 canon of St. Paul's, London, 434 chamberlain, 550 chamberlain of Roger de Mowbray, 455

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 756 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

chaplain, 198 chaplain, 453 chaplain of Roger de Mowbray, 454, 455 cleric, 307 cleric, 348 cleric, 385 cleric of Marton, 428 count of Meulan, see Beaumont Mortain (died 1090), 2, 18, 28, 163, 322 deacon, 639 dean of Salisbury Cathedral, 397 dispenser, 163 earl of Gloucester, illegitimate son of Henry I, 225, 228, 296, 417, 548 III, earl of Leicester (1168-1190), 634 knight of Cottons, 365 Osmanton, 365 monk of F6camp, 163 Worcester Cathedral, 507 nephew of Abbot Reginald of Abingdon, 146 Edward the knight, 316 obleymaker, 329 the Philosopher, 434, 445, 458 priest, 235 priest, 326 priest, 329 priest of Huntingdon, 233 Mackworth, 365 Stapenhill, 598 prior of Dorchester, 332 Launceston, 322 reeve, 333 reeve, 362 sacrist, 215 sheriff of Suffolk, 18 son of Arnald, 368 Corbutio, 117 Fulk, 456 Hamo, 153 Hardwin, the priest of Rushton, 431 Henry, 641 Junguin, 533 Lefstan, 329 Lewinc, 388 the recluse, 484 Turstan, the dispenser, 67, 74, 75, 79 Ulfet, 365 Wyger, 242

the staller, 657 Robertsbridge (Sussex), Cistercian abbey, 573 Robet, Robin, 641 Rocel', Robert, 473 Rocheford, Thomas de, deputy-sheriff of Gloucestershire, 579 Roches, Alan de, 546 Rochester (Kent), 133 cathedral priory of St. Andrew, 19, 238, 532, 547 diocese, bishops of, see Arnost, Ascelin, Ernulf, Gundulf, John 1, Walter Rochester, Turold de, 5, 91 Rockbourne (Hants), 40 Rockingham (Northants), 158, 299, 612, 641 Rockland St. Mary (Norfolk), 97 Rodings, the (Essex), 287 Rodriguez count, 494 de Azagra, F., 494 de Azagra, G., 494 de Azagra, Pedro, 494 Rodsell Farm, in Puttenham (Surrey), 24 Roeis, wife of Thomas Bardulf, 485 Roger, 329 Roger, 472 abbot of Abingdon (1175-1184), 481, 570 Byland (1142- 1196), 454, 455, 591 St. Augustine's, Canterbury (1176-1212), 488, 577, 649 almoner, 657 archbishop of York, see Pont l'Evfque (Roger de) archdeacon of Ramsbury, 397 bishop of Salisbury (1102 1139), 177, 178, 182, 187, 189, 197,200,202,205,211-213,215, 224-229, 239,246 248, 250, 264, 271,276, 277, 279, 297, 298, 342 Worcester (1163-1179), 421, 487, 494, 507, 512 cellarer of Bury St. Edmunds, 648 chamberlain, 499 chancellor, 517 chancellor, see Poer cleric, 343 cleric, 488 earl of Clare, see Fitz Richard (Roger) Hereford, 7 Hereford, 327, 351 II, earl of Montgomery, 621 earl of Warwick, see Newburgh forester, 368 great-nephew of Edward the knight, 316

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 757 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Roger (contd) marshal, 93 marshal, 552 monk of F~camp, 163 Thorney, 193, 251 porter, 311 priest of Markeaton, 365 prior of Rievaulx, 486 Rufford, 655 sacrist of Warwick, 507 sheriff of Norfolk, 18 sheriff, see Bigod Pistes see Poitou son of Billeh (...), 329 Rohese, 473 Rollevilain, Richard, 384 Romanger, Alan, 301 Rome, 9, 134, 336, 408, 520 Romeus, 464 Romney (Kent), 303 Romsey (Hants), 168 Ropsley, Simon de, 448 Rorges, 175 Ros Eustace de, 447 Geoffrey de, 311, 552 Herbert de, 163 Jordan de, 569, 614 Margaret de, 621 Peter de, 599 William de, 420, 557 William de, abbot of the Holy Trinity at F6camp, 163 Rosel Richard de, 572 Roger de, 572 Ross (Northants), 188 Rothwell (Northants), 631 Rotrou, bishop of Evreux (1155-1164), 399 Rouen (Normandy), 11, 241, 283, 399, 400 Rouen, diocese, bishop of, see Amiens (Hugh of) Rouen Robert de, royal chaplain, 197 William de, 447 Roumare Roger fitz Gerold de, 376 William de, 641 William I de, earl of Cambridge and Lincoln, 307, 376 William de, son of Earl William II de Roumare, 307

Rowington (Warws), 326 Rowleston Hugh de, 384 Roger de, 384 Ucca de, 384 Waltheof de, 384 Royton (Kent), 225 Ruckinge (Kent), 5, 552 Rudston, Gamel de, 384 Rueda (Spain), 494 Rufford (Notts), abbey, 324, 448, 527, 625, 638, 655 Rufus Arnulf, 640 Geoffrey, royal chancellor, 246, 248, 249, 258, 264, 268, 279, 280 Girbert, 226 Guy, dean of Waltham (1161- 1177), 579 Pain, 329 Richard I, archdeacon of Essex, 308, 434 William, 508, 518, 537, 560, 561, 569, 608, 626 Rugeberg, unidentified, 536 Rumon, St., 144 Rushden Guy de, 307 William de, 307 Rushton (Northants), 431 Rushton Andrew de, 431 Odo de, 431 Robert de, 431 Rustold, 329 Rye, river (Yorks N), 487, 591 Rye Henry de, 311, 331 Hubert de, 311 Ryedale, wapentake (Yorks N), 63 Ryedale, Alan de, 453, 486 Sabina, wife of Sewal de Walkfares, 657 Sackville, William de, 408 Saconus, 228 Sadwin, 624 Sagar, 52 Saham, 95 St. Albans (Herts) abbey, 223,405, 408, 423, 436, 451,497 abbots of, see Aubigny (Richard d'), Frederic, Gorham (Geoffrey de), Gorron (Geoffrey de), Gorron (Robert de), Gubiun (Ralph), Paul, Richard, Simon St. Andrew, see Rochester, cathedral priory St. Annhel, Wielard de, 368 St. Asaph (Wales), diocese, bishops of, see Adam, Godfrey

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 758 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

St. Augustine, abbey, see Canterbury St. Barbe, Ralph de, 258 St. Bees (Cumberland), Benedictine abbey, 586 St. Benet of Hulme (Norfolk), abbey of abbots of, see Elfwold, Daniel, William St. Benoit-sur-Loire (France), 421 St. Calais, Geoffrey de, monk, 174 St. Calais (St. Carilef), abbey of (France, diocese of Le Mans), 134 St. Carilef, William of, bishop of Durham (10801096), 20, 71-73, 132, 134, 136, 137, 140, 141, 163, 223 St. Clair Richard de, 228, 415 William de, 397 St. David's diocese, bishop of, see Bernard St. Etheldreda, see Ely, abbey St. Florent, abbey, see Saumur St. German, Hugh de, 576 St. Gregory, Wiber de, 254 St. Helen John de, 424, 556 Peter de, 507 St. Ives (Hunts), 182 St. Jean d'Angrli (France), 354, 355 St. Jean d'Angrli, Henry de, abbot of Peterborough (1127- 1132), 276 St. John, see Beverley, church St. John, Thomas de, sheriff of Oxfordshire, 162, 189, 191 St. Leonard, priory, see Norwich St. Leonard's church, Mailing (Kent), 394 St. Liz Simon I de, earl of Northampton, 158 Simon II de, earl of Northampton, 314, 338 Simon III de, earl of Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire, 448, 485, 487, 527 St. Margaret-at-Cliffe (Kent), 254 St. Martin Alvred de, 497, 573 Ralph de, 333 William de, 397 St. Martin's, priory, see Dover St. Martin le Grand, see London, canons St. Mary le Bow, see London, churches St. Mary, church, Mailing (Kent), 394 St. Mrre Eglise, William de, 631, 641 St. Neots (Hunts), priory, priors of, see Herbert, Martin St. Oswald, William de, 499 St. Ouen, Gilbert de, 163 St. Pancras, Robert de, canon of Salisbury, 397 St. Paul, William de, monk of Rufford, 655 St. Paul's, see London, canons St. Peter, Walter de, 507

St. Peter and St. Etheldreda, see Ely (Cambs), abbey St. Peter and St. Swithun, cathedral priory, see Winchester St. Peter, abbeys see Gloucester, Westminster, Winchester St. Stephen, Orgar de, 266 St. Stephen, abbey, see Caen St. Susanna, Hubert de, 226 St. Valery, Reginald de, 351 St. Vincent-du-Lorou~r, abbey of (France, diocese Le Mans), 134 St. Wandrille, abbey of, 595 Saket, William, 639 Salford, Giffard de, 226 Salford Priors (Warws), 10, 240 Salidus, 329 Salinas de Anafia (Spain), 494 Salisbury (Wilts), 134, 153, 406 diocese, bishops of, see Bohun (Jocelin de), Osmund, Roger Salisbury, Edward de, 263 Sallow, Robert de, 459 Salter's oak, unidentified, 536 Saltwood (Kent), 5 Samford David de, 470 Gervase de, 470 William de, 598 Samson abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1182-1211), 407, 446, 531,537,544, 562,568,569, 581,601, 615, 627, 630, 634, 646, 648, 661, 662 bishop of Worcester (1096-1112), 154, 339 chaplain, 408 Samuel, 215 Samuel, 649 Sancho VI, king of Navarre, 494 el Craso, king of Le6n (956-958), 494 the Child, son of Sancho IV Garc~s, king of Navarre and Nijera, 494 IV Garc~s, king of Navarre and Ndjera (1054 1076), 494 Sancho-Ramirez, king of Aragon (1063-1094), 494 Sandall see Kirk Sandall Adam de, 566 Sandford (Oxon), 206 Sandford, Jordan de, 424 Sandiacre, Peter de, 365 Sandridge (Herts), 405, 451 Sandwich (Kent), 5, 212, 254 Sandwich, Absalon de, 227 Sangilesa (Spain), 494

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 759 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Santa Gadea (Spain), 494 San Vincente (Spain), 494 Saragossa (Spain), 494 Sarnesfield, Philip de, 414 Sartrino, Theobald de, 620 Saul, 301 Saumur (France, diocese of Angers), abbey of St. Florent, 163, 167 Sauvage, Robert le, 198 Savigny, Ralph de, 126 Sawin, 40 Sawley (Yorks W), abbey of, 450, 482 Sawtry (Hunts), 385 abbey, 314, 467 abbot of, see Payne Sawtry Judith (Hunts), 286, 314 Sawy, 301 Say Elias de, 413 Henry de, 362 Theoderic de, 242 Thomas de, 388 Scad Durand, 329 Henry, 329 Scal', William de, 462 Scalegrai, 379 Scalers, Hardwin de, 18 Scalford (Leics), 319 Scalpin, 93 Scarborough (Yorks N), 371 Scarcliff, William de, 638 Scawton (Yorks N), 323 Schuthe, Elias de, 488 Scoblevill (Devon), 452 Scohies, William de, 114 Scot Richard, 556 Robert, 566 Scotebrug, unidentified, 606 Scotland, 497 abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury (10701087), 6, 16, 22 Scremby (Lincs), 79 (Notts), 527 Scremby, Peter de, 527 Scriba, Nicholas, 329 Scurun's Well (Suffolk), 648 Scylla, 421 Seacourt (Berks), 576 Seacourt, William de, 192, 215, 218 Seacourt, William de, 594 Seaton Ross (Yorks E), 307 Sebrith, 301

PLACES

Sebrondescroft, unidentified, 634 Seething (Norfolk), 119 S~ez (Normandy), bishop elect of, 421 S6ez, John de, monk of Holy Trinity at F6camp, 163 abbot of Peterborough (1114-1125), 205, 214, 219 Sefare, 430 Seffrid abbot of Glastonbury (1120/21-1125), 257, 258 II, bishop of Chichester (1180-1204), 523 Segar cleric, 167 merchant, 622 Segare, John, 579 Selby (Yorks W) St. German Abbey, 138, 312 abbot of, see Benedict Sele (Sussex), Priory, 198 Seldewin, 397 Selingar, 343 Selsey, bishop of, see Cthelric Seman, 271 merchant, 343 Semar, 291 Semer (Suffolk), 627 Sempringham, Gilbert of, 457 Senatus, prior of Worcester Cathedral (11891196), 632, 633, 645 Senez, de, 494 Senlis, see St. Liz Septfonteines, Ralph de, 465 Serlo, abbot of St. Peter, Gloucester (1070-1104), 2, 15, 139, 163 Serman, 529, 530 Settrington (Yorks E), 223 Seuredeswelle, unidentified, 196 Severn, river (Worcs), 242, 635 Sevul, 253 Seward, 343 Sewardsley (Northants), 629 Sewi, 271 son of Snelling, 344 Shadwell (Hants), 343 Shaftesbury (Dorset), abbey, abbesses of, see Emma, Eulalia Shalmsford, John de, 488 Sheffield (Yorks W), 595 Shenstone (Staffs), 642, 643 Sherborne (Dorset), 628 (Glos), 609 Sherborne, Humphrey de, 609 Sherburn (Yorks E), 172

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 760 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Sheriff's Lench (Worcs), 10 Shilingham Daniel de, 488 Elias de, 488 Shinfield (Berks), 500 Shipton (Glos), 10 in Quainton (Bucks), 593 (Yorks N), 345 Shipton, Osbert de, 579 Shobnall Godfrey de, 598 Juliana de, 598 Sholden Jordan de, 488 Simon de, 488 Shoreham (Kent), 394 Shorne, Henry de, 488, 498 Shotesham (Norfolk), 96 Shrewley (Warws), 326 Shrewsbury (Salop) abbey, 242, 243, 273, 346 abbots of, see Fulchered, Godfrey, Robert Shrewsbury, Robert de, master, 606, 609, 610 Shuyswell, in Etchingham (Sussex), 196 Shyracke, wapentake (Yorks W), 65 Sibson (Hunts), 272, 515 Sibson, John de, 348 Sibton (Suffolk), abbey, 608 Sierralba (Spain), 494 Sifurdeleia, unidentified, 634 Sigar, 254 Sigillo Baldric de, 417 Nicholas de, 360 Robert de, 241, 246, 248, 250, 254, 283 bishop of London (1141- 1150), 308, 313 Silli, John de, priest, 392 Silverstone (Northants), 230, 317, 459, 651, 652 Silverstone Henry de, 651 William de, 651 Silvester abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury (11511161), 360 master, 507 Simbatenhill, unidentified, 633 Simeon, abbot of Ely (1082-1093), 18 Simon abbot of Pershore (1175-1198), 507 St. Albans (1167- 1183), 451, 478, 539 archdeacon of Worcester, 512 bishop of Worcester (1125- 1150), 280, 402 cellarer of Sawtry, 448

PLACES

cleric, 465 dispenser, 222 earl of Northampton, see St. Liz prior of St. Albans, 396, 405 Sired, monk of Bury St. Edmunds, 295 Siric, son of Godwin, 254 Siward, 15, 76, 99 Siward, 271 Siward, 605 Skeffling, Isaac de, 541 Skendleby (Lincs), 527 Skendleby, William de, 527 Skypman, 608 Slakkemere, in Aversley Wood (Hunts), 286 Sleights, in Kirkby Moorside (Yorks N), 455 Smallbrook, stream in Wolverley (Worcs), 645 Smithcroft, unidentified, 343 Smithfield, parish of (London), 434 Snailwell (Cambs), 287 Snainton Acca de, 384 Thor de, 384 Snelland (Lincs), 613 Soham (Suffolk), 592 Solomon, abbot of Thorney, 557 Somerville, Walter de, 459 Sonning, Gilbert de, 397 Sornes, Henry de, 552 Sothill Ellis de, 663 Reginald de, 663 Sotriz, 163 Southampton (Hants), 134, 408 Southford, Hamo de, 488 Southgate, Brihtric de, 238 Southorpe (Lincs), 546 South Stoke (Oxon), 604 Southwark (Surrey), 25, 201 Southwell (Notts), collegiate church of St. Mary, 324 Southwick (Hants), priory of, 343 (Sussex), 198 Southwold (Suffolk), 446 Sovedune Adelard de, 488 Eilnoth de, 488 Spalding (Lincs), 641 priory of St. Mary, 362, 641 prior, see Nicholas I Sparsholt (Berks), 43, 44 Speeton (Yorks E), 538 Spernall (Warws), 536 Speyer (Germany), 641 Spina, Henry de, 488

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 761 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Sprakelin, Mordant, 322 Sprot, 254 Aldwin, 329 Sproxton, Robert de, 453 Sringlinges, Clement de, 488 Stafford, 408, 461, 636 Stafford Nicholas de, 325 sheriff of Staffordshire, 197, 275 Robert de son of Nicholas, 325, 459 Robert, 459 Staines (Middlesex), 156 Stamford (Lincs), 214, 302 Stamford Bridge (Yorks W), 510 Stamford Hill (Middlesex), 644 Stanbridge (Beds), 57 Stanbruge, unidentified, 252 Standish (Glos), 2, 351 Standish, Ralph de, 660 Standon, Robert de, 459 Stanford, Robert de, 521, 594 Stanford-on-Avon (Northants), 312 Stangate (Hunts), 286 Stanground (Hunts), 348 Stanidelfurlong, unidentified, 521 Stanlake, Richard, 209 Stanleyburn (Durham), 255 Stansted Mountfitchet (Essex), lord of, see Gernon Stanton, Turstan de, 569 Stanton Harcourt (Oxon), 160 Stapenhill (Staffs), 598 Stapleton, William de, 663 Starrlett, Robert, 625 Starston (Norfolk), 109 Staverton, Robert de, 187 Staxtondale, Thierry de, 384 Steeton, Elias de, 482 Stephen, 552 abbot of St. Mary's, York (c. 1080-1112(?)), 149 archdeacon of Buckingham, 641 chaplain, 307 chaplain, 364 custodian of Arden, 591 king of England (1135-1154), 137, 184, 228, 240, 287, 288,290,291,294, 296, 299-306, 310-313,315,317-321,323,331,334-336, 339, 342,360, 361,363,377,378,394,417, 425, 436, 447, 451,489, 517, 520, 578 mercer, 447 priest, 326 Stepney, Solomon, 308 Stert, Ruald de, 232

PLACES

Stertes, unidentified, 477 Stetchworth (Cambs), 287 Steyning (Sussex), 163 church, St. Cuthman in Bramber Castle, 163 Steynulf, 365 Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury (1043-1070), 9, 49, 109, 421 Stilenius, Peter, 566 Stisted (Essex), 5 Stixwould (Lincs), abbey, 376 Stixwould, Roger de, undersheriff of Lincolnshire, 641 Stobsheath Richard de, 329 Robert de, 329 Stockeld, Nigel de, 450, 482 Stodden (Hunts), 54, 55 Stodfald, unidentified, 455 Stoke (Dorset), 228 (Glos), 10 (Kent), 5, 21 Stoke Aelmer de, 488 Ralph de, 559 Robert de, 488 Stoke Albany (Northants), 431 Stoke Ash (Suffolk), 125 Stoke Holy Cross (Norfolk), 108 Stokes, Roger de, 348 Stonar (Kent), 137, 254 Stone (Bucks), 571 (Staffs), 275, 325 priory, 325, 664 Stone Brithwold de, 488 Godhese de, 488 Stonegrave (Yorks N), 63 Stonegrave Henry de, 453 Robert de, 453, 486 Simon de, 453, 486 William de, 453 Stonnal (Staffs), 642, 643 Stortford, John de, 329 Stourmouth Aldred de, 488 Hamo de, 488 Stow (Lincs), 138 (Norfolk), 95, 101, 102 Stowmarket (Suffolk), 216 Strache, unidentified, 286 Stratford, Simon de, 635

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 762 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Stratton (Norfolk), Ill Stratton Geoffrey de, 439 Hervey de, 459 Strede, unidentified, 287 Street, in Winsham (Somerset), 654 Strelley, Samson de, 439 Stretton, William de, 252 Sturnell, 380 Sturry Adam de, 488, 552 Heilgar de, 488, 552 Stuteville Robert de, 323, 494, 497, 499, 516, 525 Roger de, 499, 522 William de, 323, 478, 499, 522, 599 Suarin, priest, 126 Sucling, 301 Sudbury (Suffolk), 202 Sulfhamtuna, unidentified, 228 Sumergeld, unidentified, 606 Sumeri, Roger de, 168 Sumerlese, pasture between Uffington and Woolstone (Berks), 381 Sunbury (Middlesex), 465 Sundridge (Kent), 5 Sunningwell, Geoffrey de, 424 Surdeval, Peter de, 453, 486 Surlefoche, Sericus, 343 Sutton (Lincs), 438, 641 (Yorks W), 566 Sutton Asketin de, 488 G. de, 388 Osbert de, 488 Peter de, 529 William de, 438 Sutton Courtenay (Berks), 12, 41, 185 Swain, 219 Swain, 468 Swain cleric, 392 Swallowfield (Berks), 433, 500 Swallow Hill (Yorks W), 663 Swampton, in St. Mary Bourne (Hants), 33 Swein, 90 prior of Burton-upon-Trent Abbey, 252 sheriff of Essex, 159 Swell, see Upper Swell Swinfin, Henry de, 543 Swythsand, Roger de, 615 Symphorian, chaplain, 520 Syrtes, 421

Taca, Robert, 223 Tackriveling, river (Yorks N), 384, 387 Tadcaster (Yorks W), 482 Tadmarton (Oxon), 207, 363 Tadmarton, Thomas de, 521 Taillebois, Ivo, 76, 80 Taillebois Ralph, 54 Robert, 423 Taissonal, Espafiol de, 494 Talbot, 394 Geoffrey, 654 Helias, 654 prior of Bury St. Edmunds, 295 Talvas John, 566 Walter, 397 Tamworth (Staffs), 197 Tamworth, Ralph de, 418 Tancarville, William de, 221, 261, 262 Tancward, son of Walder, 326 Tanfield Dolfin de, 368 Jernegan de, 368 Tany, Gralent de, 465 Tarrant (Dorset), 228 Tasburgh (Norfolk), 110 Tathwell (Lincs), 67 Tattershal Robert de, 527 Roger de, 527 Tavistock (Devon) abbey, 131, 144, 460, 475 abbots of, see Baldwin, Walter, Wimund Tedbold, 219 Teddington (Middlesex), 465 Tees, river, 18 1 Tendring (Essex), 91 Teri, 219 Terrington (Norfolk), 287 Tew, Hugh de, 642 Tewkesbury (Glos), 382 abbey of, 548 Thaderege, unidentified, 287 Thame (Oxon), abbey of, 521, 593, 594 Thames, river, 185 Thanet (Kent), 16, 254, 488, 649 Thanet, William de, 225 Thecca, 307 Thelebregge Geoffrey de, 488 William de, 488 Thelnetham, Matthew de, 569 Thelwall (Lancs), 10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 763 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Theobald, abbot of Cluny, see Vermandois (Theobald de) archbishop of Canterbury, see Bec (Theobald of) master, 507 Theodoric, 271 Theokmare (Yorks N), 384, 487 Thetford (Norfolk), 256, 562, 569 St. Mary's priory, 180 diocese, bishops of, see Beaufai (William de), Losinga (Herbert de), Herfast Thetford, Alwin de, 106 Theulf, bishop of Worcester (1113/15-1123), 280 Thierry, chaplain, 333 Thomas, 228 abbot of Hyde (1175-1180), 490 archbishop of York, see Bayeux II, archbishop of York (1108-1114), 181, 339 chancellor, see Becket chaplain, 168, 313 cleric, 332 cleric of Lamport, 431 Snelland, 613 fuller, 301 parson, 567 priest of Norton, 319 Wilbarston, 431 prior of Durham, 412 steward, 484 Thonglands, Rainer de, 242 Thoreni, Bartholomew de, 453, 486 Thorna, unidentified, 394 Thornborough (Bucks), 558, 635 Thorne, in Minster (Kent), 375 Thorne Nicholas de, 375 Nigel de, 375 Thorner (Yorks W), 65 Thorney (Cambs) abbey, 187, 193, 251, 348, 557, 621 abbots of, see Gunter, Robert I monks of, see Ralph, Roger, Vitalis Thorngate, hundred of (Hants), 39 Thornland, unidentified, 542 Thornton (Lincs), abbey of, 541 Thornton Richard de, 384 Roger de, 384 William de, 486 Thornton Beck (Yorks N), 487 Thornton Dale (Yorks N), 384 Thornwath (Yorks W), 584 Thorp, Robert de, 641

Thorpe (Lincs), 73 (Norfolk), 211 (Notts), 448 Thorpe, Godric de, 214 Thorton (Dorset), 228 Thriplow (Cambs), 287 Thuri, 219 Thurlby, Geoffrey de, 641 Thurlow (Suffolk), 445 Thurstable (Essex), 90 Thurstan abbot of Ely (?1066-1075), 18 Glastonbury (1077/78-1096), 144, 163, 259 archbishop of York (1114-1140), 203, 223 clerk of Roger, bishop of Salisbury, 229 Thurston Water (Lancs), 364 Tickhill, William de, 455 Tihel, 98 Tilberthwaite (Lancs), 364 Tilbrook (Hunts), 55 Tilbury, John de, master, 405 Tilly, Otes de, 566 Tilmanstone, Robard de, 254 Tinchebrai (Normandy), 441 Tinchebrai Ralph de, 651 Robert de, 391 Tintinhull (Somerset), 588 Tiretot, Maurice de, sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire, 334, 342, 396 Tiwe Goisbert de, 240 Hugh de, 240 Tocca, 307 Toeni, Robert de, 81 Toft (Lincs), 524, 546 Toledo (Spain), 494 Tollesbury (Essex), 90 Tolomen, 301 Tonbridge Gilbert de, 136 Richard de, 5, 26 Tonge, Philip de, 340 Tonna, 69, 74 Top, Geoffrey de, 240 Torald, 301 Torel Ansfrid, 579 William, 532 Torigni, Hervey de, 447 Torp Geoffrey de, 636 Nigel de, 163

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 764 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Torpel, Roger de, 205, 214 Torrella, Arnaldo de, 494 Tortemedua, unidentified, 633 Tosny Ralph de, 115 Roger de, 301 Totnes (Devon), 452 Totternhoe (Beds), 57 Toulouse (France), 396, 408, 421, 434 Tours (France), 442 Towcester (Northants), 651, 652 Towcester, John de, 651 Toynton (Lincs), 546 Toyri John, 447 William, 447 Trac, Gervase de, 473 Tracy Bastard, William de, 397 Trafford, Henry de, 660 Trailli, Geoffrey de, 134, 187 Travers, Henry, 660 Trecarl, Jordan de, 322 Trecharl, unidentified, 266 Tregoz Albereda de, 408 Geoffrey de, 408 John de, 529, 530 Trenchebise, Robert, cleric, 392 Trent, river (Notts), 439 Treviana (Spain), 494 Treyford (Sussex), 23 Trianel, Robert, abbot of Ramsey (1180-1200), 602 Trottesclive, Hugh de, abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury (1126-1151), 254, 311 Trumfleet, Thomas de, 567 Trundlebeer (Devon), 475 Trussevilein, Walchelin, 486 Tudela, 494 Tuneir, William, 519 Tunge, unidentified, 455 Turald, 301 cordwainer, 622 Turbe, William, bishop of Norwich (1146-1174), 321,331,354, 355,359,383,405,445,458, 568 Turbert, 163 Turberville, Walter de, 240 Turchil, the Dane, 314 Turchople, Geoffrey, 488 Turgis, son of Malger, 368 Turgot, prior of Durham, 223 Turkil, 15 Turkil, 172

PLACES

Turkill, monk of Durham, 223 Turmot, 172 Turneor Godwin, 343 Osmund, 343 Turold, 98 Turold, 307 abbot of Peterborough (1070-1098), 140 Turolf, 69 Turpin, William, royal chamberlain, 481 Turstan, steward, 340 Turstin, 172, 189, 215 chamberlain, 32 Turville, Robert de, 652 Tutbury (Staffs), 252, 517 Twinham, see Christchurch Twit, Hugh de, 456, 555 Twywell (Northants), 348 Tyburn (Middlesex), 644 Tyd St. Mary (Lincs), 621 Tyne, river, 181, 255, 437 Tynemouth (Northumberland), 223, 255, 437 cell of the abbey of St. Albans, 396, 497 St. Mary and St. Oswin Priory, 143 Tyrrell, John, 663 Tytherley (Hants), 39 Uccha, son of Bruni, 307 Uckham (Sussex), 163 Uctred son of Dolfin, 367 Gamel, 367 Uellekin, Jocelin, 368 Uffculme (Devon), 292 Uffington (Berks), 381 Ufi, abbot of Bury St. Edmunds (1020-1044), 9 Uggeshall (Suffolk), 128 Ulceby (Lincs), 70 Ulchetel, 113 Ulf, 63 Ulf, 172 monk of Bishop Remigius of Lincoln, 15 Ulger, huntsman, 242 Ulric, priest, 329 Uluuard, priest, 234 Ulvet, 172 Ulviva, 200 Ulward, 30 Ulwin, 291 Umfraville, Odenel de, 494 Upper Swell (Glos), 10 Upton (Worcs), 10

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 765 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Upton Humphrey de, 314 Robert de, chaplain of Bishop Roger of Worcester, 507 Walter de, 507 Urban, bishop of Llandaff (1107-1134), 274 Ure, in New Forest, unidentified, 619 Urraca, queen of Le6n and Castile (1109-1126), 494 Urse, 10 William, 543 see also Abitot Uruoi, 114 Uttlesford (Essex), 88 Uttreth, 172 Vacarius, master, 486 'Valderi, Richard de, 331 Valdevinus, cleric, 517 Valence, Rainer de, 447 Valle, John de, 295 Vallu~rcanes (Spain), 494 Valognes (France), 357 Valognes Geoffrey de, 364 Jordan de, 559 Peter I de, 168, 172, 177, 253, 396 sheriff of Hertfordshire, 47, 48, 118 Peter II de, 396 Robert de, 396, 568 Roger de, 230 Vals, Aitard de, 97 Vapier, Guy de, 340 Vaudey (Lincs), abbey, abbot of, see Acius Vaux, Robert de, 494 Vavassur Robert le, 566 William le, 513, 554, 562, 566, 584, 586, 599 Veim, Thomas de, 579 Velez J., 494 Velie, Roger la, 224 Velu, William, 488 Venions, Ranulf de, 334 Ver Bodin de, 116 Hervey de, 116 William de, 232 Verbea (Spain), 494 Verdun Bertram de, sheriff of Yorkshire, 20, 136, 153 Bertram de, 477, 639 Henry de, 639, 664 Ralph de, 525

Vere Adelicia de, 408 Aubrey I de, 52 royal chamberlain, 187 sheriff of Berkshire, 169 Aubrey II de, 246, 275, 287, 291, 294, 305 royal chamberlain, 348 sheriff of Essex, 245, 247 Aubrey III de, earl of Oxford, 434, 484, 634 Aubrey IV, earl of Oxford, 484, 646 Guy de, 307 Henry de, 348 Ralph de, 484 Robert de, royal constable, 254, 298, 304, 310, 331,334, 342, 348 William de, royal justice, 560, 563 bishop of Hereford (1186-1198), 574, 632, 633 Vermandois, Theobald de, abbot of Cluny (11791183), 523 Vermundi G., 494 Verneuil (Normandy), 500 Vernon, Richard de, 240 Vesci Robert de, 82 William de, 364, 494, 552 Veteri Ponte, Fulk de, 475 Viel John le, 493 Reginald le, sheriff of London and Middlesex, 529, 530 Viguera (Spain), 494 Villars, William de, archdeacon of Chester, 325 Villula, John de, bishop of Bath (1088-1122), 144, 168, 226 Vincent, abbot of Abingdon abbey (1121-1130), 222, 244, 246, 378 Virguel Robert de, 167 William de, 167 Visdelou, Roger, 635 Vitalis abbot of St. Peter's, Westminster (1076?1085), 13, 156 cleric, 329 monk of Thorney abbey, 193 Vivemere, unidentified, 536 Vives, Jew of Cambridge, 408 Vivian chaplain, 174, 214 treasurer of Exeter cathedral, 266 Vulmar, 329 Wadden Hall, Maurice de, 488 Waer, Ralph de, 116

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 766 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES

Wake, Baldwin, 641 Wakerley (Northants), 405 Walbrook, river in Middlesex, 270 Walbrook Henry de, 270 Maud de, 270 Wulnoth de, 270 Walchelin, 329 archdeacon of Suffolk, 569 bishop of Winchester (1070-1098), 18, 20, 144, 163 Walcher, bishop of Durham (1071 1080), 134 Waldric, chancellor, 163, 165, 168, 517 Waleis, Ralph, 488, 604 Waleran, 529, 530 count of Meulan, 294, 301, 312 Wales, 24 Waleys Richard le, 314 Richard le, 660 Robert le, 663 Walkelin, abbot of Abingdon (1158-1164), 390, 400, 406, 418 Walkfares, Sewal de, 657 Walkingham, Thomas de, 367 Wall, part of Aldsworth (Glos), 626 Wall, Reginald de, 626 Wallingford (Berks), 406, 408, 433, 559 Wallo, cleric of Rushton, 431 Walsham, Alan de, 569 Walsingham (Norfolk), 230 Walter, 488 Walter, 641 abbot of Bardney, see Howest (Walter de) Evesham, see Cerisy Lilleshall (1179-1203), 606 Ramsey (1133-1160), 326, 385 Tavistock (c. 1154-c. 1168), 475 I, abbot of Thorney (1154-1158), 348 archbishop of Rouen (1184-1208), 641 archdeacon of Canterbury, 311 Oxford (1104 died 1151), 189, 191,209 bishop of Coventry, see Durdent (Walter) Rochester (1148-1182), 394, 405, 420, 494 brother of Waltham, 657 cellarer of Newnham priory, 561 chaplain, 218 cleric, 348 cleric, 507 cook, 555 cordwainer, 622 deacon, 11

deputy of Roger and Robert, sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk, 18 digger, 192, 195 Hubert, dean of York (1186-1189), 513, 561, 564, 569, 591, 592, 601, 608 bishop of Salisbury (1189-1193), 628 archbishop of Canterbury (1193 1205), 641, 644, 646, 649, 650, 653 janitor, 657 monk of Ramsey, 272 Peter, 537 priest, 413 priest, 515 prior of Byland, 454, 455 Christchurch, Canterbury, see Durdent Eye (1175-1195), 640 Southwick (1151-1163), 343 rural dean, 507 sheriff, see Grimsby (Walter de) sheriff of Warwickshire, 10 steward, 385 subprior of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, London, 434 see also Dol Waltham (Essex), abbey, 657 Waltheof, earl of Northumbria (1072-1076) and Huntingdon (1065-1076), 7, 18, 57, 223, 265, 314 Walton (Hunts), 286 (Oxon), 301 (Suffolk), 634 Walton Ernald de, son of Enisan, 325 William de, 652 Walton Hedge, unidentified, 286 Waltonholme, unidentified, 286 Walton-on-Thames (Surrey), 26 Wanborough, Robert de, 397 Wancy Ralph de, 256 Robert de, 652 Simon de, 316 Wandlebury (Cambs), 287 Wandsworth (Surrey), 27 Wandsworth, Ailmer de, 465 Wantage, hundred of (Berks), 45 Warborough (Oxon), 332 Warborough, Robert de, 332 Warboys (Hunts), 224 Ward, Rainer, 447 Wardebois, 252 Wardeden, Azo, 205 Wardon, unidentified, 269

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 767 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Wardon (Beds) abbey, 477, 623 abbot of, see Hugh Wareham (Dorset), 228 Warelwast William, bishop of Exeter (1107-1137), 178, 180, 197, 201,248, 266 William de, 266, 267 Warengar, 124 Warenne Hamelin de, earl of Surrey, 487 Philip de, 256 Reginald de, 331, 360 William I de, earl of Surrey, 7, 18, 55, 98, 101, 104 William II de, earl of Surrey, 177, 181, 283, 323 William de, 641, 650 Warin priest, 230 steward, 242 Warnborough, South (Hants), 546 Warner abbot of Battle (1125-1138), 377, 458 monk of Canterbury, 238 Warter (Yorks E), priory, 307 Warwick St. Mary's Priory, 402 St. Sepulchre Priory, 402 Warwick's Way, unidentified, 536 Wascelina, 200 Washington (Sussex), 198 Waspail, Roger, 228 Wassand Richard de, 453 William de, 453 Wasteneis Geoffrey de, 459 Robert de, son of William, 459 William de, 459 William de, son of William, 459 Water, Adam, 579 Wateringbury, Humphrey de, 340 Water Newton (Hunts), 272 Waterville Ascelin de, 158, 187, 205, 214 Geoffrey de, 296 Hugh de, 272 Ralph de, 479 William de, abbot of Peterborough (11551175), 398, 479 Watlington (Oxon), 559 Watsaches Broc, unidentified, 252 Waufre, William le, 638

PLACES

Wautier, 301 Gilbert, 301 Waverley (Surrey), abbey abbot of, see Henry Waxham Peter de, 566 Rainer de, deputy of the sheriff of Yorkshire, 553, 566 Weddington (Kent), 5 Welburn (Yorks N), 428, 453, 455, 486 Welbury (Yorks N), 554 Welby (Lincs), 84 Weld, see East Weld Weldon, Robert de, 388 Well (Lincs), 69 Well, Roger de, 254 William de, 254 Welland (Lincs), 641 Wellesley, Walerand de, 603 Wellow (Wilts), 508 Wells (Somerset), cathedral church, 603 Wells Alan de, 311 John de, 650 Welton (Yorks E), 134, 153 Welton, Walter de, 613 Wendora, Oliver de, 307 Wening, 234 Werenges, Peter, 256 Weret, 242 Werrington (Devon), 131, 144 Wertesce, unidentified, 196 Weseford, Walter de, 397 Westbourne (Sussex), 196 Westfield (Sussex), 234 Westgate, Robert de, 488 Westminster (Middlesex), 157, 165, 178, 182, 202, 212, 213,224,245,280,305,349,372-374, 377, 382,405,411,423,478,487,494,515, 518,524, 547, 561,570,571,608,620, 621, 641,653 St. Peter's abbey, abbot of, 8, 89, 202, 529; see also Crispin, Gervase, Herbert, Laurence, Vitalis Weston (Glos), 10 (Lines), 641 in Arden (Warws), 10 Weston Edward de, 569 Hugh de, 465 Robert de, 641 Westoning (Beds), 471

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 768 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Westrays, William, 483 Westwell, Alan de, 488 Westwood (Worcs), priory of St. Mary, 507 Wetherby (Yorks W), 510 Wevere, Richard, 488 Whaplode (Lincs), 546 Whaplode Alexander de, 641 Hugh de, 641 Whatfield, Ailmer de, 295 Wheat Beck, river (Yorks N), 591 Wheatfield Robert de, 533-536, 538, 543, 547, 551, 559, 571,572, 577,583,585,587,590, 592, 596, 597, 620, 621,641 William de, 559 Wheathampstead (Herts), 451, 465 Whicham (Cumberland), 586 Whiston (Yorks W), 595 Whitacre, Nigel de, 254 Whitchurch (Bucks), 391 Whitchurch, Robert de, 559 White Colne (Essex), 484 Whitfield (Northants), 317 Whitgreave, Robert de, 325 Whitlingham (Norfolk), 97 Whittlesey Mere (Hunts), 314 Wiard, 533 Wibert, prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, 357 Wichet', Alan de, 641 Wichumer, knight, 18 Wickham, Humphrey de, 254 Wickhambrook (Suffolk), 634 Widevil', William de, 431 Wido, 461 abbot, see Guy dean of Waltham, 423 knight, 18 Wigheshelle, William de, 488 Wiglac, 79 Wigot, cordwainer, 622 Wihenoc, monk of St. Florence at Saumur, 167 Wikemonde, 254 Wilawe, unidentified, 286 Wilbarston (Northants), 431 Wilfrid I, archbishop of York (664-691), 350 Willenhall (Warws), 10 Willey (Beds), 56 William, 118 William, 163 William, 172 William, 209 William, 226 William, 307

PLACES

William, 389 William, 519 William, 525 William, 613 II, abbot of Caen (1156-1179), 447 abbot of F6camp, see Ros (William) Peterborough, see Waterville (William of) Ramsey (1161-1177), 405, 467 St. Benet of Hulme (1146-1174), 354, 355, 359, 366, 370, 383 archdeacon of Chester, see Villars (William de) London, see Belmeis (William de) Totnes, 602, 608 archer, 35 baker, 301 bishop of Worcester, see Northall (William of) brother of Reiner, 439 chamberlain of St. Augustine of Bristol, 499 chancellor, see Giffard chaplain, 557 cleric, 325 cleric, 484 cleric, 556 cleric, 641 cleric of Spalding, 362 cook, 238, 242, 252 count of Aumale, 541, 542 earl of Gloucester, 296, 421, 548, 549, 579 Salisbury, sheriff of Wiltshire, 607 Warwick, 510 forester, 521 hosteler, 657 janitor, 579 I, king of England (1066-1087), 1-5, 7, 8, 1013, 15,17-21,30,34,35,37,44,47,59,66, 92, 94-97, 106, 130-132, 134, 135, 140, 163, 185,246,253,254,262,303,320, 360, 377, 394, 421,517 II, king of England (1087-1100), 132-134, 137, 138, 140,144,147-150, 152, 154-159, 163, 201,305, 360, 406, 517 I, the Lion, king of Scots (1165-1214), 497 knight, 242 knight, 604 monk of Abingdon, 215 Luffield, 587 parson of Snelland, 613 priest, 301 priest of Stoke Albany, 431 prior, 499

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 769 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

William (conid) prior of Bury St. Edmunds, 318 Castle Acre, 438 II, prior of Luffield (1195-1203/4), 651 porter, 311 reeve, 533 reeve of Bardfield, 470 royal chamberlain, 57, 164 St., see Fitz Herbert (William), archbishop of York sheriff of Oxfordshire, 160 smith, 632, 663 son of Abbot Reginald of Abingdon, 222 Albold, 318 Alfred, 641 Amfrid, 456 Bass, 573 Engelram, 453 Fulk, 622 Henry I (1103-1120), 212, 213, 226, 250 Mazeline, 345 Richard, 587 Roger, 368 Turbern, 635 Walter, 385 steward, 226 steward, 362 subdean of Salisbury, 297, 397 Willingham (Lincs), 77, 78, 221 Willoughby in the Marsh (Lincs), 71 Wilmington, Ranulf de, 397 Wilne (Derbyshire), 365 Wilshamstead, Robert de, 509 Wilstrop, Guy de, 345 Wilton (Wilts), 134 Wilton, Engenald de, 384 Wimbish (Essex), 394 Wimbledon (Surrey), 393 Wimbotsham (Norfolk), 203 Wimer, knight, 18 Wimo Judicael de, 163 Theobald de, 163 Wimund, abbot of Tavistock (1096-1102), 144 Winchcombe (Glos) abbey, 525, 609 abbot of, see Girmund Winchester (Hants), 9, 152, 167, 189, 199, 225, 239,248,263,278,375,381,383,404,405, 408, 481,488, 490, 510, 513, 518 Nunminster Abbey, 34 St. Cross Hospital, 637

PLACES

St. Peter and St. Grimbald Abbey, abbot of, 29; see also Riwallon St. Peter and St. Swithun, cathedral priory, 30, 33, 250 diocese, bishops of, see jElfwine, Giffard (William), Walchelin Winchester, Odo de, 37 Windermere, lake in Lancs and Westmorland, 364 Windgate, Florence de, 488 Windrush Andrew de, 525 John de, 525 Windsor (Berks), 171, 178, 212, 261, 310, 342, 408,458, 494, 495, 538, 578 Windsor Alfred de, 329, 447 Henry de, 329 Maurice de, steward of Bury St. Edmunds, 263, 318 Peter de, 329, 447 Winedei, 488 Winenham, unidentified, 196 Wing (Rutland), 557 Wingate (Northants), 477 Wingfield (Derbyshire), 600 Wingham (Kent), 408 Winkfield (Berks), 171 Winsley (Yorks W), 367 Winterbourne (Berks), 617 Wischard, Alan, 488 Wiskebech Etard de, 488 Wulstan de, 488 Witefeld, see Wheatfield Witham (Essex), 87 (Lincs), 641 Witsi, 163 Witton (Worcs), 10 Witvila, Robert de, 223 Wixford (Warws), 10 WIfithemore, unidentified, 343 Wlfric, 219, 291 Wlgithemore, unidentified, 343 Wlpsi, 291 Wluiat, 488 Wolfhamcote (Warws), 563 Wollaston (Northants), 338 Wollaton (Notts), 638 Wolverhampton (Staffs), 339 Wolverley (Worcs), 645 Wombleton (Yorks N), 428, 455 Woodcott (Hants), 229

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 770 1991

INDEX OF PERSONS AND

Woodhill, unidentified, 343 Woodmundslea (Oxon), 217 Woodnesborough (Kent), 254 Woodstock (Oxon), 166, 212, 224, 244, 260, 264, 265,273,274, 277, 347,364,408,427,432, 459, 477, 499, 525, 528, 579 Woodstock, Thomas de, abbot of Croxden (1178-1229), 643 Woodstone, John de, 348 Wood-Street, Ralph de, 447 Woodwalton (Hunts), 286 Woolacombe (Devon), 475 Woolston (Salop), 242 Woolstone (Berks), 381 Woolveystock, unidentified, 286 Worcester, 15, 265, 294, 370, 382, 633 cathedral, 280, 339, 512, 645, 658 diocese, bishops of, see Beorhtheah, Dunstan, Ecgwin, Osweald, Pagham (John of), Roger, Samson, Simon, Theulf, Wulfstan II Worcester Hugh de, 224 Ralph de, 518 Worsley, Richard de, 660 Wotton under Edge (Glos), 478 Wouldham (Kent), 394 Wouldham Ralph de, 394 Robert de, 394 Wowefurlong, unidentified, 521 Wragby (Lincs), 75 Wraggoe, wapentake (Lincs), 73, 74, 76 Wratting (Cambs), 287 Wrenge, Osward, 488 Wribbenhall (Worcs), 658 Writtle (Essex), 159, 342 Wrottesley, Adam de, 543 Wrynose Hawse (Lancs and Cumberland), 364 Wulfhere, king of Mercia (657-674), 314 Wulfi, priest, 15 Wulfig, son of Wulfnoth, 254 Wulfketel, abbot of Crowland (c. 1061/2-1085/6), 18 Wulfred, 291 Wulfric, 254 Wulfric, 326 Wulfric, 497 moneyer, 202

PLACES

Wulfsige, bishop of Lichfield (1039-1053), 51 Wulfstan II, bishop of Worcester (1062-1095), 2, 3, 10, 13, 15, 59, 139 Wulfward, 46 Wulfwine son of Beornwig, 254 Cake, 254 Wulfwold, abbot of Chertsey (1058-1084), 18, 26 Wulmar, monk of Jarrow, 223 Wulward, cleric, 295 Wye (Kent), 174 Wye Ralph de, 532 Robert de, 488 William de, 488, 532 Wyham Picot de, 456 Ralph de, 555 Wykeham Pain de, 384 Theobald de, 384 Wylawe, unidentified, 286 Wymering (Hants), 343 Wymington (Beds), 56 Wymondham (Norfolk), priory, 415 Wymondham, Adam de, 448 Wyna, 307 Wyton (Hunts), 224 Yarmouth, Adam de, royal sealer, 429 Yaxley (Hunts), 272, 305, 348 Yaxley Robert de, 193, 251, 272 William de, 251, 272 York, city of, 485, 510, 513, 584 abbey of St. Mary, 345, 554, 586, 599 abbot of, see Clement cathedral, 172, 504-506 chapter, 223, 454, 455, 480 chapter, treasurer, see Canterbury (John de) St. Peter's Hospital, 513 York, province, archbishops of, see Pont l'Ev~que (Roger), Thurstan, Wilfrid Ypres, William of, 303, 313 Zafadola, king of the Saracens, 494

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 771 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS* The index refers to the case numbers

abduction, 407, 553 abjuration of land, 10, 292, 373, 387, 431, 482, 483, 512, 541,549,550, 556, 557, 594, 603,616, 626 of see, 134 absolution, 461, 506, 520 account, 360, 421, 570 of management of estate, 174 royal, 637 accusation, 25, 134, 143, 149, 150, 183, 199, 204, 303,321,331,360, 371,397,403, 411,416, 421,445,457, 461,463,464,468,469,471, 480, 490, 494, 504-506, 520, 643, 644 false, 10, 143, 150, 204, 265, 330, 403, 457, 540 before king, 7, 143, 149,276, 321,407,420, 520, 540, 553 by king, 134 before royal judges, 457 accuser, 134, 371, 416, 464, 471, 504, 520 acquisition, 10, 495 uncanonical, 445 unjust, 29 acquittal, 520 actio tutelae, 421 action, 521 possessory, 420 proprietary, 395

adjournment, see postponement adjuration, 415, 523 adultery, 143, 330, 371, 407, 408, 464 advice, in law court, 3 advocate, 408, 494, 641 advowson, 328,354, 355,365,383,395, 415, 445, 500, 518,537, 544-548,562, 563,568,569, 571,572,583,586, 601,602,617,620,621, 660 afforestation, 288 agreement, 8, 15, 18, 33, 134, 136, 139, 163, 220, 222,242,283,294, 316, 317, 320, 323,329, 331,341,343,345,348,360,364, 368,391, 396,402,405,415,423-425,431,448,449, 451,453,455,458,466,467,475,478,480, 483,486-488, 492,494,499,507, 508,514, 515, 523,526, 527, 533,541,543,549, 551, 552,557, 558,567, 569,573,584, 595,602, 603,615,620,627, 630, 639, 641-643,653, 657 see also concord aid, 213, 243, 322, 343, 415, 454, 455, 487, 499, 526, 644, 646, 662 alderman, 191, 350, 533 alienation, 18, 146, 287, 311, 420, 578, 637 allegation, 405, 408, 494 allegiance, 134

* The index, with very few exceptions, lists the subjects under their modern English forms. Readers who are interested in the Latin lemmata will easily find them by looking up the corresponding English items - dissaisina,for example, under disseisin. Certain terms for officials and dignitaries which appear very frequently, such as sheriff, or abbot, have been listed only when a case deals specifically with some aspect of their office. Similarly 'witness' is only listed when a text deals with some aspect of testimony and not when there is a mere enumeration of witnesses in a charter. Although the compilation of the index was usually straightforward, certain terms posed problems for which no simple satisfactory solution could be found. The most conspicuous examples are donation and corruption, for whereas our texts contain clear examples of both, other instances are ambiguous. Offering gifts to the king or his judges in order to obtain the speeding up of a case or to secure their goodwill should be listed under donation if one sees the move through medieval eyes, but under corruption if one follows the stricter ideas of the present age. We have on the whole tended to list such instances under donation,except when corruption or some similar term is used in the sources or when the texts make it clear that money was offered in order to pervert the normal course of justice. I would like to thank Dr Monique Vleeschouwers-van Melkebeek who compiled the index with my collaboration and under my responsibility.

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 772 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

almonry, 552 alms (almoign), 7, 202, 242, 248, 264, 275, 282, 312,319,324,336,338,343,361,376,411, 453-456, 499, 509,526, 527,529, 552, 589, 590, 604, 641, 642 free, 234,240,296,333,417,431,436,452,484, 487, 492, 518, 557, 595, 621, 624 perpetual, 200, 234, 240, 282, 308, 310, 314, 322, 341, 343,356,391. 417, 424,431,440, 454-456,460,474,484,487,492,509,513. 518,522, 526, 552, 555,557,571, 573,584, 590, 595, 613, 617, 623, 638, 652, 655, 663 pure, 431, 454, 455, 474, 487, 492, 513, 518, 522, 526, 555,557, 571, 584, 590, 595,613, 621, 663 reasonable, 557 royal, 372, 499, 641 alod, 40, 43 amercement, see mercy, of the king anger, the king's, 421 anointment, 421 apostoli, 327 appeal (=accusation), 407, 411, 483, 641 appeal (=to higher court), 327, 371, 402, 408, 418, 420, 421, 434, 637, 641 to the pope, 134, 360, 395, 408, 418, 420, 421, 478, 520, 637 suspending execution, 327 appointment, 5, 10, 296, 405, 523, 570, 602, 641 arbitration, 458, 494 archbishop, authority contested by bishop. 3 archdeacon, accused, 520 arrest, 5,7, 11, 14,69, 134, 143, 149, 172,410,416, 421,457,464,469,471,490,493, 501, 506, 581, 644, 648 in the act, 5, 14 arson, 190, 504, 641 arts, liberal, 10, 661 assart, 304, 325, 367, 439, 443, 444, 552, 625, 643 assent, see consent assize, 172, 454, 455, 487, 524, 528, 536, 630 of Clarendon, 432, 501 of darreinpresentment, 365, 445, 601, 617 the king's, 421, 561, 630 of mort d'ancestor,600, 627, 632 of Northampton, 501 of novel disseisin, 377, 443, 591 possessory, 365 utrum, 445 (grand), of Windsor, 538, 561, 575, 602, 609, 610, 641, 654 see also recognition asylum, see sanctuary attaint, 513

attorney, 421, 494, 539, 560, 561, 564, 583, 587, 590, 601, 602, 608, 633, 649 see also representation power of, 546, 564 audience, papal, 637 authority, 5, 7, 9, 148 apostolic, 478 canonical, 9 of the justiciar, 570 papal, 134 public, 471 royal, 5, 15, 445, 458, 487, 489, 499, 516, 570 bail, 350 bailiff royal, 627 seignorial, 634 ban, 420 banishment, 190, 411, 420, 426, 457 banlieue, 420 baron of the county, 158, 376, 387 of the exchequer, see exchequer, barons of king, 9, 17, 18, 126, 131, 134, 157, 162, 163, 189, 202, 246, 261, 276, 280, 303, 377 barony, 183, 186, 421, 491, 559 bastardy, 408 battle, see combat, judicial behaviour, insulting, 411 bench, of royal justices, 641, 653 benefice, 411 deprivation, 411, 416 benefit of clergy, see privilege of clergy bequest, 51, 226, 379 betrayal, of accomplices, 493 betrothal, 408 bishops, judged, 134 blasphemy, 421 bordar, 99, 121 borough, 4,5,17, 18, 166, 209, 231, 349, 494.648 free, 322 borrowing, 421 borth-seher, 648 boteless, 172 boundary (of diocese), 274 (of land), 65, 249, 258, 271. 286, 314, 318, 323, 326,364, 377, 384,404,428,439,453-455, 474. 475,477,486,487,494,551, 554, 606, 641, 645 bribe, see corruption bull, papal. 9, 172, 396, 402, 405, 408, 418, 445, 637, 661 burgage, 163, 295, 315, 427

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 773 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

burgess, 172, 202, 209, 293, 295, 300, 305, 322, 336, 345,371,441,463,471,493,550,630, 648,662 burglary, 471 burial, 15, 30, 163, 179, 180, 193, 197, 242, 402, 434, 444, 450, 482, 507, 559, 655 calumny, 424, 644 canal, 486 captivity, 134 capture, red handed, see arrest in the act case reopening, 411 settlement, 3 transfer, 3, 42, 408, 420 castle, 1, 7, 64, 65, 134, 143, 163, 196, 240, 307, 323,331,343,420, 421,491,516, 585,612, 641,644 fortification, 7 invasion, 64 peace, 345 repair, 421 surrender, 134 work, 345 castle-guard, 18, 143,225, 321,612, 646 castlery, 161 chamber, 570 champion, 316, 381, 598, 641 chancellorship, 421, 490, 641 chancery archiepiscopal, 408 royal, 421 chapel, royal, 320, 360 chapelry, 639 chapter, 138, 172, 218, 223, 234, 272, 281, 283, 308,311,323,360, 371,373,385,405,408, 424,438,445,466,497,520, 552, 566,567, 569, 595, 630 charter, 3,4, 9, 18,69, 130, 146, 154, 159, 161,187, 217,257,258,275,286, 306, 307,323,325, 326,331,333,335,345,348,360, 367,369, 376,377,385,394, 396,402, 415,417,428, 438,444,445,448,452-455,458,460,474, 478,484-486,492,494,497, 517,522, 525527, 531,532, 542,548,549,557,567-569, 580-582,589,594, 602,604,605,609, 613, 617,620,623,625,626, 628,630,635,638, 643,650, 652, 654, 656-658 of abbot, 405, 602, 609, 630 (archi)episcopal, 9, 146,284, 369, 374, 395, 397, 402, 405, 602, 628 cancellation, 405 of confirmation, 317, 374, 377, 458, 499, 532 conservation, 360 copy, 15

false, 257, 377, 458 of foundation, 314, 415 genuine, 377 inspection, 18, 360, 405, 550 loss, 532 royal, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, 137, 138, 143, 152, 154, 182,211,226,240,242,246,275,284,287, 291,298,313,320, 322, 325,333,339, 349, 360,377, 398, 405, 415,417,420,435,443, 478,487,489,491,494,497,499,513,517, 532, 579, 581, 582, 612, 634, 641 contradictory, 581 renewal, 489 sealed, 377, 434, 462 surrender, 532, 550 unjust, 620 unsealed, 405 chattel, 220, 342, 366, 377, 420, 421,438, 653,664 of king, 98 chevage, 219 chirograph, 9, 226, 257, 261, 343, 348, 377, 391, 415,424,431,449,481,494,529,530,584, 615, 617, 620, 626, 643, 646 church armed entry, 649 dedication, 172 licence to build, 173 mother, 559, 566, 639 privilege, 3 subjection, 3 cildwite, 5 citizen, 137, 447 lawful, 441 claim, 2, 10, 18, 277, 287, 441,458,483,488,494, 495, 534, 630, 647 on advowson, 537, 545, 548, 562, 563, 601, 602, 617, 620 on burial, 15 on case, 233 on chapel, 566, 567, 639 on church, 3, 9,92, 101, 102, 198,223,296,383, 434,438,458,499, 507, 550-552, 562-564, 566-569, 572, 595, 601,602 on church-scot, 15 contradiction, 124 on customs, 15, 18, 283 on debt, 647 ended, 158, 171 on exemption, 9 false, 236, 262, 282, 649 on ferry, 352 on forfeiture, 648 on freemen, 96, 97, 107, 109, 110, 118, 123, 124 on geld, 231 given up, 9, 25, 142

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 774 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS on house, 15, 380 on hundred, 627 on jurisdiction, 9, 138, 189, 581, 662 on knight's service, 646 on land, 2, 3, 8, 10, 18,28, 30,31,33-38,46,48, 51,53-59,61-63,66,67,69-71,76,79, 80, 82-87, 89, 92, 95, 96, 99, 100, 103, 105, 108,109,113, 115, 117,119,121,124,125, 127, 130, 138, 142, 144, 145, 154, 158, 160, 163, 165, 171,172, 187,220,238,245,248, 264,268,277,289,294,295,311,323,326, 329, 345,346,348,351,357,361,362, 366, 368,375-378,385,387, 392, 393,397, 420, 424,425,431,446,451,462,465,474,477, 481,483,485,494,498,508,510,511,517, 519,524, 529, 534, 537,539, 541,543,546, 549, 552, 556,557, 565,573-575,578, 579, 584, 585,590, 594,596-599, 603,604,606609,615, 616,622,631,636,640-643,645, 650, 654, 657-659, 662, 663 on liberties, 581 against one's lord, 619 on lordship, 137 on mill, 68 on monastery, 25 on pasture, 604 on patronage, 445 on pension, 402 on plea, 648 on prebend, 242 renewal, 9 on rent, 205, 214, 634 rightful, 86 on sake, 172 on serf, 664 on soke, 15, 73, 76, 172, 291 on sokeman, 111 on tax, 15 on team, 172 on tithe, 576 on toll, 172 on town, 9 unjust, 10,205,233,282, 324, 380,428,519,642 on villein, 342 on waterway, 25 on wood, 74, 75, 252, 268, 324, 606 in writing, 494 clemency, royal, 461 see also mercy, the king's clerk, cleric criminous, 371, 409-411, 413, 419 of justiciar, 654 royal, 418, 570, 660 skilled in the law, 661

cliff-guard, 322 cnihtengild, English, 291 cognizance, 108 collection, canonical, 134 combat, judicial, 15, 85, 100, 105, 110, 113, 121, 143, 194, 316, 381,403,407,412,456,463, 468,469,471,494,502,504,505, 513,520, 526, 540, 555, 598, 618, 619, 641, 648 exemption, 648 fine, see fine of duel wager, 453, 511, 517, 598 command archiepiscopal, 360 ducal, 341 by judges, 501 by justiciar, 641,644 papal, see mandate, papal by queen, 212 royal, 5-7, 9-11, 15, 17-19, 25, 94, 126, 129, 134, 137, 140, 141,143, 147-149, 162,203204,206,216, 218, 221,222,229, 230, 232, 233, 239,246, 252, 254,257, 268, 271,280, 284, 287,291,296, 298,299,310, 320, 323, 327, 335,336, 342,345,347, 349,355,358361, 363 366, 370-373,375-378,383,390, 393, 396,397, 399, 400,402,405,407, 408, 420,421,424,433,434,441-443,446,447, 457, 474,477,488,490,494,497, 507,509, 513, 517,521,551,578,579, 582, 592, 627, 641, 647, 660 not obeyed, 361 refusal to obey, 363 commendation, 96, 97, 106, 108, 112, 116, 120, 121, 126 common, 343, 437, 453, 539, 584, 635, 641, 645 community, 231 compensation, 3, 12, 138,267, 311,345,404, 405, 411,431,542, 654 complaint, 327, 372, 375-377, 383, 386, 402, 411, 413,415, 431,630, 634, 637, 641 to abbot, 581 to bishop, 15 false, 404, 650 to king, 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 17, 132, 143, 191, 218, 222, 303,323,363,371,390,405,406,411,417, 418,420,421,443,488,495,516,517,579, 581,641,644 to queen, 12 to royal justices, 404, 415, 458, 641, 649 complicity, 306, 321, 415, 493, 641, 644 composition, 316, 325, 405, 499, 507, 558 amicable, 405, 573 compurgation, see purgation concession, 533, 602

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 775 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

concord, 15, 138, 163, 188, 225, 252, 271, 325, 385,451,467,478,485,494,499, 554, 573, 584, 598, 622 final, 275, 325, 358, 462,477,481,499, 510, 511, 515,518,522,524, 529, 530, 532,534-539, 544-547,560-565,571,572, 575,577, 583, 585-587, 589-591, 596, 597, 599-602, 606-610,617,620, 621,631-633,640,643, 651 licence for, 643 see agreement concubinage, 143, 408, 644 condemnation, 7, 143, 223, 396, 416, 420, 421, 426, 457, 471, 472, 506, 611, 641, 644 unjust, 204 condictio certae pecuniae, 421 confession, 7, 9, 17, 163, 164, 174, 204, 360, 363, 377,405,411,414,434,457,471,472,480, 490, 512, 519, 520, 574, 644 confirmation, 9, 10, 15, 18, 19, 86, 223, 307, 308, 313,317, 322, 325,326, 332,343,344, 378, 400, 424, 428,439,445,448,452,454,455, 475, 478,484,489,494,497-499,510,513, 522, 525-527, 541,543,552,558,566, 579, 594, 602, 609,623,625-627,636,651,656, 657 of agreement, 364, 391, 485 of charter, 360 of donation, 193, 200, 394 of ecclesiastical liberty, 12, 18 of jurisdiction, 189 of land, 2, 13, 184, 200, 202,220, 223,228,248, 264, 272, 374, 377,394, 455,456, 458,498, 527, 532, 541,543,594,609,627,636,638, 656 papal, 316, 325, 405, 421 payment for, 630 for the present, matrimonial, 408 royal, 9, 10, 12, 13, 141,148, 156, 163,202,240, 246, 300, 333,339,349,,374, 377, 405,406, 417, 443,492, 499,513, 525, 532, 634, 641 of urban liberty, 630 confiscation, 7, 143, 183, 396, 401, 407, 420, 421, 471,627 congregation, establishment, 415 conjuration, 457 consanguinity, 408 conscience, 568 consecration, 1, 3, 5, 18, 134, 138, 139, 360, 405, 421,644 consent, 7, 9, 138, 139, 146, 375, 377, 389, 405, 408,423,432,451,453,458,474,475,481, 499,517,520, 521,525,529,530, 535,543, 552, 557, 569,570, 573,580,595,602, 604, 605, 626, 650, 651

baronial, 303 matrimonial, 408 royal, 15, 296, 303, 405, 406, 499, 641 tacit, 7 conspiracy, 7, 134, 143, 183, 360, 421, 488, 641, 644 to kill king, 7, 143, 331 under oath, 7, 143 constabulary, 612, 619, 642, 646 constitution of Church, 360 of realm, 660 royal, 371, 395, 420, 421 constitutions of Clarendon, 421, 445 contempt, 420 of appeal, 637 of court, 641 of king, 421, 446 of Roman Church, 386, 520 contract, 190, 220 control, marital, 64 contumacy, 127, 134, 135,209,269,292, 303, 311, 321,363,386,396,408,411,420,421,438, 447, 458, 494, 517, 520, 596, 641, 646 for fear, 641 for illness, 128 contumely, 1, 134, 411, 421 conveyance, 430 conviction, 321, 416, 464, 520 coronation, 8, 490, 600 correction, 443 corroboration, 5, 550, 557, 573, 652 corruption, 3, 9,321,408,417,420,436, 568, 627, 641,661,662 council ecclesiastical, 3, 296, 405, 520 full, 646 royal, 421 counsel, 1, 3, 7,9-11, 15, 134, 138, 294, 317, 318, 321,325,331,346, 348,360, 377,405,421, 434,445,450,451,458,471,482,485,491, 494,495,499,529,530,569,604,630,641, 644, 646, 648, 661 counterwitness, 31 counties, meeting, 9, 10, 15, 18, 50, 59, 185, 201, 256, 272, 287 court archdeacon's, 464 archiepiscopal, 411 borough, 191 church, 134, 233, 244, 266, 269, 281, 284, 296, 308,311,327,389,408-410,413,416,434, 449, 464, 520, 614, 661 competence, 134, 296, 520 county, 1, 4-6, 9, 10, 13, 15, 18-20, 29, 31, 34,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 776 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

38,40,43,47,49-51,53,59,61,64,77,80, 126,132,155,157,160,166,169,172-174, 185,187,196,201,204,212,215,223,231, 243,245,247,267,272,295,321,322,331, 340,351,353,363,370,375-377,387,390, 394,398,406,442,451,471,475,485,487, 488,491,496,509,517,565,566,581,589, 593,594,598,605,607,616,645,651,658, 659, 664 testimony, 6, 20 episcopal, 284, 411, 438 false, 420 hundred, 13, 15, 22-28, 30-36, 39-42, 44-48, 52,54-58,60,62,63,65,67-76,79,81-84, 87-93,96,97,100,102-110,112,113,116127,129,157,167,172,185,189,196,199, 213,216,232,246,249,256,279,295,301, 334,348,351,358,369,370,372,400,487, 569, 577, 588, 591, 615, 627, 628 lord of, 634 king's, 2,3,7,9-12,17,41,42,83,134,143,145, 147,154,163,166,168,174,177-181,183, 184,189,196,197,200,202,205,206,212, 219,224,228,236,240,248,250,257,265, 268,273,274,276,283,285,294,300 303, 312,317,320,321,323,325,336,349,360, 362,363,365,371,376,377,385,396,404, 407-409,417,420,423,429,436,449,456458,465,473,476,481,485,488-490,492, 494,495,499,500,511,513-515,517,518, 522-524,531-540,543 547,552-554,558, 561-564,571,572,574,575,577,578,580, 583,585,586,589-591,596,597,599-602, 606,608-610,612,615,617,620,621,627, 631-633,635, 637, 641,644, 646, 649, 654 chief, 546 lay, secular, 408-412, 421, 614, 637 local, 18, 464 loss, 420 manorial, 174, 576, 608 papal, 3, 360, 405, 421, 478 riding, 66, 69-72, 74-76, 78, 79, 172 secular, see court, lay seignorial, 133, 136, 162, 164, 165, 174, 182, 187,193,198,208,209,214,217,225-227, 233,244,269,295,307,311,316,318,325, 327,331,338,344,346,348,351,356,362, 363,368,373,374,377,378,383,388,389, 391,393,395-397,407,413,414,420,423, 435,442,448,450,453,454,459,482,483, 488,501,508,509,519,527,531,548,549, 556,577,581,588,604,608,615,618,623, 624,630,636,640,641,646,648-652,654, 656, 661-663

wapentake, 60,63,65,67,68,72-76, 79, 81, 82, 84, 279, 641 creditor, 209, 421, 471 crowd, 644 crown royal, 134, 142, 320, 360, 420, 443, 641 prince, 490 curse, in charter, 18 custodian, 637 custody, 7, 10, 128, 134, 143, 149, 175, 204, 316, 409,420,421,461,464,471,490,516,570, 579, 627, 637, 641,648 custom (=law), 2,5, 135, 145, 154, 172, 174, 191, 192,202,219,295,321,360,371,377,390, 405,411,420,421,432,439,443,468,488, 489, 494, 510, 513, 570, 630, 641, 646 abolition, 303 ancient, 303, 408, 420, 458, 570, 648 (archi)episcopal, 5 bad, 5 of borough, 662 of county, 375 ecclesiastical, 134, 395 of England, of the kingdom, of the land, 5, 7, 192,204,381,395,396,411,420,436,495, 506, 520, 641 free, 301, 398, 481, 489, 510, 513, 636 good, 7,570 just, 570 lay, 411 legal, 5 of London, 493 maritime, 303 new, 18 old, 5,18, 432, 458, 570 royal, 5, 351, 421 of Spain, 494 unjust, 4 custom (=payment), 2, 4-6, 15, 17-19, 87, 95, 112,137,141,148,152,163,164,166,172, 181,185,196,201,213,216,219,221,225, 231,234,238,250,253,254,256,275,278, 279,283,295,297,305,307,315,318,322, 325,340,349,369,374,377,452,454,455, 486 488, 531,577,579, 604,605,649,655 new, 427 damage, 8, 11, 14, 134, 363, 390, 396, 402, 467, 478, 488, 494, 556, 641 danegeld, 238, 340, 343, 452, 487 date, appointed, fixed, 15-17, 134, 415, 420,445, 458,488,491,494,541,569,604,641,644, 649 peremptory, 405, 408

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 777 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

dean (rural), 371, 464 death penalty, 7, 14, 330, 350, 411,421,490, 507, 553, 644 boiling, 330 burning, 506 decapitation, 7 drawing and hanging, 540, 644 flaying alive, 490 hanging, 7, 143, 237, 289, 290, 412, 490, 493, 503, 540, 553, 611, 618, 641, 644, 648 debt, 172, 204, 295, 321, 471, 490, 520, 647 deception, 276, 415 decree, 443, 570, 661 (archi)episcopal, 416 imperial, 146 papal, 408, 520, 661 royal, 146, 303 synodal, 360 Decretum, Gratian's, 661 dedication, 405, 488 deed, 647 defamation, 149 default (= default of justice) see justice, default default (= non-appearance) see contumacy deforcement, 370, 456 degradation, 410, 416, 419 delay, 327, 363, 377, 396, 405, 414, 415, 420, 421, 463, 517 delivery, 26, 27, 43, 48, 69, 81, 103, 106, 115, 117, 118, 124, 127, 144, 272, 372,430, 533,579 demesne, 5, 10, 13, 18, 42, 72, 132, 146, 163, 164, 168, 182, 184, 215,220,228,242, 250, 258, 259,261,262, 270, 272,277, 287,294, 307, 312,316, 324, 338,340,343,356, 363,367, 394, 396,420,453,466,491,497,512,527, 543,558,576, 578,585,594,600,605,617, 628,639, 645, 656, 662 royal, 5, 28, 41, 144, 172, 221, 240, 334, 341, 347, 405, 417, 487, 579, 641 denial, 15, 25, 204, 321, 331, 411,416, 457, 520, 553 denunciation, 7, 331 deposition of abbot, 451, 479, 517 of archdeacon, 520 of bishop, 9, 421 deraignment, 5, 6, 10, 15, 18, 24, 35, 50, 59, 91, 126, 129,130,132, 137, 141,157, 159, 162, 163, 178,180, 182, 187, 191,196, 200, 202, 205,240, 256, 259, 260,262, 264, 266, 268, 281,282,284, 285,287,293,295, 312, 318, 322, 331,335, 338, 340, 352,357, 361,374, 438,442,456,473,475,488,492,496,500, 514, 517, 542, 548,555,591,604,608,612, 624, 629, 638

of chapel, 229 of church, 197, 198,202,230,284,297,319,383 of fair, 297 of feudal service, 162, 164 of fish, 256 of land, 5, 10, 13, 15, 18, 21, 35, 50, 52, 59, 91, 94, 114, 129, 130, 132, 137, 141, 154, 156, 158, 161,166,168,175,181,182, 184,185, 188, 194,207, 221,228,259, 260, 262,264, 268,269,271,277, 280, 281,299, 302, 321, 356, 377,383,389,397,398,459,608,650652, 657 of liberties and customs, 349 of men, 116, 126, 342 of prebend, 6 of tithe, 338 description, 15, 570 desertion, 408 detinue, 333 devil, invocation, 644 devise, see testament Digest, 337 dignity of church, 405 of king, 644 dike, 535, 573 disafforestation, 641 discipline, ecclesiastical, 455 discord, 8, 138, 149, 577 discretion, age of, 662 disinheritance, 627, 641 dismissal, 360, 416, 523, 615 displeasure, royal, 401, 479 disposal, free, 293 disseise, to, 54, 69, 131, 134, 144, 187, 190, 194, 272, 282,296, 309, 442,443,492, 543,584, 630, 641 without judgment, 589, 630 unjustly, 56, 309, 311, 315, 319, 363, 447 unjustly and without judgment, 282, 315, 441, 442, 589, 608, 641 disseisin, 134, 443 dissension, 576 distraint, 174, 295, 323, 471, 653 disturbance of possession of church, 339, 389 of possession of land, 335 ditch, 163 division, of land, 20, 72, 575 divorce, 408 certificate, 408 Domesday Book, 15, 17, 18, 132, 142, 144, 189, 245, 253 fragments from Domesday Book are published under numbers 21-131

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 778 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

domicile, 421 domination, 5, 9 dominus, capitalis, 377 donation, 1-4, 8-11, 15, 18, 19, 25, 30, 40, 43, 49, 57, 58, 60, 64, 65,73, 92, 93,103, 134, 138, 143,144, 146, 147, 193,200,223,234,238, 240, 242, 246,248,251,258,264,266,272, 282,296,297,307,308,310,312,314,317319,321,333,334, 338,343,356,360, 361, 363,365,367,369,371,374,376-378,380, 391,394-396,403,405,408,415, 421,423, 424,430,431,436,438,440,443,445,450456,458-460,465,471,474,475,480-483, 486,487,492-494, 500, 502,507-509, 511, 514,515,517-519,524-526,533,535,536, 538,541,542,546-550, 552, 555, 557,558, 561-563,565,568,569,571-573,578,579, 584, 585,587, 589,593, 595,597 605,607, 608,610,613,616,620-625,628,630-633, 635-638,641-643,645,651,652,654-656, 658, 659, 662-664 to king, 8, 9, 138, 143, 146, 147, 246, 363, 405, 421,493,495, 641 to pleader, 408 to queen, 408 revocation, 146 royal, 9, 13, 18,66, 103, 106, 108, 109, 115, 119, 121,144,156,161,163, 181,196,200,203, 221,226,248,294,297,303,313,334,417, 424, 443, 458, 487, 513, 517, 634, 641 unlawful, 146, 223, 339, 418, 425 doorkeeper, royal, 290, 421 dower, 93, 263, 378, 408, 458, 662 dowry, 549, 622, 650, 652 duel, see combat, judicial earldom, 7, 223 easement, 300, 385, 439, 543, 575, 606, 625 edict, royal, 3, 18, 371, 386, 395, 417, 421, 644 ejection, of wife, 408 ejectment, 173, 360, 386, 393, 445, 494 election, 134, 405, 421, 569, 574, 641, 661 canonical, 405 elopement, 553 enclosure, 343, 535 encroachment, 5, 151, 152, 630 enfeoffment, 388, 443, 465, 489, 634, 646 ecclesiastical, 134 old, 377 enrolment, 10, 582, 641, 647, 648, 654 entry, 296, 579, 580 defence, 487 free, 643 equity, 9, 321, 411, 421, 488, 644

of law, 406 royal, 443 equivocation, 540 escheat, 317, 497, 579, 628, 663 free, 628 essoign, 296, 377, 420, 445, 458, 581, 646 of captivity, 494 of childbed, 408 of crossing sea, 641 of infirmity, 361, 363, 408, 420, 421, 445, 494, 580, 641 of royal service, 363 evidence, see proof exaction, see tax examination, judicial, 438 exceptio reijudicatae,438 exception, 396, 420 dilatory, 402 exchange, 18, 25, 29, 48, 81, 138, 193, 203, 209, 325,343,431,440,448,450, 451,482, 521, 542, 546, 654 exchequer, 360, 408, 420, 421, 423, 444, 458,518, 538,539, 547,561,564,569, 570, 572,582, 592, 600, 603, 614, 617, 637, 641,650, 654 barons, 277, 360, 421, 444, 569, 603, 647, 654 incompetence, 637 excommunication, 9, 51, 139, 271, 308, 311, 325, 360, 389, 396,408,415,419-421,520, 521, 523,552, 553, 637 exculpation, 371, 469 execution, 14, 143 place, 7, 143, 350, 471, 644 not on Sunday, 553 executioner, 7, 350, 471, 504, 553 exemption, 489 from episcopal jurisdiction, 9, 18, 320, 360,405 from geld, 47 exile, 1, 7, 190, 276, 421, 457, 516, 540 exit blocked, 453 free, 453, 643 expenses legal, 138, 407, 408, 422, 445, 568, 594, 612, 646, 647 of study, 644 expulsion, 443, 641 extortion, 170, 211, 371 eyre, see, justice itinerant fair, 172, 297, 301, 546, 608, 644 faith, 7, 134, 254, 326, 385, 453, 459, 494, 583, 641,658 breach, 321 good, 134, 421,494

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 779 1991

INDEX

OF SUBJECTS

falsity, 89, 457, 540 farm, 43, 132, 220, 242, 285, 348, 469, 492, 497, 534, 576, 595 see also fee-farm for life, 595 perpetual, 385 royal, 28, 40 farmer, 420 fealty, 7, 163, 254, 272, 292, 296, 360, 420, 421, 445,490, 494, 619, 644 breach, 176 oath, 7, 292, 360, 421, 490, 593 fee-farm, 164, 187, 281, 420, 447, 477 see also farm felony, 186, 513, 540, 662 ferry, 352 fief, fee, 7, 13, 15, 31, 88, 94-97, 99, 101-103, 105, 108, 109,114,116,118, 119,121,123,124, 134, 146, 163, 164, 172, 175, 187, 194,206, 225,227,240,259,261,270,271,294,295, 318,325,334, 343,345,359, 367, 377,382, 393-396,408,417,420,421,423,431,442, 462,465,470,475,481,488,494,511,513, 543,546, 549,552,555,565, 569, 574, 580, 593,598,600,608,612,615,634,636,638, 641, 645, 648, 651, 652, 657, 662 ecclesiastical, 296, 615 lay, 296, 595, 615 knight's, 287, 296, 327,420, 475, 534, 574, 580, 610, 612, 641 transfer without judgment, 359 fightwite, 18 fine (=agreement), 151, 152, 253, 259, 525, 595, 597, 622, 641 see also concord, final confirmation, 177 of duel, 121, 194, 316, 453, 473, 483, 496, 514, 515, 526, 598, 613, 636 fine (=penalty), 19, 25, 133, 141, 151, 152, 163, 172, 185, 190,222,246,259,403,421,532, 544, 546, 600, 602, 641, 643, 653, 661 half, 5 payment, 19, 133 fisc, royal, 417 see also treasury, royal fishery, 185, 255, 364, 437, 487, 510 flogging, see whipping flotsam, 256 flymenfyrm, 5 force, 10, 57, 73, 134, 173, 218, 220, 242, 291,334, 386 forest, 163, 181, 439, 444, 491 offence, 150, 480, 503 forestel, 5

forester, 424, 606, 625 chief, 444, 629 royal, 400, 439 forfeiture, 2, 7, 18, 47, 64, 79, 95-98, 102, 107, 108,111,114,116, 118-121,125,126,129, 134, 155, 163, 172, 186, 187, 190, 192, 195, 196, 202, 204,246,288,304,306, 361,369, 377, 484, 487, 513, 517, 592, 648 forgery, 360, 458, 611 fornication, 408 foundation, 360, 376, 415, 579 frankalmoign, see alms, free frankpledge, 487, 588, 630, 648 fraternity, 193, 202, 282, 311 fratricide, 421 fraud, 10, 134, 292, 321, 363, 408, 418, 483, 494, 644, 657 freedman, 408 freeholder, 326, 630 freeman, 31, 44, 47, 91, 103, 104, 107, 108, 110, 112,116,118,121-123, 126,128,129,316, 326,411,497, 551,627, 628,630, 645,657 status disputed, 96, 97, 116 freewoman, 120, 627 friendship the abbot's, 569 the king's, 137, 190, 516 frithstool, 172 fugitive, 183, 342 fyrdwite, 18 gage, 5,9,37,78,85,86,98,99, 110, 112, 113,163, 164,172,190,193,204,209,256,283,341, 377,420,425,446,479,488,494,581,622, 651 gallows, 7, 143, 553, 641, 644 garden, 163 gavel, 207, 209, 430 geld, 15, 33, 47, 130, 151, 172, 206, 215, 231, 247, 424, 447, 455, 487, 582 exemption, 215 gersum, 622 grace, the king's, 323, 421 grammar, 10 granary, royal, I grange, 492, 534, 535 grant, see donation grithbreach, 5 hallmoot, 219, 332, 349, 369, 372, 379, 466, 488, 498, 625, 626, 650 hamfare, 5 hamsoken, 18

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 780 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

hand the king's, 47, 52, 60, 91,92, 108, 120, 121,411, 417, 445, 491, 494, 497, 520, 570, 579 lord's, 145 hangman, see executioner hedge, 163 heir, 253, 269, 293, 294, 307, 318, 325, 326, 343, 345,348,367, 374-376,378,385,388,392, 408,423-425,431,448,450,453,454,456, 459,460,462,473,474,477, 481-483,485, 488,495,498, 510, 511,513, 515, 516, 519, 521,524, 529, 530, 532-534,536, 538,541, 543,544,549,552,555-558,560, 561,563, 566, 571,578,579, 583. 585-587,589, 590, 593,594, 597,599, 600,602,603,605,608610,613,617,620, 622, 625,626, 631,632, 635,636, 638-640, 645,646,655,657-659, 663, 664 institution, 226, 605 heiress, 662 in gift of king, 553 heredity, see inheritance heresy, 426 homage, 10,206,257,272,292,316, 364,382, 388, 397,420,421,485,494, 515,520, 531,543, 596, 605, 619, 645, 646, 662 liege, 420 refused, 10, 164 homicide, 134, 139, 172, 321,409, 411, 416, 419, 461,470, 493, 494, 501,506, 644 by accident, 139 attempt, 330 on royal road, 5 honour, 7, 18, 46, 154, 186, 190, 265, 420, 421, 452, 559 of archbishop, 421 of church, 421 of God, 421 of king, 134, 411,420, 421 hospital administration, 637 custodian, 637 host (= army), 225 hostage, 134, 644 housebreaking, 471, 493, 553, 644 household, royal, 429 hunting-right, 181, 399, 439, 480 husting, 270, 335, 447, 529, 530, 550 illegitimacy, 408 immunity, 246, 275, 314, 520 impounding, of animals, 641 imprisonment, 7, 11, 134, 143, 147, 169, 170, 190, 204,239,342,343,350,407,415,419,421,

461,469,471,490,493, 501, 506, 553, 581, 611,641,644,648,649 perpetual, 7, 416, 421 incest, 408, 464 infamy, 265, 408 infangthief, 2, 5, 18, 172, 202, 216, 221, 250, 349 infidelity, 134, 190 inheritance, 7, 15, 16, 31, 146, 161, 172, 175, 190, 200, 222, 226,227, 240, 242,265-267, 270, 273,275,285,294,296,311,318,325,344, 360, 363,367,375,379,388, 393,396,397, 407,408,412,420, 424,431,446,453,455, 465,470,473,481 483,485,486,488,491, 494,495,498,509-511,513,515,516,519, 521,524, 526, 529-532, 534, 536, 538,541, 543-546, 549, 553,563,565,566, 571,578580, 593-603,605,608-610, 622,627,631, 633,635, 636,638-640,645,646,655,657660, 662-664 injury, 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 12, 141,202,229, 230, 280, 293, 318,321,334, 335, 391,396,406,407,411, 415, 420, 443, 517, 581,612, 637, 641 injustice, 3, 10, 150, 478, 644 innovation, 421 inquest, 5, 9, 15, 17, 131, 208, 282, 296, 308, 328, 339, 365,390,405,444,458,461,480,509, 559, 579, 619, 628, 641 on life and limbs, 172 royal, 12, 155, 167, 172, 253, 390 sworn, 18, 167, 172, 232, 255, 291, 314, 318, 339,365,406,433,437,447,475,476,497, 498, 512, 573, 628 written report on, 18 inquiry, see inquest inquisition, see inquest inscription, 520 inspeximus, royal, 489 institution of parson, 583 uncanonical, 445 insult of king, I of royal justice, 411 intercourse, sexual, 408 interdict, 320, 421, 443, 637 intrusion, 445 invasion, 3, 5, 18, 52, 88, 91, 92, 128, 134, 154, 163, 194, 253, 363, 394, 446, 458, 491, 494 see also seizure, spoliation inventory, 18, 142, 287, 570 investigation, 380, 419 investiture, 134, 281, 296, 402

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 781 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

jetsam, 141, 256 Jew, 321, 647 judge canonical, 134 civil, 637 ecclesiastical, 9 higher, 420 just, 321 lawful, 134 papal delegate, 402, 405, 408, 478, 480, 486, 499, 520, 558, 621,637, 661 suspect, 405 judges deliberating in secret, 641 disagreement among, 7 judgment, 3, 7,9, 11, 13-15, 19,42,66,70,88, 118, 127, 132, 134, 136, 150, 158, 163, 187,201, 205,208,224,226, 227,239,240, 248,250, 258,267,273,277,281,283, 284, 287,291, 296, 303,305,317,320, 325, 327, 331,335, 340, 358,360,362,371,372, 375-377,381, 383,386, 389,393,394,396, 397,402-404, 406-411,413,414,416,419-421,433-436, 438,444,445,452,453,458,478,488,489, 492-494, 506, 510,520, 526, 527, 540, 553, 569, 570, 577, 614, 641, 647, 650, 661 in absence, 127, 296 acceptation, 134, 420 annulment, 134 approbation, 4 blood, 421, 490 canonical, 134 confirmation, 134, 402 contradiction, rejection, 134, 248,397, 420, 421 ecclesiastical, 420 enforcement, execution, 134, 163, 224, 383, 402, 411,494 false, 9,134, 371, 420, 506 falsification, 420 final, 134, 226, 408 of God, 10, 15, 150, 321, 468 see also ordeal hasty, 661 just (right, true), 3, 134, 187, 219, 233, 242, 289, 362, 405, 411,484 on law and on fact, 405 lay, 420 legal, 360 papal, 11 peremptory, 321 postponement, 3, 5, 7, 31, 134, 135, 291, 321, 337,363,396,405,408,420, 421,457,471, 520, 581, 630, 634, 641, 644, 646 pronouncement, 134, 419-421, 641 proposition, 4, 371

reasonable, 540 secular, 421, 468 suspension, 520 unanimous, 404 unjust, 134, 420 written, 434 jurisdiction conflict, 15, 122, 134, 138, 174, 199, 219, 320, 331,360,405,409-411,413,414,417,419421,449,488,490,520, 581,637, 648,662 criminal, 169, 407 episcopal, 15, 371, 394, 469 lay, 520 manorial, 189 royal, 417, 520 juror, 19, 63, 64, 286, 343, 377, 384, 406,433,475, 569, 579 jury, 19, 343, 365, 436, 579, 639, 660 composition, 643 justice (=righteousness), 3, 7, 9, 34, 41, 48, 134, 331,360, 377,396, 397, 399,402,405,408, 420, 421,425, 432, 637, 644 justice (=judicial administration of the law), default, 163, 187, 188, 201, 229, 244, 249, 282, 315,354,361,375,383,396,415,420,424, 442, 488, 517, 531, 641, 648, 662 denial, refusal, 134, 420 to do, 3, 5, 98, 134, 291,311,331,377,411,413, 416, 419, 420, 449, 458, 661 ecclesiastical, canonical, 321, 327, 415, 644 full, 411, 413, 458, 637, 641 lay, 419 and mercy, 661 right, 191, 355 rigour, 548 royal, 420, 531, 553 secular, 18 seignorial, 343, 618 justice ( = person administering the law) itinerant, 204,237,411,429,432,433,437,459, 582, 600, 603,632, 650, 661 royal, 7, 15, 137, 144, 151, 155, 156, 159, 163, 172, 175, 182, 189, 191,204,246,255,256, 260,266,272,287,299,302,304,305,331, 340, 351,357, 358,363,370,371,375-377, 382,398,399,404,406,411,412,420,423, 424,432,433,436, 437, 444,452,457,458, 470,473,485,487,493,506,510, 511,517, 518,524, 525,528,532, 534-539, 544-547, 550,551,557,562, 563,567, 569-572, 575, 577,579,580,584, 589,596, 597,599-603, 606,608-610, 630-633,635,639,641,642, 644, 649, 650, 653, 654, 661 justiciar, chief, 204, 211, 215, 271, 377, 396, 405, 406,415,421,424,444,449,493,522,531,

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 782 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

532, 550, 570, 581,614, 615,641,644,646, 653, 654 local, 251, 310, 334, 335, 377, 441 kinship, 387, 408, 416 knight of abbey, 295 lawful, 453 possessing seal, 377 royal, 411 knight-hospitaller, 637 knight-service, see service, knight knighthood, 323, 415 lady, 64 land common, 343 free, 113, 129, 311 holding, unjust, 2 royal, 5, 19, 95, 128 servile, in villeinage, 285, 650 landsetta, lancetti, 648 language English, 204 French, ignorance of, 641 vernacular, 219 larceny, 204, 350 law, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14, 67, 74, 138, 331,363,443, 446, 494, 520, 629, 637, 644 ancestral, 457 canon, 134, 233, 296, 327, 360, 363, 386, 402, 408, 419, 421,443, 458, 494, 520, 644 quoted, 9 Christian, 134, 321 civil, Roman, 337, 360, 408, 443 clemency, 408 of the country, of the (English) kingdom, of the land, 5,7, 135, 164, 183,323,411,420,495, 540 customary, 421, 443 Danish, 7 disrespect, 395 divine, 408, 421, 443 English, 5, 7 episcopal, 134 holy, 134 human, 408, 443 ignorance, 408 just, 10 of Kent, 421 King Edward's, 131 Norman, 7 obedience, 420 old, 5 of prohibition, 371

respect, 630 rightful, 10 royal, 363 skill, 421, 661 strict, 417 Teutonic, 408 worldly, 10 lawman, 4, 172 layman, incapacity, 360 league, 236, 420; see also banlieue learning, legal, 9, 405 lease, 8, 15, 82, 627 legate, papal, 408, 421, 480, 520, 637, 641 leges repetundarum, 421 legislation, see assize, constitution, decree, edict, ordinance legitimacy, 408 lese-majesty, 420, 421 letter episcopal, 603 of jury, 660 of release, 647 royal, obreptitious, 641 liberty, 246, 275,301,303,307, 314, 353,360, 369, 374,398,421,424,432,481,488, 510, 513, 520, 527, 627, 634, 635 ecclesiastical, 3, 5, 9, 12, 15, 18, 146, 172, 296, 320,331, 349,360, 369, 405,411,421,427, 432,439,444,488,489,570,581,582,630, 631 urban, 322, 630, 648 literature, knowledge, 3 livery, see delivery loan, 421 lord, 16,22,43,45,79,90, 103, 134,242,314, 317, 343,377,385,420,445,466, 518,569,576, 580, 588,619,630,634,641,642,646,653, 662 attempt on life, 330 capital, 569, 610 higher, 420 liege, 7, 421 sovereign, 420 lordship, 9, 137, 296, 303, 415, 417, 436, 455, 458 magic, 204, 421, 461 magistracy, urban, 644 majesty, royal, 386, 420 majority, age of, see discretion, age of majority decision, 551 malediction, 1, 421 malice, 386, 454 man evil, 421 faithful, 377, 498

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 783 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

man (contd) free, see freeman good, 164, 415 of good repute, 254 holy, 457 honest, 5,249, 278,281,309,331,372,409, 486, 533 honourable, 326, 331, 347 just, 412 of king, 102. 104 lawful, 9, 244,254, 288, 298, 308, 326, 343, 345, 354,355,357, 369, 375,399,400,427,467. 474, 475, 509, 512, 551, 569, 579, 656 liege, 421 literate, 661 mature, 254 noble, 15, 644 old, 31, 254, 255, 405, 406, 427, 437 poor, 614 prudent, 331, 377, 405 rich, 252, 614 senior, 15 vile, 9 wise, 5, 9, 12, 164, 172, 185, 187, 195, 254, 331, 348, 363, 378, 380, 405, 421,457,467 mandate episcopal, 416 imperial, 4 papal, 134, 396, 499, 637 royal, 421, 438, 445, 446, 458, 480, 509 manor, 3, 10, 18, 19,21,26, 29-32. 36, 38, 39, 41, 55, 87, 92-94, 103, 104, 111, 118, 123,130, 137, 144, 146,156, 160,162, 163, 168, 172, 174,189,192. 196,200,207,211,220,234, 240, 248,250,253,257,258,271. 273,285, 311,312,317,343,345,348,353,361,363, 367,370, 374, 377,379,393,397, 403,405, 406, 420, 421,442,444,445,458,471,484, 488,516, 546, 552, 560, 576,578, 579,581, 619, 629, 634, 636, 641, 642 administration, 174 capital, 516 head, 60 royal, 4, 12, 22, 28, 88, 104, 109, 125, 144, 168, 185, 458,471 market, 163, 172, 246, 305, 321, 322, 336. 406, 494, 630, 648 marl-pit, 343 marriage, 7, 265, 316, 317, 408, 652, 662 annulation, 408 clandestine, 408 consummation, 408 dissolution, 408 infidelity, 408 lawful, 408

legitimate consent, 408 presumed, 408 promise, 408 royal confirmation, 190 unlawful, 408, 464 marsh, 163, 334, 573, 641 meadow, 82. 164, 349, 369, 645, 651 measurement, of bounds, 65 mediation, 209, 415, 494, 621 mercenary, 290 merchant, 143 foreign, 17 merchant guild, 648 mercy, 661 of abbey, 650 of archbishop, 371 of Church, 484 of king, 7, 88, 128, 134, 163, 192, 262, 404,420, 421,458,480,491,506,540,582,592,600, 611,630, 641,644, 649, 661 of lord, 484, 650 messenger, 1, 7, 10, 19, 39, 71, 91, 134, 143, 337, 405,408,411,415-417,420,421,457,458, 494, 520. 521, 552, 641, 644 mill, 68, 185, 193, 218, 297, 307, 343, 345, 349, 367,374,440,467,484,487,510, 554, 587, 605, 636 miller, 133, 185, 653 minister of bishop, 279, 637 of king, 5, 7, 170, 340, 411, 429, 453, 457, 501 minority, 377, 460 role of uncle, 145 mint, 241 miracle, 3, 7, 10, 14, 16, 204, 403, 461, 469, 471, 472, 504-506, 644 misinformation, 246, 262, 363, 406, 421,428,435 misrule, by abbot, 149 mitre, 405 money, false, 239 money-lending, 204, 295, 408 moneyer, 202, 239, 241, 425, 469 mortgage, 209, 377, 425 murder, 321. 331, 340, 432, 493, 513, 644 fine. 353, 452, 592 by poisoning, 520 music, knowledge, 3 mutilation, 411, 412, 416, 471, 472, 540 blinding, 7, 143, 210, 237, 239, 471, 472, 504, 505 branding, 410, 426 castration, 143, 237, 239, 421, 471, 472, 504 finger, 540 hands, 7, 239

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 784 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

naif, see villein necessity, 432 neighbour, lawful, 343, 460 neighbourhood, see venue nobility, 5, 150 non-appearance, see contumacy novelty, 360, 644 nuisance, 323 oath, 7, 15, 17-19, 31, 63, 132, 134, 141,143, 150, 163, 166, 180,190,192,215,216,219,220, 232, 244,249,254,256,271,280,291,298, 301,314, 321,323,326,343,347,348,354, 355,357, 360, 367,377, 384,390,402,404406,411,415,417,420,421,427,428,430, 431,433,435-437,440,445,447,453,457, 458,462,464,467,468,470,471,474,475, 480,482,487,491,494,498,512,521,541, 550, 551,568,569,573,577, 579,593,594, 598,615,626,641,643,644,650,651,657, 658, 660 accusatory, 464 false, see perjury on Holy Gospels, 254, 296, 311, 494, 541 on holy relics, 15, 193, 204, 220 purgatory, 411, 416, 457, 464, 520, 648 renounced, 15 royal, I oath-helper, 193, 414, 420, 520 obedience, canonical, 360, 405, 421 obligation, 9, 421, 405 sworn, 421 obstruction of king's justice, 553 of road, 335 occupation, 19, 44, 52, 151, 152, 325, 389, 484 illegal, 445 unjust, 5, 41, 58, 296, 396, 470, 517 unjust and without reason, 193 violent, 470, 637 see also spoliation office, removal, 630 official episcopal, 421, 658 royal, 4, 12, 109, 412, 416, 419, 637, 644 abuse, 4, 644 oppression, 1, 11, 18, 134, 320, 444 ordeal, 3,15, 31, 85, 100, 104, 105, 110-113, 118, 120, 121, 150, 321,426, 520 of hot iron, 19, 95, 99, 101,102, 150, 204, 471, 507, 520 of water, 234, 471, 493, 501, 503, 506, 520 order ecclesiastical, 134, 327, 360, 420, 421

judicial, 453 ordinance, royal, 303 ordination, 9, 138, 154, 405, 420 ostensurus quare, 572 outlawry, 7, 93, 172, 192 ownership, 365, 396, 443, 641 pacification, 134, 139, 431 pallium, 421 pannage, 38, 367, 400, 423, 439, 643 pardon, 7, 14, 143, 190, 192, 304, 420, 421, 445, 458, 463, 513, 516, 553, 584, 611 parish, 163, 198, 229, 283, 296, 402, 434, 576 park, 163, 343, 643 parson, parsonage, 296, 445, 458, 507, 518, 537, 544, 545, 563, 569, 572, 589, 595,602, 615 part, wiser, 405, 648 partition, 434 sworn, 364 passage-money, 134, 172 pasture common, 177,326,333,343,358,367,455,456, 476, 486, 487, 535, 542, 604, 613, 641,643 enclosed, 639 patronage, 296, 345, 395,445, 563, 569, 602, 621 pavage, 172 pawn, 471 peace, 7, 9, 10, 126, 134, 139, 149, 156, 164, 204, 212,216, 233,235,250, 254, 262,265,269, 275,290, 309, 315,316, 321,323,331,343, 345,360,405,411,412,415,418,421,423, 443,448,451,467,494,499,513, 551,573, 602, 603, 617, 630, 641, 642, 644, 660 breach, 18, 172, 303, 416, 505, 592 final, 515 of king, 129, 134, 187, 260, 411, 505, 641 kiss, 134, 360 between parties, 411, 412, 415, 418, 515, 541 of sheriff, 134 peer, 420, 646, 651 penance, 7, 223, 343, 416 pension, 402, 414, 458, 478, 499, 512, 518, 520, 569 people, common, 644 perambulation, 249, 258, 281, 286, 326, 377, 404, 428, 455, 474, 475, 551,591 peremptory, see date perjury, 10, 19, 134, 204, 406, 420, 421, 468, 470, 494, 504, 568 permission of bishop, 9 of king, 9, 37, 103, 134,415 physician, royal, 294, 360 pilgrimage, 7, 176, 190, 461, 463, 464, 471, 641

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 785 1991

INDEX

OF SUBJECTS

pipe roll, 360, 377, 444, 543, 633 erasure, 444 transcription, 647 piracy, 143, 421 plaintiff, 402, 406, 408, 411, 417, 431 plea of crown, 144, 420, 551 episcopal, 283 pledge, 5, 7, 134, 145, 147, 164, 172,204, 209, 212, 294, 295,325,342,345,385,415,420,421, 428,448,453,457,463,465,468,488,494, 519, 520,566, 567,581,593,613,623,641, 643,648, 651 pontage, 172 pope, 3, 134, 360, 405, 408,420, 421,445,558 see also appeal to portion, of monks, 570 port-moot, 209, 251, 295, 336, 622, 648 possession, 4-6, 8, 10, 15, 18, 144, 145, 253, 257, 258,287,291,292,294,297,307,311,319, 325,336,345,377,386, 391,393,395,396, 402,405,411,415,420,421,431,443,445, 447,470,478,484,491,492,494,499,512, 513,517,520,527,552, 570, 573,579,581, 613, 620, 637, 641,642 canonical, 325, 395 free and quiet, 573 heritable, 296, 363 just, lawful, rightful, 363, 377, 395 long time, 282 peaceful, 10 perpetual, 344, 405, 527 unjust, 296, 395, 423 postponement, 3, 134, 135, 321, 337, 402, 405, 408,420, 520, 531,581,630, 634, 641,646 power material and spiritual, 360 public, 644 religious, 3 royal, 2, 3, 11, 143 prebend, 6, 172, 178, 242, 299, 373, 411, 520, 559 precedent, 360, 408, 421 prediction, 412 prerogative papal, 520 royal, 360 prescription (=limitation), 396, 405, 630 presentation, presentment (to a benefice), 234, 296,445,458, 518, 537,544, 545,563,568, 569, 572, 602, 617, 621, 660 prevarication, 9 priest degradation, 234 expulsion, 637 status, 126

prison, 204, 461, 469, 471, 644, 648 privilege, 9, 360, 405, 630, 637, 648, 662 apostolic, 9 of clergy, 11,371,395, 409-411,413,416, 419, 490, 520 ecclesiastical, 3, 331, 444, 458 granted by king, 491 granted by pope, 325, 402, 405, 637 of knights, 408 secular, 444 procedure canonical, 360 criminal, 504 judicial, legal, 386, 408, 411,420, 421,494, 520, 661 ordinary, 520 pre-Conquest, 18 proceedings, stopped, 18 process of law, see procedure, judicial procreation, 408 proctor, 641 profanation, 360 profession (=vow), 405, 421, 661 profit, judicial, 648, 662 prohibition (archi)episcopal, 421 royal, 10, 18, 371, 373, 406 promise breach, 1,9 for the future, matrimonial, 408 proof, 9, 15, 31, 62, 85, 91, 94, 100, 110, 112, 113, 120, 122-125, 134, 138, 143, 144,150, 156, 163, 172, 187, 196,217,226, 230, 242, 277, 289,291,303,321,327,331,351,361,371, 377, 393,402,405,411,412,415,420,445, 452, 453,468,469,471,489,520,540,541, 552, 568, 570, 641,644 burden, 402 legitimate, 520 see also charter, combat judicial, inquest, jurors, jury, oath, ordeal, purgation, recognition, testimony, witness, writ proof-judgment, 403, 471, 526 property, 143, 395, 405 prosecution, 155, 185, 371, 458, 463, 520 by king, 134, 147, 176, 190, 290, 411,480 by royal justice, official, 5, 144, 151, 152, 170, 204, 419 protection, papal, 520 punishment, 1, 95, 134, 139, 143, 150, 190, 204, 217,241,308,321,371,386,411,416,425, 644 corporal, 471 full, 5 half, 5

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 786 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS incurred twice for same offence, 419 measure, 416 purgatory, 403 purchase, of land, 5, 10, 51, 295, 329, 362, 373, 375, 377, 423, 454, 495, 525, 543 consent, 375 purgation, 134, 193, 321, 371,403,411,412,457, 463, 464, 471, 493, 494, 501, 506 canonical, 416 see also oath, purgatory purpresture, 356, 629 quitclaim, 9, 15, 138, 142, 158, 164, 179, 180, 192, 195,200,218,222,233,235,238,267 272, 294,306,307,318,323,325,326,329,348, 360,362,368,373,378,385,387,388,392, 404,405,421,423,425,428,431,434,445, 448,450,453,454,456,458,459,462,465, 473,477,481-483,485,486,496,512,515, 517,522,524,525,527,532,534,536-539, 541,544-546,549,550,552, 557, 558,560, 562,563,566,567,569,571,572,576,584586,589,593-595,597,599-603,607,616, 617,620-622,625-627,631,632, 635,636, 640,641,643,645,647,650,651,655,658, 659, 663, 664 see also remission, resignation, surrender quittance, 647 radcnecht, 377 ransom, 190 rape, 316 ratification, 386 rebellion, 7, 11, 95, 129, 134, 143, 190, 223, 239, 243,292,421,479,488,491,497, 634,644 recognition (=admission), 10, 15, 93, 108, 132, 134,163,206,207,218,219,225,262,283, 284,289,311,319,343,382,387,388,396, 405,454,475,488,500,511,527,536,543, 548,559,560,572,578,579,588,592,594, 601,608,615,619,627,632,633,643,646, 651 recognition (=investigation), sworn, 2,212,213, 247,254,261,278,284,286,288,296,298, 300,301,308,309,326,332-334,336,343, 344,347,352,354,355,357,365,369,375 377,382,384,388,391,399,400,427,433, 439,441,453,455,460,466,487,491,497, 500,509,512,522,534,535,539,547,548, 554,560,562,571,574,576,579,582,584, 586,597,600,601,604,615,617,619,628, 639, 641, 643, 650, 656, 660 recognition

of darreinpresentment, 518, 537,544, 545, 568, 601 of mort d'ancestor, 599, 600, 631 of novel disseisin, 591 see also assize reconciliation with Church, 343 with king, 134, 147, 401, 420 refused, 139 record, 5, 18, 137, 219, 255, 296, 316, 336, 343, 377,378,414,420,437,489,510,546,551, 559, 576, 577, 600, 641, 646, 651, 654 contradiction, 420 recovery of church, 258, 418, 569 of fief, 7 of land, 3,5, 10, 18, 138, 257, 258,272,292,316, 317, 347, 377, 403, 404, 420, 422, 629 of seisin, 510, 641 of tenant, 10, 98 redemption, 134, 295 reeve, 31, 172, 293, 314, 322, 648, 651 royal, 12, 24, 28, 38, 167, 171, 172 urban, 17, 630 regency, 11, 386, 449 reinvest, to, 134 relief, 266, 646, 651 remedy, for injustice, 323 remission of advowson, 583 of debt, 185, 582, 661 of default, 641 of land, 525 renovation, of customs and liberties, 5 rent, 8, 87, 92, 95, 109, 111, 121, 133, 151, 152, 201,205,207-209,214,254,282,285,287, 293,295,301,311,316,322,329,336,340, 344,367,369,384,390,398,404,405,411, 414,415,418,425,430,443,445,458,462, 477,478,486,492,498,499,511-513,517, 518,521,524,529,530,533,534,538,541, 543,549,560,561,569,579,587,595,596, 602,605,608,609,613,615,621,624,625, 627,630,632-634,638,640,641,645,651, 652, 657 renunciation, 405, 445, 520, 550, 558, 573, 627 replevin, 342 report, written, 18 representation in court, 528 see also attorney repute, bad, 416 requisition, 12 rescript, papal, see bull, papal

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 787 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

reseise, to, 18, 134, 187, 212, 218, 233, 272, 282, 291,309,315,319,363,441-443,517,641 by right, 233 reseisin, 443, 641 resignation of claim, 405, 569 from office, 377 restitution, see restoration restoration, 5, 7, 9, 10, 18, 20, 134, 142, 144, 146, 163, 178, 187, 212, 250, 257, 267,283,285, 288,297,309,313,315,318,359,363,366, 370, 374, 377, 386-388, 395, 396,398,405, 415,417,418,431,434,443,444,446,491, 494, 511,512,517,520, 527,536, 543,548, 552, 579, 594, 601,604, 625,637, 641,658 of bishopric, 134 of church, 173, 224, 339, 386 integral, 548 of land, 2, 3,5,6, 8, 10, 18, 20, 142, 146, 153, 164, 188,220, 224, 228,242,250,257,259, 266, 267,272,283,292, 313, 316,332,333, 336, 343,346, 431,484, 497, 511,512, 643 of merchandise, 143 of money, 166, 421 of prebend, 6 of rights, 157, 377 of seisin, 641 of spoils, I of tithe, 338 of toll money, 163 retractation, of complaint, 649 revenge, 644 revenue royal, 487, 494 urban, 630 reversion, 8, 33, 220, 343, 622 revocation, 5, 478, 637, 641 revolt, see rebellion riding-moot, 172 right, 2-4, 11, 12, 15, 18, 42, 67, 74, 76, 78, 84, 86, 91, 106, 107, 134, 137, 141, 158, 162, 187, 194,223,230,233,246,254,291,294,297, 314,318,321-323,331-334,343,348,354, 360, 365,375,377,379,380, 385,387,393, 394, 399,405,406,415,420,421,435,442, 445,446,450,453,458,473,482-485,488, 494, 509,515,517-520, 522, 525,531,536, 537,540-542, 550,552,560, 561,568-570, 572,581,585,593, 594, 597, 599, 604,617, 620, 621,627,630-634,637, 641,643,651, 653,656, 658-660, 662, 663 ancient, 5,303, 581 customary, 5, 112 default, denial, see justice, default distinguished from seisin, 393

to do, 6, 134, 148, 165, 172, 187, 188, 191, 225, 227, 233,283, 321,324, 334, 377, 383,396 ecclesiastical, 405, 420, 421, 445, 458, 644 eternal, 5 feudal, 408 full, 134, 187, 188,227,334,355,377,420,442, 517, 570 greater, 187, 232, 538, 542, 601, 641 hereditary, 7, 15, 138, 161, 222, 316, 360, 379, 396, 408,420,452,486,494,510,515,556, 589, 595, 605, 627, 632, 660 inviolable, 360 in land, 2, 67, 74, 245, 378, 552 military, 259 old, 570 parochial, 402, 434 perpetual, 138, 144, 268 pontifical, 421 royal, 144 to undergo, 260 violation, 12, 134 see also action, proprietary riot, 173, 644 road, 286, 335, 343, 510, 535, 546, 636 royal, 5, 439 trees along, 5 safety, 8 unlawful, 163 robbery, 10, 11, 143, 169, 223, 290, 350, 407, 432, 443,463,471,479,493,494, 553,641,648 robe, ecclesiastical, 134 rule, monastic, 276 rustic, see villein sacrilege, 172, 457, 468 safe-conduct, 7, 134, 421, 540 sake, 2, 5, 15, 18, 25, 69, 74, 76, 77, 85, 86, 122, 141, 161, 172, 202, 221,250, 349 sale of horse, 463 of house, 270 of land, 5,21,47, 52, 58, 64, 112, 164, 172, 270, 295,325,362, 373,396,423,425,473,521, 532, 556, 584, 623, 624, 626, 630, 651 of men, 134 salt-pan, 163, 343 sanctuary, 143, 172, 327, 644, 649 scot, 447, 582 church, 15, 430 king's, 238, 253, 340 scutage, 377, 646 exemption, 243 seal, 53, 293, 326, 343, 391, 453, 462, 475, 550, 557,566,605,620, 625,626, 651,652,657, 658

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 788 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

of abbey, 569, 573, 650 of abbot, 405, 558, 602 of alderman, 533 of archdeacon, 434 (archi)episcopal, 242, 308, 394, 402, 405, 408, 439, 499, 558, 602, 628 of chapter, 405 of chief justiciar, 405 of king, 25, 27, 39,40,43,66, 134, 163,226,246, 285, 342, 360, 377,405,424, 489, 424, 657 falsification, 611 keeper, bearer, 360, 429, 641 papal, 405 of priory, 651 of queen, 189, 408 of royal constable, 242 security, 134, 520, 641 sedition, see rebellion seduction, 409, 516, 540 see apostolic, 637 episcopal, 134 seise, to, 5, 18, 21, 26, 30, 32, 39, 45, 46, 48, 53, 55, 56, 60, 64, 71, 78, 85, 92, 104, 106, 110, 117, 126, 127, 129, 131,144, 153, 163, 187, 196, 200, 218,223,226,245,270, 281,289, 294, 296, 311,314, 315,343,361,363,396, 397, 417, 433,441,470,488, 517, 589, 600, 634, 641 seisin, 172, 187, 272, 284, 319, 365, 389,393,404, 445,452, 510, 533,541,581,589, 596, 598, 605, 641,650 full, 641 seisor, 53 seizure of goods, money, 12, 134, 209, 254, 279, 442, 495, 510, 570, 627, 646 of goods, unjust, 445 of hundred, 627 of land, 5, 10, 11, 47, 143, 163, 187, 209, 220, 222, 258, 313, 336, 404, 510, 579 illegal, 484 of people, 98, 134, 170, 581 of ship, 212 of tithe, 442 separation, of spouses, 64, 408 serf, see villein serjeant, 217, 415, 443, 517, 630 royal, 118, 134, 495 servant, royal, 25, 134 service, 10, 15, 19,37, 107, 134, 145, 175, 196, 206, 208,219, 225,234,238,307,316-318,322, 325,334, 336, 340, 343,347, 367, 377,382, 430, 443,477,482,486,488,498, 511,513, 521,524, 526,531,533,541,546, 552, 555,

556,560, 561,575,577,598,604, 605,609, 615,624, 632-634,636, 640, 642, 648,649 in church, 637 default, 484 feudal, 206, 511 forensic, 524, 541 forinsecal, foreign, 534, 651 free, 281, 450, 482, 589 knight, 145, 162, 164, 240, 257, 296, 377, 388, 534,546, 574, 578, 610,619,635, 636,642, 646 default, 646 lawful, 15 military, 15, 226, 296, 317, 424, 437, 662 mural, 300 royal, 15, 37, 134, 172, 521, 571, 576, 590, 605, 609, 635, 646 rustic, 301 secular, 332, 431, 440, 452, 454, 455, 474, 487, 557, 584, 623, 638, 652, 655 spiritual, 482 transport, 12 sheriff frankpledge viewed by, 648 punishment, I revenue, 390 seizure by, 627 shire-moot, see court, county sign of the cross (as signature), 307 silence, perpetual, punishment, 520 simony, 360, 405 slander, 9, 421 sluice, 554 soke, 2,5, 15, 18,25,69,70,72-78, 80, 85, 86,98, 111,112,122,126,141,161,172,202,216, 221, 231, 250, 282, 291, 349, 425, 656 sokeman, 1, 52, 98, 111, 295 spoliation, 5, 18, 35-37, 41,44, 52, 53, 57, 58, 77, 134, 143,172,188,193,217,232,237,238, 243,253,291,296,297,311,346,363,366, 377,395,402,415,420,434,443,445,446, 458,470,484,494,496,499,517, 520, 541, 543, 604, 638 without hearing or judgment, 443 without judgment, 134, 336, 359 see also invasion, transgression spoliatus ...restituendus, 134 stallage, 231, 630 standard-bearer, 172, 407, 421, 634 steward, royal, 33, 97, 126 stewardship, 11, 421, 531 stone quarrying, 140 transport, 140 stranger, 163

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 789 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

subjection, of churches, 3, 276, 405, 415, 418 substitution, 523, 531 subversion, see rebellion succession, legitimate, 3, 393 suggestion, false, 421, 641 suit, suitor, 172, 216, 219, 316, 322, 588, 649, 656 suit, withdrawal, 8, 25 summons, 7, 18, 19, 127, 134, 143, 174, 183, 191, 193,209,219,269,270,279,291,303,311, 320, 321,360, 363,371,377,378,396, 397, 402,404-406,408,415,418,420,421,427, 445,447-449,464,488,491,518,520,531, 535-537, 539, 544, 545,547, 551,560, 562, 569,571,572,574, 575,581,582,586, 589, 597, 599,600,602,604,610,615,617,630632, 634, 637, 638, 641, 643, 644, 647 canonical, 134 denied, 127 military, 7, 408 scorned, 7, 269, 396 surety, 134, 204, 420, 421, 494, 641, 648 surrender of archbishopric, 421 of castle, 134 of church, 569 of land, 10, 392, 430, 636, 640, 653 suspension, 320, 323, 360, 421, 520 of course of justice, 9 suspicion, 644 sword royal, 421 spiritual, 421 synod, episcopal, 9, 154, 283, 284, 320, 321, 338, 360, 408, 438, 445, 520, 566 table, archiepiscopal, 420 tallage, unjust, 345 tally, 444 tax, 15,213,215,231,420,421,475,521,526,612, 623, 630, 644, 646 excessive, 211, 237, 340 on house, 172 papal, 637 unjust, 11, 18 on wine, 608 team, 2, 5, 18, 141, 172, 202, 216, 221, 250, 349 temple, knightly order, 421, 440, 541 tenant, 15, 18, 22, 32, 109, 158, 187, 192, 207,211, 232, 272, 321,418,494,497,539,541,570, 594, 596,598,605,§08,630, 632, 633,635, 636, 657,662 in chief, 45, 61, 420, 491, 499, 517, 627 free, 541, 648 haggovele, 630

oppression, 4 tenure, 6, 27, 28, 31, 34-40, 42, 43, 46, 50-52, 54, 55, 57, 59, 60, 72, 85, 88, 94, 96, 97, 103, 105, 107-109,112,114-116,118-121,124, 125, 127, 130, 145, 151,152, 164, 172, 194, 272, 280,291,292, 301,309, 336, 343, 347, 367, 369,373,377,404,420,488,491,515, 521,524, 526,533,541,546, 570,571,578, 580, 609, 630, 641, 642, 651 annual, 630 in chief, 275, 491, 499, 517 by fork and flail, 498 free, 498 hereditable, 396, 561, 589 just, 630 for life, 23, 30, 33, 51, 222, 238, 242, 258, 261, 263,294,378,396, 425,458,475,497,512, 527, 529, 530, 576, 598,615,624, 627, 638 loss, 8 by mowing and reaping, 498 old, 578 perpetual, 270 for term, 8, 15, 49 for three lives, 51 unfree, 498, 648 unjust, 2, 5, 45, 387, 630 for year and day, 295 testament, 226, 275, 408, 655 testimony, 4-7, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 23-25, 28-32, 34, 35, 38, 39, 41,43,44,46-49,51-53, 55, 56, 58-62,64-66, 68, 71, 72, 75, 77, 79, 81, 84, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 96, 97, 100, 102-105, 107, 109, 112, 113, 116,118-123, 126, 127, 129-132, 134, 158, 163, 164, 172, 174, 180, 187, 220, 223,226, 233,242,244,247,249, 253,256,257, 261,262,289,293,295,296, 310, 314,326, 331,332, 334,336, 351,356, 360, 361,370,371,374-376,387, 391,393, 398,402,405,406,408,415,417,420,421, 438,440,442,452,454,458,467,471,478, 492, 509,517,520, 527,548, 550,567, 576, 580, 616,622,625,626,628,641,650,654, 656 contradiction, 108, 123 false, 506 lawful, 9 sworn, 18, 541, 551 see also witness theft, 14, 167, 172, 192, 204, 210, 237, 317, 350, 377, 410,415,419,432,446,471,472,493, 494, 501, 503, 553, 618, 648 thegn, 40, 237 thegnland, 18, 60, 132 thurgold, 172

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 790 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

tithe, 197, 202, 258, 325, 338, 343, 377, 386, 394, 405,415,442,466,488,507,558,576, 595, 617, 627 tithing, 588, 648 pence, 630 toll, 2, 5, 17, 18, 25, 141, 163, 172, 191, 202, 216, 221,250, 254, 278, 349, 630 exemption, 630, 648 unjust, 17 toll-house, 648 tolt, 187 tort, 2, 202 torture, 170, 407, 469, 471 tower, custody, 420 transfer, of pleas, 3, 377, 520, 577, 598 transgression, 488 treason, 7, 134, 143, 183, 265, 276, 321, 331, 407, 421,490, 494, 540, 644 treasure trove, 204, 331, 469 treasury, royal, 15, 143, 183, 420, 429, 444, 570, 644 see also fisc, royal trespass, 163, 643 tribute, to Roman see, 405 truce, 494 tyranny, 7, 10, 12, 149 unfaithfulness, to lord, 7 usage bad, 390 of the English realm, 135 usufruct, 396 usurpation, 172, 254, 415, 662 of land, 5, 10, 52, 132, 238 usury, 204, 408 vacancy, 18, 215, 222, 421, 458, 494, 568, 570, 641,660, 662 vassal, 7, 15, 31, 120, 134, 162-164, 331, 345, 377, 494, 619 vengeance, 7, 9, 134, 190, 321, 468 venue, 10, 212, 232, 253, 254, 272, 281, 298, 309, 323,343,377,428, 453,467,474, 475,486, 494, 551 verdict, 160,212,216,271,365,447,552, 569, 579, 582, 615, 641 false, 406 sworn, 281, 343, 345, 467, 569, 581, 660 vexation, 343, 375, 385, 391, 394, 428, 445, 548, 620, 637, 639, 642, 646 vicar, vicarage, 307, 569, 595, 637 view, 323, 584, 641 vif-gage, 377 vill, 9, 15, 122, 123, 242, 246, 307, 314, 326, 345, 351,387, 428,446,455,526,533,538,541,

543,546, 554, 557, 571,576, 584,588,595, 604, 608, 613, 615, 636, 650 villein, villeinage, 31, 121, 122, 163,253,285,301, 307,343,377,407,415, 449,471,504,576, 579, 648,653, 664 villein, fugitive, 342 vindication, 8, 9 violence, 5, 11, 12, 134, 143, 163, 185, 187, 223, 254,290,292,296,306,311,316,334,345, 377,378,386,393,395,402,404,406,407, 415,420,421,423,443,445,446,451,453, 470, 479,493,494, 553, 581,637,641,644 vision, 5, 644 visitation abbatial, 415 (archi)episcopal, 3, 360, 405 vote, 570 wage, 471 wall, city, 300 wapentake, see court, hundred wapentake-moot, see court, hundred ward, wardship, 145, 278, 295, 316, 460, 494, 516, 627, 662 ward-penny, 159 warnoth, 398 warranty, 48, 90, 92, 114, 115, 182, 294, 323, 377, 389,404,421,451,454-456,473,477,481, 485,499,511,524, 534,542, 543, 550, 555, 557,569,594,596, 597,608,613,616,623, 630, 632,633, 638,640,641,650, 654, 655 default, 492 warren, 163, 399 waste, 134, 323, 331, 384, 439, 487, 606, 641 watch, 151 watchman, 325 royal, 275 waterway illegal rupture, 133 income, 25 whipping, 411, 490, 644 widow, 143, 527, 529, 530, 549, 624, 662 wife, property, 64 will, see testament of king, 421, 457, 491 witchcraft, 204 witness false, 436, 641 lawful, legitimate, 15, 356, 361 see also testimony woman, free, 627 women, prohibited association, 170 wood common, 539 royal, 38

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 791 1991

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

wreck, 256, 303 writ, 4, 103, 106, 121, 586 of (arch)bishop, 310, 408 of bishop, purchase, 408 of chancellor, 659 of chief justiciar, 298, 586 of darreinpresentment, 563, 660 of earl, 309, 640 false, 89 of king of Scotland, 249 of king's son, 212, 213, 226, 640 of mort d'ancestor, 599, 633 of novel disseisin, 510, 542, 606, 650 precipe, 377 of queen, 212, 386, 396 of recognition, 615, 650 of right, 316, 362, 377, 481, 483, 517, 598, 641, 651, 659 royal, 26, 43, 45, 59, 69, 71, 105, 126, 211, 385, 418,420,438,598,603,607,645,651,652, 655, 662-664 of confirmation, 220, 223, 246

delivered free of charge, 429 executive, 140, 178, 424 ordering court-sitting, 15, 132, 155, 160, 165, 187, 247, 296, 378,396, 397, 399,400,405, 406, 434, 458, 485, 488, 554, 564, 604 ordering to do right, 148, 163, 188, 191, 291, 375, 395, 396, 425, 517 ordering execution of judgment, 141, 154, 159, 160, 168, 178, 184, 196,197,201,216, 299, 369, 370, 383, 459, 579 ordering exemption, 243 ordering restoration, 1, 18, 366, 370,446, 521 ordering seisin, 233, 361, 363, 442 ordering suspension of case, 323 payment for, 377, 641 of peace, 134, 171 purchase, 408 return, 462, 616 sealed, 134, 429 surrender, 158, 272, 465, 519, 525 of royal justices, 551 of summons, 420

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 792 1991

HeinOnline -- 107 Selden Society 793 1991