This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ The forest eyre, 1154-1368. Winters, Jane Frances The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 05. Oct. 2021 The Forest Eyre, 1154-1368 Ph.D. Jane F. Winters King's College London (LONDOn) Abstract The main body of this thesis consists of a catalogue and description of the documentation of the forest eyre between 1154 and 1368. The information is presented chronologically so that the pattern of visitations is readily apparent, but a county by county list of eyres is also appended. Drawing on such sources as the pipe rolls, close and patent rolls, liberate and charter rolls, plea rolls, chronicles and ancient correspondence the catalogue indicates when and where forest eyres were held, the names of the personnel involved and the amount of revenue assessed in each instance. Where plea rolls exist a full description of the contents is provided, with a breakdown of the number and types of offences committed. Particular care has been taken in the catalogue to indicate the distinction between contemporary plea rolls, copy rolls made later in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and those brought together in the modern period for archival convenience. There is a short introduction to the catalogue, which outlines the history and development of the eyre from the conquest to the end of the period under discussion, throwing particular light on the financial proceeds. There is also a brief examination of the workings of the forest law and administration. 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 List of Abbreviations 5 Introduction 6 Methodology 41 Catalogue of Forest Records 47 Appendix One 421 Appendix Two 448 Bibliography 451 3 Acknowledgements Thanks are due to my supervisor, Dr. David Carpenter, for his help and guidance over the past years. I am also grateful to the staff at the Public Record Office, who made a complicated task much easier. Finally I owe a debt to my family and friends who have offered support and advice when it was most needed. This is particularly true of Dr. Nick Barratt, Dr. Kathryn Faulkner, Dr. Samantha Letters and Dr. Carla van Dort. 4 List of Abbreviations Ann. Mon. Anna/es Monastici, ed. H.R. Luard. 5 vols. (Rolls ser., 1864- 9). CChR Calendar of the Charter Rolls (HMSO, 1903-20). CCR Calendar of the Close Rolls (HMSO, 1892-). Chron. Maf. Matthaei Parisiensis, Monachi Sancti Albani, Chronica Majora, ed. H.R. Luard, 7 vots. (Rolls ser., 1884-9). CLR Calendar of the Liberate Rolls (HMSO, 1916-64). CPR Calendar of the Patent Rolls (HMSO, 1891-). CR Close Rolls (HMSO, 1902-38). PR Patent Rolls (HMSO, 1901-3). Howden Chronicon Rogeri de Hovedene, ed. W. Stubbs, 4 vols. (Rolls ser., 1868-71). RCh Rotuli Chartarum in Turn Londinensi asseriati, ed. T. Duffus Hardy (Record Commission, 1837). RLC Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in Turn! Londinensi asse,vati, ed. 1. Duffus Hardy, 2 vols. (Record Commission, 1833-4). Pipe rolls, both printed and unprinted, are cited under the calendar year (e.g. Pipe Roll, 1175). See below pp. 29-31, 41. References are initially cited in full but subsequently only the name of the author is given, with a page reference. Where more than one work by the same author is cited, however, a short title is also provided. Place of publication is only cited if other than London. 5 Introduction1 The Development of the Forest Eyre Prior to the Conquest the kings of England enjoyed the right to hunt freely on their own lands, but in this they did not differ significantly from any other landowner. It was not a function of kingship, rather the prerogative of the landed. This changed with the arrival of William the Conqueror. In Normandy the strict preservation of game was confined to the ducal demesne, but the conquest of England offered a unique opportunity to extend the sphere of influence. At this stage it seems likely that the protection of hunting rights was still of paramount importance. William the Conqueror and his sons were notorious in their devotion to hunting. The compiler of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle noted that William preserved the harts and boars And loved the stags as much As if he were their father.2 In a similar vein Henry of Huntingdon noted that 'he loved the beasts of the chase as if he were their father. On account of this, in the woodlands reserved for hunting, which he called the 'New Forest', he had villages rooted out and people removed, and made it a habitation for wild beasts'.3 The evidence is far from clear, but the reign of Henry I seems to have witnessed a development both in the extent and organisation of the royal forest. That new land was added to the forest is apparent from Stephen's The most important general works on the royal forest are R. Grant, The Royal Forests of England (1 991 ), the introduction to Select Pleas of the Forest, ed. G.J. Turner (Selden Soc., xiii, 1899), C. Petit-Dutaillis and G. Lefebvre, Studies and Notes Supplementaiy to Stubbs' Constitutional Histoty (Manchester, 1930) and C.R. Young, The Royal Forests of Medieval England (Pennsylvania, 1979). 2 The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A Revised Translation, ed. D. Whitelock et al (1961), p. 165. Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, The History of the English People, ed. and trans. D. Greenway (Oxford, 1996), p. 405. 6 charter of 1136. In this document Stephen promised to return land added to the royal forest by his predecessor.4 It had clearly expanded to embrace more than the royal demesne. As far as the organisation and administration of the royal forest is concerned the single surviving pipe roll from the reign of Henry I is invaluable. The 1130 pipe roll records revenue that is clearly derived from a general forest visitation. The efforts of the justices were concentrated in the south of England, although the forest of the bishopric of Chester was visited and pleas were heard in Gloucestershire and Huntingdonshire.5 The forest was already becoming more than simply a royal game preserve. It would not be until the second half of the twelfth century that the unique financial potential of the forest began to be exploited systematically, but the change in emphasis had begun. The development of the royal forest was interrupted by the upheaval of Stephen's reign, when 'wild animals ..., which before had been most scrupulously preserved in the whole kingdom..............., were now molested in every quarter, scattered by chance-corner and fearlessly struck down by all'.6 It was, however, only a short-lived setback. A regard, yielding significant financial returns, was undertaken as early as 1155 and by the mid 11 60s the framework that would survive into the next century and beyond was well established. In addition to this development of the forest administration Henry Il's reign saw a vast increase in the total area of the forest. By 1189, between one third and one quarter of England was considered by the king as within the bounds of the royal forest8 and some twenty-nine counties were affected to a greater or lesser degree. Some of the more important forest counties ' Select Charters and Other Illustrations of English Constitutional Histoiy, from the Earliest Times to the Reign of Edward!, ed. W. Stubbs, 9th edn., revised by H.W.C. Davies (Oxford, 1921), pp. 143-4; Petit-Dutaillis and Lefebvre, p. 179; Grant, p. 3. It should be noted that there was no question of disafforesting land placed within the forest by William I and William II. H.A. Cronne, 'The royal forest in the reign of Henry I', in Essays in British and Irish Histo,y in Honour of James Eadie Todd, ed. H.A. Cronne etal(1949), p.22. 6 Gesta Stephani. ed. and trans. K.R. Potter (Oxford, 1976), p. 3. E. Amt, 'The forest regard of 1155', Journal of the Haskins Society: Studies in Medieval Histoiy, ii (1990), 189. ° J.A. Green, 'Unity and disunity in the Anglo-Norman state', Historical Research, lxii (1989), 124. 7 were Essex (the entire county), Hampshire (New Forest and others), Northamptonshire (Rockingham, Salcey and Whittlewood), Nottinghamshire (Sherwood), Wiltshire (numerous) and Yorkshire (Galtres and Pickering).9 The royal forest embraced not only wooded areas, but also large tracts of arable land and even towns and villages. Anyone dwelling or holding land within the forest bounds was subject to a complex set of regulations, implemented by royal officials answerable only to the king.