Trans. Bristol & Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 131 (2013), 229–244 BRISTOL AND GLOUCESTERSHIRE NOTES AND QUERIES Edited by David J. H. Smith, M.A., F.S.A. and Jill Barlow, M.A. CONTENTS Notes 15. King Henry V’s cradle John Fendley and David Smith 22. The playing of fives (and west gallery music) John Jurica 25. A riot in Tetbury David Smith and Jill Barlow 26. The place-name Awre Richard Coates 27. The priest chairs of St Nicholas, Gloucester Robert Tucker 28. Garter Bigland’s funeral Huw Jones 29. Eastington in Domesday Book Neil Stacy Queries 30. A 19th-century inscription at Hanham Abbots William Evans 229-244_BGAS131_Notes&Queries.indd 229 09/01/2014 10:41 230 BRISTOL AND GLOUCESTERSHIRE NOTES AND QUERIES NOTES 15 King Henry V’s Cradle Much information about this ancient piece is already in the public domain. During the 18th and 19th centuries it was famous locally and was widely believed to be genuine. It was in private ownership but was frequently shown to visitors. By 1839 it had come into the hands of the antiquary George Braikenridge of Brislington, who was said to have bought it for £30. By 1872 it was at Troy House, Mitchel Troy, and its location was reported by William Old to the Royal Historical Society. In 1908 it was auctioned at Christie’s and was bought for 230 guineas by Guy Laking, the royal armourer, bidding on behalf of the king. Four years later the London Museum was set up at Kensington Palace under Laking’s direction and the cradle was given to the museum by George V, where it remains. The cradle is made of oak with two heraldic birds watching over a suspended crib. It is now believed to date from the late 15th century, so is about one hundred years too late to have been used by Henry V, who was born in 1386. In the late 18th century the fashion for visiting country houses was in full swing and many attractive stories and false attributions were invented to interest this first generation of tourists; perhaps the suggestion that the cradle had royal origins was one of these. JOHN FENDLEY and DAVID SMITH 22 Fives and west gallery music at Ruardean church In his Forest of Dean history published in 1858 Henry George Nicholls, minister of the Forest church at Harrow Hill, indicated that in nearby Ruardean a side of the church tower had been whitewashed for use as a fives court.1 When that was done is not clear but the game in the churchyard may have been discontinued in living memory, perhaps at the latest in the early 19th century. Who or what was responsible for its demise is also unclear but it can be noted that the antiquary Thomas Dudley Fosbrooke had a long association with the church following the publication in 1807 of his history of Gloucestershire.2 At the time Ruardean was both an agricultural and industrial parish3 and its church was a dependent chapel of Walford, the Herefordshire parish immediately to its 1. H.G. Nicholls, The Forest of Dean; an Historical and Descriptive Account (1858), 152. 2. T.D. Fosbrooke, Abstracts of Records and Manuscripts Respecting the County of Gloucester, Formed into a History (2 vols., Gloucester, 1807). 3. See A.R.J. Jurica, ‘Ruardean’, in The Victoria History of the County of Gloucester (VCH Glos.), V (1996), 231−47. 229-244_BGAS131_Notes&Queries.indd 230 09/01/2014 10:41 BRISTOL AND GLOUCESTERSHIRE NOTES AND QUERIES 231 north. The Walford living, a vicarage, was in the gift of the precentor of Hereford cathedral and from 1811 until his death in 1842 Fosbrooke served Ruardean church as in turn stipendiary curate and vicar of Walford.4 On Fosbrooke’s death Ruardean church became a separate benefice in the precentor’s gift. Henry Formby, its first incumbent, was an adherent of the Oxford Movement and his ideals soon placed him at odds with parishioners.5 In 1844 he refused to let a friendly society hold its anniversary service in the church on a Friday on the ground that liturgically Friday was a fast day.6 Later that year his objection to the display of secular notices on the church door saw magistrates fine him for removing voter and jury lists.7 Formby, who had an interest in church music, particularly plain chant, moved the choir from the church’s west gallery to the chancel. That change led to a fall in church attendance and prompted a petition for the singers to be returned to the gallery.8 While the playing of fives in the churchyard had presumably stopped by Formby’s time, he clearly sought to end music performances in the gallery during services. The gallery had not long been in place, having been erected in 1776 specifically as accommodation for the singers, and it was removed during a thorough restoration of the church carried out in 1889 and 1890.9 Formby resigned the living at the end of 1845 and became a Roman Catholic soon afterwards.10 JOHN JURICˇ A 25 A riot in Tetbury Most of the records of the Court of Star Chamber were destroyed by a fire in the Six Clerks’ Office in 1622, but some intriguing documents did survive, among them (in the National Archives) STAC 7/4/17, an undated petition of Richard Norris, the bailiff of Tetbury. The National Archives offers only the date range of the reign of Queen Elizabeth. In essence his complaint records that on a market day, which happened to coincide with the annual May Day celebrations, he attempted to suppress the usual fun and games because he was concerned that a recent outbreak of plague in the town would spread, due to the crowds. He twice managed to persuade the crowd to disperse, but several named people incited the youth of the town to ignore the bailiff’s proclamation and to go ahead with the celebration. If the bailiff had again tried to stop them he believed he would have been assaulted as the mob included armed men and he had been threatened. So he petitioned for the ringleaders to be subpoenaed to appear before the Court and to be punished for the insurrection. Those named are: George Estcourt, Thomas Bidel, John George the elder, Richard Banner, Richard Farr, Robert Huggins, Robert Bentlat and William Iles. A transcript of the petition is appended to this note. 4. Ibid. 244−5. 5. Ibid. 6. Glouc. Jnl., 13 Jul. 1844. 7. Ibid. 9 Nov. 1844. 8. N. Temperley, The Music of the English Parish Church I (Cambridge Studies in Music 1983), 256−7. 9. Jurica, ‘Ruardean’, 245. 10. O.W. Jones, Isaac Williams and His Circle (SPCK 1971), 123−4. 229-244_BGAS131_Notes&Queries.indd 231 09/01/2014 10:41 232 BRISTOL AND GLOUCESTERSHIRE NOTES AND QUERIES As to its date, sadly no list of bailiffs for Tetbury in the reign of Elizabeth has yet been found. The earliest possible year seems likely to have been 157211 and it cannot have been later than 1586 because George Estcourt was chosen bailiff on 7 October that year12 and Richard Norris died in December 1588 (his daughter-in-law, Sylvester [sic] Kingscott alias Norris, entered a caveat as to probate on 21 December).13 Within this date range the only year when the market day (Wednesday) fell on 3 May, the date given in the petition, is 1581. Norris’s stated reason for attempting to cancel the May Day celebrations seems plausible. Plague was endemic in England at this time and there had been a serious outbreak in Gloucester in the previous year.14 Norris goes out of his way to show that he is not a puritan, describing the event as an honest and laudable pastime, and it is noteworthy that the usual practice was to set up the maypole outside the bailiff’s house, showing that the custom had the sanction of the authorities. As the role of bailiff was an annual appointment this would have meant that the focus of the celebrations was in a different place in the town every year. However it is perhaps worth remarking that his son, Edward, was the vicar at this time, and may have taken a less indulgent view. Edward died in 1583 leaving a posthumous son, another Edward, who became a puritan cleric and emigrated to Salem, Massachusetts. The main organizer of the unlawful assembly was George Estcourt, as evidenced by his being named first on Norris’s list and of the erection of the third and successful maypole outside his house. He was a younger brother of Thomas Estcourt of Shipton Moyne and cousin of Sir Thomas Estcourt.15 He had a reputation as a troublesome neighbour, quick to go to law. He was trying to establish himself as leading inhabitant, already had a lease for 21 years of the market tolls, and later owned nine burgages and much land. Smyth relates at length his later (failed) attempts to gain control of the commons.16 Of the other ringleaders little is known. It is significant that Norris does not state that he was actually hurt, only that Richard Banner and others threatened him, and also that no injuries at all are recorded in the petition. As to the long list of weaponry alleged to have been carried by the rioters, this can be taken as common form in a petition of this nature and not as a literal report. For example, it was normal for a gentleman to carry a sword when out in public; this was a symbol of his social status and did not mean that he intended to use it.