2So EVERYDAY LIFE
diction which by right belonged to Ecclesiastics, mentions that
"testamenta laicorum defunctorum liberorum et aliorum qui
servilis conditionis reputantur per dominos Feudorum im-
pediuntur".1 Lastly, at the Synod of Winchester, in 1308, and
at Canterbury in 1328 and 1342, the Church repeated its claims
on behalf of the serf.2 This continuous agitation was finally met
by a petition to the King from Parliament, which asked him to
disallow any testamentary rights to the serf, since this "is against
reason". The royal answer, "The King wills that law and reason
be done",3 shows that the Crown realised the thorny nature of
the matter, and that it were better left with only an oracular
answer.
We must not, of course, fall into the error of supposing that,
because the ecclesiastical hierarchy saw one side of this problem,
and endeavoured by threats of excommunication to enforce their
views, the whole Church throughout England was of their
opinion. It is to the credit of the Church that she took up this
attitude (the more so inasmuch as ecclesiastical holdings of land
were very large) but not every cleric was prepared to obey these
constitutions. As landowners, and therefore the lords of innu-
merable serfs and their property, many ecclesiastics (especially
corporations, such as abbeys or monasteries) were loth to assent
to a rule which definitely weakened their control over their own
peasants. Thus the monks of Vale Royal in Cheshire, in the
fourteenth century, were still asserting that their bondmen
*' could not make a will, nor dispose of anything, nor have or
give any thing of all their goods, but all their goods shall remain
wholly to the lord except a penny, which is called Masspenny,
and a 'principal' to the parish church".4 The importance, as it
seems to the monks, of maintaining such a claim is clear when
we read the rubric at the head of the document: " These are the
conditions by reason of which the abbot and convent of Vale
Royal say that the people of Over are their bondmen (ndffez)"*
Another document, however, suggests that the monks were pre-
1 Reg. Pontissara, 203.
2 Wilkins, op. ctt. n, 293, 553, ?O5«
3 Rot. ParL n, 1496, 150 a.
* Vale Royal Ledger Book, 121. Principal = mortuary, see p. 144.
* Ibid. 120.