CO
= 00
00
1 Q 1
lifilii
1761 00
CO I
1-
^- ,-.*
THE
PUBLICATIONS
OF THE
J&effcen JJociefg
tts/jI iravTos tt)v sXsvdspiav
VOLUME XIII
FOR THE YEAR 1899
^*ft*n fkttUty
Founded 1887
TO ENCOURAGE THE STUDY AND ADVANCE THE KNOWLEDGE
OF THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH LAW.
{Patrons :
HIS MAJESTY THE KING.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE DUKE OF CORNWALL AND YORK.
president :
THE RIGHT HON. LORD MACNAGHTEN.
Dtce^iPresfoents :
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE STIRLING.
SIR HOWARD ELPHINSTONE, BART.
Council :
Mr. J. T. Atkinson.
Mk. Henry Attlee.
The Hon. Mr. Justice Bruce.
Mr. A. T. Carter.
The Hon. Mr. Justice Channell.
Mr. Chadwyck Healey, K.C.
Mr. F. A. Inderwick, K.C.
The Hon. Mr. Justice Joyce.
Sir H. C. M. Lyte, K.C.B.
Mr. A. Stuart Moore.
Mr. B. Pennington.
Sir F. Pollock, Bart.
Mr. W. C. Kenshaw, K.C.
Mr. T. Cyprian Williams.
The Hon. Mr. Justice Wills.
Xiterarg director:
Professor F. W. Maitland (Downing College, Cambridge).
Buoltors :
Mr. J. W. Clark. Mr. Hubert Hall.
Ibonorarg Secretary :
Mr. B. Fossett Lock (11 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London).
Ibonorars {Treasurer :
Mr. Francis K. Munton (95a Queen Victoria Street, London).
Don. Secretary ano treasurer for tbe Tflntteo States :
Mr Kichard W. Hale (10 Tremont Street, Boston, Mass.).
gtfat $>fcas of i$t fomt
J&efben JSoctefg
SELECT PLEAS OF THE FOEEST
EDITED
FOR THE SELDEN SOCIETY
BY
G. J. TUKNEE, M.A.
of Lincoln's inn, baeeisteb-at-law
03. Q
LONDON
BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY
1901
All riqht$ reserved
#
v,/3
PBEFACE
The text of this volume consists for the most part of extracts from
the eyre rolls of the tenth year of the reign of John and of the latter
half of the reign of Henry III. The rest consists of forest inquisitions,
upon which some of the eyre rolls printed in this volume were based,
some perambulations of the reign of Edward I. and a few other
miscellaneous documents. The MSS, relating to Essex (pp. 69-74)
are in the British Museum ; all the others are in the Public Kecord
Office.
The Introduction is confined to a description of the forest laws
of the thirteenth century ; and it has been found impossible to deal
with every branch of them, even within this limited period. No docu-
ments explaining the rights of common enjoyed by the inhabitants of
the forests are printed in this volume, nor is any account given of them
in the Introduction. Common is a large subject, and in the judgment
of the editor it is not convenient to treat common in forests apart
from common elsewhere.
The Glossary includes words used in documents relating to the
forest administration even though they are not mentioned in the text
of this volume. Numerous examples are printed in it which illustrate
the use and purpose of the hounds used in the middle ages, but an
attempt to show their relation to hounds of modern times is deemed
to lie outside the scope of this work.
The editor has to thank Mr. J. H. Willis for a valuable note on
one of the words mentioned in the Glossary ; Mr. Henry Bradley, of
Exeter College, Oxford, and Mr. Victor Kastncr, professor of the French
vi SELECT PLEAS OF THE FOREST
Language in Owens College, Manchester, for advice about the
French text printed on pp. 125-128 ; Mr. E. B. Turton, of the Inner
Temple, who read the greater part of the text in proof, for many useful
suggestions; Miss K. S. Martin for assistance in collating the text
and for the verification of most of the dates and references in the
book ; and Miss E. M. Samson for compiling the Index of Matters.
The assistance of the Literary Director and the Hon. Secretary has
been invaluable ; and the latter has devoted more time and attention
to this volume than the Society or its editor could have hoped to
secure. Daring the unfortunate illness of the Literary Director,
Mr. C. E. H. Chadwyck Healey very kindly acted in his stead.
The labour of endeavouring to recover from the plea rolls a
branch of law of which little has been known for a long time past
has not been inconsiderable ; and the editor hopes that, if his efforts
have been successful, the delay that has thus been occasioned will
not be regretted by members of the Society. The volume should
have appeared in 1899, and represents that year in the Society's
Publications.
July 1901.
Note — In the king's Chancery of the the spelling of the clerks who enrolled
thirteenth century the letter v was used to forest proceedings differed from that of the
represent the initial letter u, even when the clerks of the Chancery, the exact use of the
initial had a vowel sound. Thus the clerks letters u and v has been followed in the
of the Chancery wrote • vt,' ' vnum ' and text printed, in this volume. As the docu-
' vnde.' In the middle of a word they used ments quoted in the Introduction are short
the letter u, even when it had a con- and are derived from various sources, little
sonantal sound. The clerks of the Ex- information can be obtained from them
chequer and the two Benches used the about the use of the letters u and v. For
letters u and v in the same fashion. Else- this reason the letter u is printed in the
where, however, the letter v was occasion- Latin documents quoted in the Introduc-
ally used in the middle of a word. This tion, even when it is represented in the
was the case in the forest eyre rolls ; and original by the letter v.
as it is of some interest to notice how far
CONTENTS
Introduction . . .
Appendix I. (Charter of the Forest)
Appendix II. .
PAGE
ix-cxxxiv
. cxxxv-cxxxvn
cxxxviii-cxxxix
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS.
I. Northamptonshire, a.d. 1209
II. Rutland, a.d. 1209
III. Salop, a.d. 1209 .
IV. Huntingdonshire, a.d. 1255 .
V. (a) Northamptonshire, a.d. 1255
(b) „ a.d. 1272
VI. (a) Somerset, a.d. 1257 .
(b) „ a.d. 1270 .
VII. Rutland, a.d. 1269 .
VIII. Surrey, a.d. 1270 .
IX. (a) Nottinghamshire, a.d. 1287
(b) „ a.d. 1334
2-6
6-7
8-10
11-26
27-38
38-41
41-42
42-43
43-53
54-61
61-64
65-69
SELECT FOREST INQUISITIONS.
X. Essex, a.d. 1238-1242 69-74
XL Huntingdon, a.d. 1248-1253 74-79
XII. (a) Northamptonshire, a.d. 1246-1250 79-93
(6) „ a.d. 1251-1255 94-116
PERAMBULATIONS.
XIII. Rutland, a.d. 1299 116-117
Windsor, Surrey, a.d. 1300 117-118
Warwick, a.d. 1300 118-119
Nottingham, a.d. 1300 119-121
viii SELECT PLEAS OF THE FOREST
INQUISITIONS.
PAGE
XIV. (a) Forest of Bernwood, a.d. 1266 121-122
(b) Forest of Whittlewood, a.d. 1278 123-124
XV. Somerset, a.d. 1279 . 125-128
PLEAS OF THE WARREN.
XVI. Cambridge, a.d. 1286 . . . 129-131
Glossary 133-153
Index of Matters . 155-159
Index of Persons 161-182
Index of Places 183-192
INTBODUCTION.
THE FORESTS IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.
I. The Forest and the Beasts of the Forest.
II. The Forest Officers.
III. The Lesser Courts of the Forest.
IV. The Forest Eyre.
V. The Regard.
VI. The Clergy.
VII. The Extent of the Forests.
VIII. The Chase, the Park and the Warren.
I.
THE FOREST AND THE BEASTS OF THE FOREST-
In mediaeval England a forest l was a definite tract of land within
which a particular body of law was enforced, having for its object the
preservation of certain animals ferae naturae. Most of the forests were
the property of the Crown, but from time to time the kings alienated
some of them to their subjects. Thus the forest of Pickering 2 in York-
shire and all those in the county of Lancaster were in the fourteenth
century held by the Earls of Lancaster, who enforced 3 the forest laws
over them just as the king did in his own forests. But although the
king or a subject might be seised of a forest, he was not necessarily
seised of all the land which it comprised. Other persons might
1 The word forest is often used in official at forest eyres held in 8 Ed. iii. The pro-
documents of the middle ages in the ceedings there transcribed show conclu-
singular where according to modern usage sively that the full body of the forest laws
the plural would be expected. Thus, the was enforced in the forests of Henry earl
usual expression is 'justice of the forest of Lancaster. The reference to the Cow-
south of Trent ' instead of 'justice of the cher Book is Duchy of Lancaster Miscel-
forests south of Trent.' foneous Book, No. 1.
1 The Great Cowcher Book of the Duchy 3 The privileges which the Earls of
of Lancaster contains transcripts of pleas Lancaster enjoyed in these forests were
of the forests of Lancaster and Pickering exceptional. See p. cxii below.
X INTRODUCTION
possess lands within the bounds of a forest, but were not allowed the
right of hunting or of cutting trees in them at their own will.
The history of the English forests may conveniently be divided
into three periods, of which the first extended from the earliest times
till 1217, the year of the granting of the Charter of the Forest ; the
second from 1217 till 1301, when large tracts were disafforested by
king Edward I. ; and the third from 1301 till the present day.
This volume is concerned chiefly with the second of these periods ; for
until this has been studied in detail it will be impossible, owing to
lack of documents to do more than make conjectures about the earlier
period; and after 1301 the whole forest administration was from
various causes in a state of decay.
In the forests the red deer and the fallow deer were strictly pre-
served, 1 as were also certain other animals ; but to ascertain which
these were will require some consideration. Man wood in his ' Treatise
on the Forest Laws,' which was written 2 at the end of the sixteenth
century, declared that there were five beasts of the forest, the hart,
the hind, the hare, the wild boar and the wolf : in other words, the
red deer, the hare, the wild boar and the wolf, the hart and the
hind being respectively the male and female of the red deer. But
although Man wood did not include the fallow deer in the class of
beasts of the forest, he inserted it in another class with the fox, the
marten and the roe, which he called beasts 3 of the chase. The law,
however, recognised no such distinction between the red deer and the
fallow deer ; for if the words ' beasts of the forest ' have any legal
significance, they must refer to those beasts which are the particular
subject of the forest laws, and as the laws relating to the red deer were
precisely the same as those relating to the fallow deer, both species
ought to be placed in the same class.
Again, Manwood's exclusion of the roe from the beasts of the
forest, although true in his own time, was not true of the period under
our consideration. During the thirteenth century the roe was the
subject of the forest laws in all parts of England. But in the
thirteenth year of the reign of Edward III. the court of the King's
Bench decided 4 that the roe was not a beast of the forest but of the
1 The two principal legal incidents which ransom,
attached to a beast of the forest were that 2 The first edition appeared in 1598, a
if it were found dead an inquisition was second in 1599, and a third, much enlarged,
held upon it by four neighbouring town- in 1615.
ships ; and if a trespasser was convicted of 3 As to the beasts of the chase see p. cxiv
killing it, he was adjudged to prison at below.
the forest eyre, from which he was released 4 Coram Rege Rolls 315, Rot. 106 ;
on payment of a sum of money by way of Patent Roll 197, m. 17.
THE BEASTS OF THE FOREST xi
warren, on the ground that it drove away the other deer. The cir-
cumstances in which this decision was given and its terms deserve
notice. In the forest eyre of 12 Ed. III. Henry de Percy put forward
a claim to have woodwards carrying bows and arrows in his woods
in his manor of Seamer, which was within the forest of Pickering,
and also to have the right of hunting and taking roes, as well within
the covert of the forest as outside. The Earl of Lancaster, to whom
the king had granted the forest and all his rights over it, opposed
the latter of these claims on the ground that the roe was a beast of the
forest, and that the right demanded was against the assize of the
forest. It must here be observed that it was not uncommon for the
king to make grants of the right of hunting hares and foxes in his
forests ; and it may be presumed that the owner of a forest such as
the Earl of Lancaster would do the same. So, too, certain forest
officials claimed the right l of hunting the hare and the fox as ap-
pendant to their offices. There are, however, no instances of a right
of hunting any kind of deer being exercised except by the king
or the owner of a forest. No ordinance is extant which deals with
the subject ; but probably all that the Earl meant when he pleaded
that the right demanded was against the assize of the forest was that
it was without precedent and against policy. The justices in eyre
adjourned the claim for consideration by the Court of King's Bench,
which gave judgment as follows :
Et super hoc uisis et examinatis clameis ac recordo et processu predictis
et habito inde tractatu et diligenti deliberacione cum cancellario thesaurario
iusticiariis et aliis de consilio domini regis, quod licet tempore domini
Edwardi quondam regis Angl' aui domini regis nunc quo tempore predicta
foresta fuit in manu ipsius aui domini regis nunc transgressores, qui
conuicti erant de capcione capriolorum, fecerunt finem ut pro transgressione
uenacionis foreste, prout per recordum predicti Willelmi de Uescy et sociorum
suorum est compertum, uidetur tamen iusticiariis hie et consilio domini regis
quod caprioli sunt bestie de warenna et non de foresta eo quod fugant alias
feras de foresta.
Thus the roe ceased to be a beast of the forest in consequence of
a kind of judicial ordinance, a decision given after consultation with
the great officers of state, based, not upon precedent or analogy, but
upon the broad ground of practical convenience.
The remaining beast of the forest was the wild boar, 2 which was
1 See p. 67 below. it is taken from the Gloucester eyre rolls
2 The following is an example of the of January 12. r >8 :
boar being treated as a beast of the In 'Presentatumestper eosdemet conuictum
Xii INTRODUCTION
already scarce in the thirteenth century. Entries on the forest eyre
rolls show that it belonged to the same class of animals as the red
deer, the fallow deer and the roe ; but such entries occur seldom, and
in many of the rolls of the great eyre, which began in 1256 and ex-
tended over many counties, the wild boar is not mentioned at all. 1
But besides omitting one animal from his list of beasts of the
forest, Manwood wrongly inserted two others. The hare should have
no place in his list of such beasts. If we look through the rolls of the
forests, we find that, except in a few special instances, the hare was
not preserved by the forest laws. It is true that it enjoyed a certain
measure of protection by reason of the assize, 2 which prohibited grey-
hounds and dogs from being brought within the forest, but this pro-
tection was a mere incident of the assize, which was enacted for the
preservation of other animals. Nevertheless the forest rolls show that
the hare was undoubtedly preserved in one forest, in which it was the
subject of the same laws as the deer of different species, and the wild
boar. This forest was the warren 3 of Somerton, within the boundaries
of which the king specially preserved the hare as a beast of the
forest. It is impossible that an animal so common throughout
England could be preserved elsewhere without some mention of it
being found in the forest rolls. Moreover, except in districts of small
area, its preservation would have been an intolerable burden to the
country. For example, one of the forest laws required that, when-
ever a beast of the forest was found dead or wounded an inquest forth-
with should be held upon it by four neighbouring townships ; and
records of such inquests in the warren of Somerton still exist. To
quod in uigilia sancti Uincencii anno classes, those relating to the vert and those
quadragesimo quidam aper inuentus fuit relating to the venison. The word venison
occisus in balliua de Blakeneye, Inquisicio was applied to the beasts of the forest,
inde facta fuit per quatuor uillatas propin- There is evidence apart from the rolls of
quiores, scilicet, Lydeney, Ettelou', Aylbris- forest pleas, that the word included the
ton' et Aluynton' que dicunt quod lohannes wild boar as well as the red and fallow deer
le Uilayn de Blakeneye dictum aprum and the roe. On 29 October 1225 two
occidit ; qui non uenit nee fuit attachiatus hunters were sent into the forest of Dean
quia mortuus ; ideo nichil de eo. Et quia to take twelve boars for the king's use. On
dicte uillate non uenerunt plenarie etc. ; the following day a writ was sent to the
ideo in misericordia.' (Forest Proceedings, constable of St. Briavels with respect to
Treasury of Receipt, No. 28, Roll 4 d,) venison taken by these hunters. (Rotuli
Another example occurs on the rolls of Litterarum Clausarum, vol. ii. p. 84.)
the same eyre ; Again, in some letters close of 1 November
1 Presentatum est per forestarios et uiri- 1226, we have the words, 'decima uenacionis
darios et conuictum quod Beginaldus de porcis.' (Ibid. 157.)
Yolewe et Walterus Wytenot occiderunt ' See pp. 1 and lv below,
unum porcum in foresta de Dene ; super * By the assize of Woodstock, which is
quern capti fuerunt et missi apud Glouc' attributed to the year 1184, people were
ad imprisonandum, et modo non ueniunt.' forbidden to have greyhounds in the forest.
(Ibid. Roll 4.) (Gesta Henrici, Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. clxi.)
Pleas of the forest were divided into two 3 See pp. 41, 42, 43 below.
THE BEASTS OF THE FOREST xiii
make such a law apply to the hare throughout the length and breadth
of the vast forests of the thirteenth century would have been absurd.
Again, Manwood's inclusion of the wolf in the class of beasts of
the forest was entirely unwarranted. The wolf is seldom mentioned
in any of our public records ; and the passages in which we meet with
it do not support his statement. From the thirteenth year l of the
reign of Henry II., a hunter received an annual allowance, charged
upon the sheriff's farm, for hunting wolves in the county of Wor-
cester. In a suit 2 in the king's court at Westminster in 1225 the
tenant pleaded that he held the lands demanded by the service of
catching wolves in the king's forest. By a charter 3 dated 6 March
123f the king granted to John of Lexington the right of hunting and
taking in all the royal forest in the county of Nottingham, except the
demesne warrens, the fox, the wolf, the hare and the cat. By
letters patent 4 dated 14 May 1281, the king directed Peter Corbet to
take and destroy all wolves in the counties of Gloucester, Worcester,
Hereford, Salop and Stafford. In short, the wolf, so far from being
in any way preserved, was treated as a noxious beast which ought to
be exterminated.
Thus it may be confidently asserted that there were in general
four beasts of the forest, and four only, the red deer, the fallow deer,
the roe and the wild boar, the only exception being that in a few
districts the hare was also made the subject of the forest laws.
Occasionally, however, we may meet with passages in official docu-
ments which, if not considered carefully, might suggest that there
were in some cases less than four beasts of the forest. For example,
in a charter B of the year 1212, by which king John granted to the
prior and monks of Lenton a tenth part of all his venison taken in
the counties of Nottingham and Derby, the word uenacio, or venison,
which in the middle ages was applied to the beasts of the forest, is
defined as the red deer, the fallow deer and the wild boar. Here
the omission of the roe might suggest that this animal was not
considered as a beast of the forest in all counties. It is unfortunate
that no documents still exist which relate to the forests in Nottingham
and Derby in the reign of Henry III. or his predecessors. But if the
1 See Publications of the Pipe Roll reference to a wood in Gloucestershire :
Society, vol. xi. p. 64. ' Ac pro eo quod tarn lupi quam malefactores
* Maitland's Bracton's Note Book, vol. foreste frequenter ibidem accedunt et
iii. p. 518. morantur propter densitatem eiusdem sub-
3 Charter Eoll 33, m. 5. bosci.' See also the word ' Lupus ' in the
* Patent Roll 90, m. 20. In some letters Glossary to this volume.
patent dated 23 May 1281 on the same roll * Rotuli Chartarum, p. 180 b.
(m. 10), the following passage occurs with
x i v INTRODUCTION
rolls of the Nottingham forest eyre of 15 Ed. I. be searched, it will
be found that in one case l the roe does appear as a beast of the forest.
But as this is a single case we may infer that the roe was not common
in the county. 2 Its absence from the words denning venison in the
charter of 1212 may therefore be explained by its scarcity, the drafts-
man of the charter probably omitting it because he was under the
impression that it was not found in the counties of Nottingham and
Derby, rather than with the express intention of excluding it.
It must, however, be conceded that although the roe was a beast
of the forest it was not always looked upon with favour even by the
king. Thus in a charter 3 of liberties granted to the Abbey of Abing-
don, king Eichard I. allowed the monks to take all roes which they
could find in a certain district, but not harts and hinds, without
his licence. Other evidence 4 could be adduced to the same effect, but
it is not inconsistent with the roe being a beast of the forest, as to
which the evidence of the eyre rolls is conclusive.
II.
THE FOKEST OFFICERS.
The Justices.
For the purpose of forest administration England was divided into
two provinces, one of which lay to the north, the other to the south
of the river Trent. This division 5 was made in the year 1238, when
1 For. Proc. y Tr. of Rec, No. 127, Roll 1. 1209 free warren of roes. Thus : ' Sciatis
2 Of this we have some further evidence nos dedisse et concessisse et per cartam
from a memorandum on the same rolls nostram confirmasse Willelmo Picot liberam
which states that three hundred and fifty warennam de cheuerellis et leporibus et
harts, hinds, bucks, does, and prickets died cuniculis et fesantis et perdicibus in terra
of murrain in the fourteenth year of Ed- sua de Dudinton' et de Torp' quam longe
ward i., but which says nothing of roes. lateque terra ilia se extendit, ita quod
(Ibidem, Roll 5 in dorso.) nemo in ea capiat cheuerellum uel leporem
3 The grant was by a charter dated uel cuniculos uel fesantos uel perdices sine
29 March 1190, of which an inspeximus is assensu suo et licencia sua super forisfac-
enrolled on the Charter Roll of 10 Ed. iii. turam decern librarum ' (Rotuli Chartarum,
The words of the charter which confer the p. 185).
liberty are as follows : ' Et omnes capre- A grant of warren of roes was, however,
olos, quos ibi inuenire poterunt, accipiant et exceptional.
ceruos et ceruas non accipiant nisi nostra 5 On 22 May 1238, John Biset was
licencia.' (Charter Eoll 131, Ent. 30.) appointed justice of the forest south of the
* Although the roe in the thirteenth Trent. (See Patent Roll 47, m. 6.)
century was a beast of the forest and not a Robert of Ros had been appointed justice
beast of the warren, king John granted to of the forest in the counties of Not-
William Picot by a charter dated 14 April tingham, Derby, Yorkshire, Lancaster,
THE FOREST OFFICERS XV
a justice of the forest was appointed for each province. Before that
date, although there had more than once been two such justices, to
each of whom was assigned a particular group of counties, there was
usually one only, 1 the ' Capitalis Forestarius ' 2 of the Charter.
The business of the justices was ministerial rather than judicial.
They w 7 ere not required by virtue of their office to be present
either in person or by deputy at any of the forest courts ; but
the king as a general rule included them in commissions 3 to justices
to hear and determine forest pleas. At the beginning of the fourteenth
century, although there was no sudden change in their duties, they
ceased to be described in the king's Chancery as justices, and received
instead the less distinguished designation of wardens, which continued
in use until the reign of Kichard II., when the title of justice was
again revived.
One of their principal ministerial duties was to release on bail
prisoners who were detained in custody for offences in the royal
forests. This was no light work : any poacher caught in the act of
killing a deer, or with venison in his possession, was forthwith
sent to prison, from which he could only be released on an order
from the justice of the forest or from the king himself. But besides
this and other special duties of a similar character, they supervised
the whole forest administration, held special inquisitions on the
expediency of proposed royal grants of liberties, and in general
carried out all the executive work relating to the forests.
The justices of the forest occasionally in the thirteenth century
and frequently in the fourteenth century performed their duties by
deputy. In the reign of Edward III. it was the practice for general
inquisitions concerning the state of the forest to be held before the
justices or their deputies, 4 who were styled lieutenants of the justice.
As a rule the deputy seems to have been appointed by the justice ;
but there are cases in which the appointment was made by the king.
Northumberland and Cumberland by letters Southampton, Wiltshire, Berkshire and
patent dated 27 November 1236. (Patent Surrey, and in the bailiwick of Thomas of
Eoll 46, m. 12.) Langley in Oxfordshire. (See Patent Eoll
Brian de l'Isle had been appointed 37, m. 2.)
in October 1229 justice of the forest in the ■ The justices of the forest were some-
counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, times styled 'Protoforestarii.' Mathew
York, Lancaster, Nottingham, Derby, Lin- Paris (Chronica Maiora, Rolls Series, vol.
coin, Leicester, Rutland, Northampton, iv.), for instance, so describes John Biset
Buckingham, Essex, Cambridge, Hunting- (p. 88) ; but he also calls him l summus
don and Oxford except the bailiwick of Anglie forestarius ' (ibid.), and ' summus
Thomas of Langley; and John of Mon- iusticiarius foreste ' (p. 174).
mouth was at the same time appointed * Mentioned in Chapter 16 of the Char-
justice of the forest in the counties of ter.
Stafford, Salop, Worcester, Warwick, Glou- 3 See p. lvii below,
cester, Hereford, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, 4 See, for example, p. xlix below.
a 2
XVI INTRODUCTION
Thus Henry III. appointed l Eoger of Lancaster deputy for Roger of
Leyburn, the justice of the forest north of the Trent, by letters patent
dated the 25th October 1265, during the pleasure of the king and
Roger of Leyburn himself.
The justices 2 were usually men of considerable political standing.
John 3 fitz -Geoffrey, Robert Passelewe and Robert Walerand, for
example, all left their mark on English history, independently of
their administration of forest business. By the end of the fourteenth
century the office evidently became a sinecure, being then usually
held by a nobleman of high rank. But though a sinecure, the
income attached to it was certainly not derived solely from an official
salary, for from the close of the thirteenth century the justices of the
forest south of the Trent received from the king an annual payment 4
of a hundred pounds only ; and the salary of the justices of the forest
north of the Trent was only two- thirds of that sum.
The Wardens.
Next in authority to the justices were the wardens of the forest.
They were variously described in official documents, and seldom
expressly as wardens ; but the word may conveniently be used to
avoid ambiguity. Usually a warden had the custody of a single
forest, but in some cases he had the charge of a group of forests
lying apart from one another. Thus in the year 1300 Sabine 5
1 Eoger of Leyburn was appointed jus- to him as to a justice of the forest. He is
tice of the forest north of the Trent by the only justice who is described as steward
letters patent dated 25 October 1265. (See in letters patent of appointment. In other
Patent Eoll 82, m. 3.) On the same day documents he is described as 'justice of the
Eoger of Lancaster was appointed his forest.'
deputy. (See same roll, m. 2.) In the 4 Eoger l'Estrange, who was appointed
letters patent dated 1 August 1270 by which justice of the forest south of the Trent by
Geoffrey de Neville was appointed justice letters patent dated 21 October 1283 (see
of the forest north of the Trent, Eoger of Patent Eoll, 101 m. 5), received an annual
Lancaster is described as steward of the fee of 100Z. (See Liberate Eolls 542, 543,
forest (see Fine Eoll 67, m. 5). 544 and 545.)
2 A complete list of justices of the Geoffrey de Neville, who was appointed
forest south of the Trent, with the dates of justice of the forest north of the Trent by
the letters patent appointing them, will be letters patent dated 1 August 1270 (see
published in one of the forthcoming Fine Eoll 67, m. 5), received an annual fee
numbers of the English Historical Review. of one hundred marks. (See Liberate Eoll,
3 The appointments of John fitz- 537, m. 3.)
Geoffrey and Eobert Passelewe are not The letters patent appointing a justice
recorded upon the Patent Eolls. Eobert usually state that he is to take the same
Walerand was appointed ' steward ' of the salary as his predecessors in the office,
king's forest south of the Trent by letters 5 See For. Proc, Ancient Chancery, No.
patent dated 1 September 1256. (See 102, m. 9. Her five forests were Mendip,
Patent Eoll 67, m. 3.) Nevertheless the Selwood, North Pedderton, Nerroche and
same letters patent direct the ministers of Exmore.
the forest to be intendent and respondent
THE FOREST OFFICERS xvii
Pecche was the warden of five forests, all situate in different parts of
the county of Somerset. Similarly all the forests in the counties of
Northampton, Huntingdon, Oxford and Buckingham were grouped
together and subject to a common warden, who was styled the
warden or steward of the forests between the bridges of Stamford
and Oxford. These forests, it is true, were in places contiguous to
one another ; but each of them had its own name and for many
purposes was treated as a distinct forest bailiwick.
There were two classes of wardens : the one appointed by letters
patent under the great seal, holding office during the king's pleasure ;
the other hereditary wardens. When the king appointed a warden by
letters patent, he usually appointed him at the same time the warden
of a particular castle within the forest. Thus the warden of the castle
of Eockingham and the warden of the forests between the bridges of
Stamford and Oxford were usually the same person, who was appointed
to both offices by the same letters patent.
The hereditary wardens were liable to lose their offices for mis-
conduct. Eobert of Everingham, for example, was removed x from his
office in the year 1287 as a punishment for committing various grave
offences, including the appropriation of the king's deer to his own
use. On the other hand, Peter de Neville, in spite of the shameful
conduct of which he was convicted 2 in the forest eyre of the year 1269,
remained in possession 3 of his office. In general, as might have been
expected, there was more irregularity and oppression in the forests
where there was an hereditary warden than in those where the
wardens held office during the king's pleasure.
Misleading titles were often applied to the wardens, such as
steward, bailiff, or chief forester. In letters patent the king is
usually expressed to have granted the wardenship of a forest to the
person appointed, who in consequence may appropriately be described
as a warden. On the other hand, the wardens are often described on
the forest eyre rolls as ' stewards.' Thus John Mansel, to whom the
king granted the wardenship 4 of the forests between the bridges of
1 See p. 67 below. for trespasses in Rutland forest. (See
2 See pp. 44 to 53 below. Close Roll 95, m. 10.) On Thursday 26
3 By letters close dated 17 November April 1274 sentence of outlawry was pro-
1269, the king directed the justice of the mulgated against him, for an offence com-
forest to deliver to Peter de Neville his mitted on 7 October 1273. (See Inq. post
bailiwick of Rutland which had been taken mortem, 3 Ed. i., No. 64.)
into the king's hand, the said Peter having On 13 September 1300, the king granted
found sureties to answer for his trespass. the custody of the forest of Rutland to
(See Close Roll 91, m. 12.) It is probable Theobald, the son of Peter de Neville,
that he committed other offences in the (See Patent Roll 119, m. 7.)
forest, for on 1 February 127}, an order * Sec note 5, p. 13 below,
was sent to admit him to bail to answer
xviii INTRODUCTION
Stamford and Oxford by letters patent dated 22 October 1252, was de-
scribed ' on the eyre rolls of 1255 as ' chief steward of the forest ' ; and
other wardens are elsewhere described as ' stewards ' without even the
addition of the word ' chief.' TTnfortunately, the title ' steward,' which,
if it had been applied solely to wardens, could have caused no
ambiguity, was often applied to persons who were not wardens. Thus
Geoffrey of Childwick 2 and Geoffrey de Mortemer 3 are respectively
described on the Huntingdon eyre rolls as stewards of the forest; and
William of Northampton 4 is similarly described in the Northampton
eyre rolls of the same year. Now it is quite certain that none of these
people were wardens of the forest, because a complete series of the
wardens of this period can be compiled from the patent rolls which
record the letters patent by which they were appointed. If, however,
Geoffrey of Childwick and the other persons styled stewards were not
wardens, they must have been deputy wardens called stewards for
want of a better name. A few years later the word lieutenant, ' locum
tenens,' came into use to describe their position. Adam of Nailford,
for example, acted as deputy for Elias de Hauville, 5 who was warden
of the forests between the bridges of Stamford and Oxford in the year
1292. In an inquisition 6 held in Eockingham forest on the 9th March
1294 Adam is described in one place as ' subsenescallus ' or * sub-
steward,' and in another as ' locum tenens Elye de Hauuile.'
It was possible for a warden to assign his office, or a portion of
his bailiwick, with the consent of the king. Thus Eichard de Mun-
fiquet, or de Munfichet, 7 granted the wardenship of the forest of
Essex to Gilbert of Clare in the year 1267 with the king's consent.
Again in 126f Warin of Bassingbourn, who was then warden 8 of the
forests between the bridges of Stamford and Oxford, granted the forest
of Weybridge, which was part of his bailiwick, to Eobert le Loup 9 for
life, and the king on 20 February 126f confirmed the grant by his
letters patent. On 5 June 1275 Edward I. granted this then recently
created bailiwick of the forest of Weybridge, which had become
vacant, to a certain John of Er an sham 10 for his life without the ex-
press consent of the warden of the forest between the two bridges ; and
1 See p. 13 below. March, 1292. (See Patent Koll 109, m. 17.)
2 See p. 14, note 8, below. 6 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, 82, m. 5.
3 See p. 22, note 4, below. 7 Charter Eoll 61, m. 5.
4 See p. 31, note 6, below. 8 See note 4, p. 40 below.
5 Elias de Hauville was appointed 9 See Patent Eoll 84, m. 26.
warden of the castle of Eockingham and of 10 John of Fransham was appointed to
the forests between the bridges of Stamford the office by letters patent dated 5 June
and Oxford by letters patent dated 10 1275. (See Patent Eoll 93, m. 21.)
THE FOREST OFFICERS XIX
on the death of John of Fransham he granted it to John Pikard l for
life without any such consent.
The wardens were the executive officers of the king in his forests.
"Writs relating to the administration of forest business, as well as to
the delivery of presents of venison and wood, were, in general, ad-
dressed to them. They also attended the various courts of the forest.
It does not appear, however, that their presence at any of them was
necessary.
The Verderers.
The wardens were not the only officers of the forest in direct
relation with the Crown. In all the forests, except those in the
county palatine of Cheshire, there were officers called verderers 2 who
were responsible to the king and not to the wardens. Like coroners,
verderers were elected in the county court, the elections being made
upon the receipt by the sheriff of a writ 3 called ' de uiridario eligendo.'
When elected they held office for life unless they were removed by the
Crown : an event which frequently happened in the fourteenth,
but not often in the thirteenth century./ The Close Eolls of the reign
of Edward III. supply numerous examples of verderers being removed
from their office, sometimes because they were incapacitated by age or
illness, and at others because they were insufficiently qualified. The
qualification was the possession of land within the forest, but it is
probable that the particular quantity of land was not fixed, but lay
in the discretion of the Crown. As a rule the verderers were either
knights or persons possessed of considerable landed property. They
received no salary, and no perquisites were attached to their office ;
1 John Pikard was appointed by letters nostre de G. in comitatu predicto adeo
patent dated 15 May 1276. (See Patent languidus et senio contractus existit quod
Koll 94, m. 23.) ad ea que ad officium uiridariorum in
2 Verderers are seldom mentioned in eadem foresta pertinent exercendum labor-
documents of the early years of the reign are non potest ut accepimus, tibi precipimus
of John. The first instance of the word quod si ita est, tunc in pleno comitatu tuo
1 uiridarius ' in the charter rolls is in a de assensu eiusdem comitatus loco predicti
charter dated 21 January 121|. (Rotuli N. eligi facias unura alium uiridarium, qui
Chartarum, p. 204.) If the word occurs at prestito sacramento prout moris est extunc
all in the charters or on the pipe rolls of the ea faciat et conseruet que ad officium uiri-
reign of Kich. i., it must be very rarely. It darii pertinent in foresta predicta. Et talem
will be noticed that they are mentioned in eum eligi facias qui melius sciat et possit
the rolls of the eyre of 10 John (see pp. 3, officio illi intendere. Et nomen eius nobis
4, 7, 8), and in the Charter of the Forest, scire facias. Teste rege etc.' (Registrum
1217, they are evidently an integral part of Omnium Brevium, 1595, p. 177 v°.)
the forest hierarchy. In the thirteenth century the king some-
3 The following is the form of the writ times directed the warden of a forest to
sent to the sheriff ordering an election : substitute a verderer for one discharged,
'Rex uicecomiti Lincoln' etc. Quia N. instead of d irecting the sheriff to cause a new
de H. unus uiridariorum nostrorum foreste one to be elected. (See Close Roll 05, m. 8).
XX INTRODUCTION
but some letters close l dated 1222, and addressed to the sheriff of
Wiltshire show that by custom they were not liable to be put on
assizes, recognitions and juries. Although the number of verderers
in each forest varied, it was usually four ; sometimes, however, a
forest was divided into several bailiwicks, in each of which there were
four verderers. Thus, there were four in each of the three bailiwicks in
the forest 2 of Northumberland, and a similar arrangement prevailed
in the forest 3 of Cumberland, which also comprised three bailiwicks.
On the other hand, in Sherwood 4 forest the number of verderers was
six. Finally, a few forests, among which may be noticed the forest of
Eutland 5 and the warren of Somerton, 6 were considered too small to
need more than two verderers.
The chief work in which the verderers were engaged was that of
attending the forest courts. 7
The Foresters.
All the ordinary work of the forests, such as watching for tres-
passers, pursuing them, attaching or arresting them — in short, all the
work of a modern gamekeeper — was performed by a group of officers
called foresters, whose numbers varied in different forests. In the
Eutland forest eyre of 1269, it was proved that Peter de Neville,
the warden, had under him many foresters with pages under them, to
the damage and overburdening of the whole country. Accordingly,
the justices directed that there should in future be no more than
five walking foresters, one riding forester and a page, the number
that of old there was wont to be. These foresters were not only
1 The following is the text of the letters Northumberland. One lay to the south of
close : ' Bex uicecomiti Wiltes' salutem. the river Coquet, another between the rivers
Precipimus tibi quod non ponas uiridarios Coquet and Alne, and the third to the north
nostros de foresta nostra de Braden' in of the river Alne. The same rolls show
assisis recognicionibus uel iuratis quia se- that there were twelve verderers in the
cundum consuetudinem terre nostre poni whole forest. (See For. Proc, Tr. of Bee,
non debent in assisis recognicionibus uel No. 125.)
iuratis.' (Rot. Litt. Claus. i. p. 486.) 3 On the rolls of the eyre held at
It seems from the following entry on the Cumberland in 13 Ed. i. thirty-six regarders
Close Eoll of 32 Hen. iii., that the exemp- are mentioned ; of whom twelve made a
tion did not extend to grand assizes : regard in one bailiwick, and twelve in an-
* Mandatum est uicecomiti Berkes' quod non other. No regard made by the regarders
ponat G. P. et B. F. in aliquibus assisis of the third bailiwick is recorded on these
preterquam in magnis assisis, si opus fuerit, eyre rolls. (For Proc., Tr. of Bee, No. 5.)
quamdiu iidem G. et B. fuerint uiridarii The same rolls show that there were twelve
regis in foresta regis de S.' (Close Boll verderers in the whole forest.
62, m. 8.) 4 See p. 61 below.
2 From the rolls of an eyre held at New- s See p. 43 below,
castle on 22 April 1286, it appears that 6 See pp. 41, 42 below,
there were three bailiwicks in the forest of r See pp. xxvii to 1 below.
THE FOREST OFFICERS xxi
appointed by the wardens ; they were also dependent upon them
for their remuneration, for the Crown paid them no salaries.
The wardenship of every forest which was held hereditarily carried
with it, either by prescription or by express grant, certain rights x
and privileges. Peter de Neville, for instance, was entitled 2 to due
chiminage, lawing of dogs in places where it was due, and dead and
dry wood which could be collected by the hand alone without any iron
instrument in the demesne woods of the king. Robert of Everingham,
the warden of Sherwood, enjoyed 3 among other things the right to
have the bark and the crops of oaks which the king had given by his
writ ; the right to have after-pannage as often as it occurred, and the
privilege of holding his ten knights' fees of the king in chief exonerated
from service on account of his custody of the forest, and in return for
finding his foresters at his own cost. But the wardens, although
they enjoyed rights and privileges such as these, in order that they
might maintain foresters under them, were so far from paying them
anything that they themselves were actually paid by the foresters for
allowing them to exercise their office. The foresters who thus paid
an annual farm for their offices took their own remuneration from
the inhabitants of the forests, by means of various acts of extortion 4
which they claimed as customary rights. Perhaps no better illustra-
tion of the oppression to which this system of farming the office of
forester led could be found than the list of grievances 5 which the men
1 These rights and privileges varied in quolibet porco unum obolum.' (Close Roll
different forests. Those which the warden 138, m. 25.)
of Sherwood enjoyed are set out in the in- The warden of the forest of Galtres is in
quisition printed on pp. 66, 67 below. From this passage called the steward of the forest,
some letters close dated 2 September, 1315, and the person who is described in it as
we have the rights of the warden or steward the warden of the forest is the justice of
of Galtres in Yorkshire They are as follows : the forest north of the Trent.
• [Compertum est] quod senescalli dicte 2 See p. 46 below,
foreste de Galtres, qui pro tempore 3 See pp. 66, 67 below,
fuerunt, tarn temporibus progenitorum 4 Sometimes the foresters instead of
nostrorum quam nostro solebant ponere et extorting money from the inhabitants,
deponere forestarios in foresta predicta pro wasted the king's woods. Thus on the rolls
uoluntate sua; et quod habere solebant de of the Stafford eyre of September 1271 we
omnibus quercubus per dictos progenitores have the following entry :
nostros aut nos datis tannam et ramos ; ■ Presentatum est ... . quod forestarii illi
et puturam suam in foresta predicta ; et sepissime amouentur et alii in loco eorum
eciam duas landas que uocantur Hanter- ponuntur per senescallum qui capit ab
wayth' et Ercedekneclos reddendo inde unoquoque ad introitum suum magnam
annuatim dictis progenitcribus nostris et summam pecunie ; et preter hoc certam
nobis quinque solidos per manus custodis summam certis terminis per annum, ex-
eiusdem foreste ; et insuper quod ad ofhcium cepto fine facto ab unoquoque pro balliua
senescalli ibidem pertinet habere chemi- sua tenenda nee habent forestarii unde hoc
nagium et caplicium, reddendo inde nobis facere nisi de boscis balliuarum suarum.'
decern solidos per annum per manus (For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 184, Roll
custodis predicti ; efc quod habere solebant 9 d.)
proficuum porcorum intrancium coopertam * See pp. 125 to 128 below,
foreste predicte mense uetito, uidelicet, de
xxii INTRODUCTION
of Somerset presented at an inquisition held in the year 1277. They
complained of the chief forester or warden appointing more foresters
than were necessary for looking after the forest, and of his taking from
them money for appointing them ; of the foresters coming in the
month of August to collect corn from the inhabitants, of their mak-
ing ale with the corn, which they then compelled the inhabitants to
buy ; of their collecting from them lambs and young pigs ; and of their
cutting down trees for fuel, and of taking chiminage where it was not
due. It can hardly be doubted that extortion such as this was more
resented by the masses of the people than the restrictions on hunting
and woodcutting which constituted the main body of the forest laws.
But even if the grievances of the men of Somerset were exceptional,
they were the same in kind as those which people suffered in all
the counties of England where the king had forests. Probably the
best known article of the Charter of the Forest was the one which
provided :
Nullus forestarius uel bedellus de cetero faciat scotale uel colligat garbas
uel auenam uel bladum aliud uel agnos uel porcellos nee aliquam collectam
faciant ; et per uisum et sacramentum duodecim reguardorum quando facient
reguardum, tot forestarii ponantur ad forestas custodiendas quod ad illas
custodiendas racionabiliter uiderint sufficere.
But it was a difficult article to enforce ; and there was no better
safeguard against the evils which it was intended to remove than an
extensive disafforestment of the forests.
So when the commons demanded that the perambulations of the
forest should be made in accordance with the provisions of the Charter
of the Forest, their demand was largely one for a curtailment of
the districts over which extortion could be practised.
There were two kinds of foresters : those on horseback, or riding
foresters, and those on foot, or walking foresters. The former were,
of course, more burdensome to the inhabitants of the forests than
the latter, but there was no rule as to how many foresters of each
kind there should be in a forest. If, however, it appeared to the
justices in eyre that there were too many, they gave directions, l as in
the case of Peter de Neville, that the number should be reduced.
Some of the foresters also had grooms or pages under them, who
accompanied them when they were keeping watch over the forest.
They enjoyed no authority apart from their masters, to whom they
were related much as a * bulldog ' is to a proctor in a university town.
1 See p. 52 below.
THE FOREST OFFICERS xxiii
The Foresters in Fee.
In most of the larger forests there were, in addition to the wardens,
verderers and ordinary foresters, certain other officers, who were
styled foresters in fee. It is impossible to describe even in general
terms the conditions under which they held office, varying as those
conditions did in different forests. All that the words ' forester in
fee ' necessarily connoted was a forester holding his office hereditarily.
Thus Eobert of Everingham, the hereditary warden of Sherwood
Forest, is described l on the eyre rolls of 15 Ed. I., as a forester in
fee. But when applied to him or to any other hereditary warden the
words are embarrassing, as they were usually applied to hereditary
foresters subordinate to a warden, and it is convenient to have a name
for such officials.
Let us consider some examples. In the forest of Dean 2 there
were eight or nine foresters in fee, each concerned with a particular
district or bailiwick to the exclusion of his fellows, but all subordinate
to the constable of St. Briavells, who was warden of the forest. As
a body of officials, whose collective authority extended over the whole 3
forest, outnumbering the verderers, and independent of the warden,
they must have possessed great influence in the management of
forest business. In many of the forests there was no such body;
there was, for example, none in Butland. On the other hand, in
certain forests there were foresters in fee who did not, as in the
forest of Dean, constitute a special class, although they individually
exercised a greater authority by reason of the magnitude of their
bailiwicks. In the vast forest or group of forests between the bridges
of Stamford and Oxford there were several foresters in fee. One had
for his bailiwick the forest of Bernwood, another the forest of Which-
wood. These were not the only forests between the two bridges ; there
were besides the forests of Rockingham, Cliffe, Salcey, Whittlewood
and Huntingdon, in some of which there were no foresters in fee.
Thus the foresters in fee in Bernwood and Whichwood, instead of
having a coordinate authority which extended over a whole forest, were
officials each of whom had the charge of one of a group of seven forests.
There is a question which forces itself upon our notice at this
point, and must be considered. By whom were the foresters in fee
1 See p. 61 below. (For. Proc, Anc. Chanc, No. 102.)
2 In the perambulation of the forest of 8 This appears to be the case from a brief
Dean made in the year 1300, nine foresters investigation of the history of the forest of
in fee and four verderers are mentioned. Dean.
XXIV
INTRODUCTION
originally enfeoffed ? Was it by the king or by the wardens of the
forest ? The ' Red Book of the Exchequer ' shows that there were
men who held lands of the Crown in the time of king John by the
service of guarding the forest. Sometimes, too, it could be shown
that their ancestors were holding the same lands by the same service
early in the twelfth century. Many of them, no doubt, were
subordinate to no one but the king; they were, in fact, rather
hereditary wardens than foresters in fee, according to the usage of
those words which is adopted for convenience in this book ; others,
however, were undoubtedly foresters in fee, and subordinate to a
warden. Perhaps in some cases they were enfeoffed of their baili-
wicks by the king, and a warden was afterwards placed above
them with the custody of some royal castle in the neighbourhood.
The king would grant certain of the rights which he had over the
forest, and the rents paid to him by the foresters in fee, to a bailiff
or warden to hold at an annual rent. But these are matters on which
generalisation is dangerous. Until we have more documents relat-
ing to the forests printed and indexed, we can say little of many
aspects of the early history of any of the forests ; still less can we
speak with any confidence of the varying relation which obtained
between a warden and a forester l in fee.
The Woodwards.
The king's demesnes, it must be remembered, formed but a portion
of the lands within his forests. The residue included extensive
woods, over which the owners enjoyed most of the ordinary rights
of property. In fact, the only limitation upon their rights may be
expressed briefly by saying that they could do nothing by which the
woods would cease to afford shelter for the beasts of the forest. In
precise language, they could not make ' essart 2 purpresture or waste '
without the king's licence. Now in order to protect their rights
they, like other landowners outside the forest, required the assistance
of an official bearing a close resemblance to a royal forester. His
principal duty was to attach trespassers in their woods and compel
them to make answer for their offences. But these officials were
made by the forest laws to serve two masters. They were compelled
to protect the king's venison as well as their masters' woods. Every
1 Like the verderers, the foresters in fee 94.)
were not liable to be put in juries and 2 These words are explained on pp. lxxviii,
assizes. (See Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. pp. 59, lxxx and lxxxiii below.
THE FOREST OFFICERS XXV
owner of a wood within a forest was obliged to have a forester, which,
far from being a hardship, was a convenience ;■ but the forester l was
bound to swear fealty to the king and his venison, and the vert. If
the owner of such a wood had no forester, or if he had a forester
who had not taken the necessary oath, the wood was seised into the
King's hands. The forester was called a woodward. His lord was
bound to present him to the chief justice of the forest, before whom,
and none other, he was sworn, and at every eyre of the forest he was
bound to present him before the justices in eyre, under pain of his
wood being taken into the king's hands.
A woodward, then, was nothing more than a private forester,
sworn to protect the king's interests. If a trespass was committed in
his wood and was discovered for the first time by the royal forester,
the wood was taken into the king's hands. Of this a good example
occurred in the Buckinghamshire eyre of 1255, which is enrolled 2 as
follows :
Presentatum est per forestarios et uiridarios et conuictum quod in
uigilia sancti Edmundi martiris anno etc. tricesimo quinto circa horam
nonam duo mastini domini S. de P. scilicet unus fuscus et unus niger
inuenti fuerunt in bosco dicti S. apud H. dilacerantes unum brokettum
uulneratum in dextera hanchia. Et quia dicta transgressio primo inuenta
fuit per forestarium domini regis et non per wudewardum ipsius S., ideo
boscus capiatur in manu domini regis.
The Rangers.
Towards the end of the fourteenth century, we meet a new officer,
who was styled a ranger. His duties were considered by Manwood
to relate to the purlieus or districts which were disafforested in the
great disafforestment of the year 1301. It is, however, impossible to
explain his duties and status, or the laws which prevailed in the
forest purlieus, without an investigation of the history of the forests
in the fourteenth century, which lies outside the scope of the present
work. It is sufficient to remark that the rangers are seldom men-
tioned 3 in documents of the reign of Edward III. ; that they may be
1 A woodward was not entitled to carry tarn de uiridi quam de uenacione.' (See
bows and arrows in the forest, but only an Coram Rege Rolls 315, Rot. 106.)
axe. The following is a recital in the ■ For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 2, Roll 1.
record of the case mentioned on p. xi above : 3 In some letters patent dated 24 October
' 'juilibet wodewardus per assisam foreste 1371 Henry Dolyng is described as ranger
debeat portare in foresta hachettum et non of the New Forest, and in similar letters of
arcum et sagittas pro sinistra suspiccione two days later Thomas of Croydon is de-
oenacionis deponenda ad presentandum scribed as ranger of Waltham (Patent Roll
XXvi INTRODUCTION
considered as a particular kind of foresters rather than as a specially
created class of officers ; and that we meet with them only when the
whole system of forest administration was in a state of dissolution.
Kegarders.
The duties of the officers known as regarders are discussed on a
subsequent page under the general heading ' The Eegard.'
The Agisters.
The only remaining forest officers were the agisters, of whom there
were usually four in each forest. They were chiefly concerned with
the collection of money for the agistment of cattle and pigs in the king's
demesne woods and lawns. Beasts of the plough and sheep were allowed
to pasture over the lawns and open spaces in the forests, subject to
customary restrictions, but they were allowed in none of the forests
during the fortnights before and after Midsummer day respectively,
a period which was known as the Fence Month or in Latin Mensis
Uetitus. They were excluded because the deer were supposed to
be fawning during this season. Pigs were agisted in the king's
demesne woods from 14 September till about 11 November in every
year, and a few pence were paid for each pig agisted, the number
varying in different forests. The agisters counted the pigs as they
entered the forest, and collected the pence as the pigs came out. The
wardens seem to have appointed them, but there is at least one case l
recorded of an agister being elected in the county court in the same
way as a verderer.
287, m. 19). There are probably many tudme nisi unum locum tenentem per totam
earlier instances of the use of the word on forestam predictam et unum clericum atque
the Patent Kolls of Ed. iii. Eangers are not unum rangiatorem inqualibet foresta, modo
mentioned as officers attending the forest habet plures.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, 285,
inquisitions of the fourteenth century. In Boll 4.) And in another inquisition, held
one inquisition held in Braden forest in 12 in Brokenhurst in 40 Ed. iii., it was found :
Ed. iii. a man is described as ' nuper rengi- ' quod ubi forestarii equites et due rangia-
arius eiusdem foreste ' (For. Proc, Tr. of tores dicte foreste solebant habere unum
Bee, No. 281, Boll 4 in dorso); in an in- hominem in foresta predicta, dicti forestarii
quisition concerning Whittlewood forest, nunc habent tres homines ad nocumentum
held in 48 Ed. iii., the following passage patrie ad leuandum dicta amerciamenta
occurs : ' Item dicunt quod Almaricus de contra assisam foreste.' (For. Proc, Tr.
sancto Amando senescallus foreste inter of Bee, No. 310.)
pontes Oxon' et Staunford', qui non de iure ' Close Roll 112, m. 12.
habere deberet neque de antiqua consue-
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST XXvii
III.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST.
Manwood's Arrangement and the Swainmote.
When Manwood wrote his treatise on the ■ Forest Lawes,' traditions
of them may have survived still, although, as a body, they had
fallen long since into desuetude. Various rights and privileges
of which we in the nineteenth century can learn little may have been
enforced in his day, but they could not have contributed much towards
the elucidation of the broad outlines of our subject. In the main his
knowledge of the forest laws, like ours, was derived from official
records, and not from direct experience of their application. For this
reason we ought to attach little weight to his assertions where they
are deductions only from documents to which we also have access. If
the Charter of the Forest had been issued for the first time in
the reign of Elizabeth, Manwood's opinion on its construction might
have been interesting and even valuable. But issued as it was in
the reign of Henry III., we should, if we desire to ascertain its
effect, use the methods of construction of the thirteenth century. So,
too, we should consider how far the political events and conditions of
that time permitted the strict observance of its provisions. And
above all we should remember that if we have evidence of the way in
which it was observed, its intended construction is interesting to the
historian so far only as it throws light upon conditions which pre-
vailed before its issue.
Manwood's account of the forest courts needs revision. After
studying the Charter of the Forest he arrived at the conclusion that it
provided for certain judicial sessions at particular times. From this
he assumed that those sessions were actually held. ' First,' he says, 1
* it is to be understood that there be three principal and chief courts
usually kept for matters of the forest, that is to say, the court of
attachments, the court of swanimotes, 2 and the high court 3 of the Lord
1 Forest Lawes, ed. 1615, chapter xxi. p. on the Carte Antique Roll E E. or 37.
187 v°. a The court which Manwood described
2 The letter i in the word swanimote pro- as the Court of Justice seat was derived
bably represents the syllable ge in ' gemote.' from the court of the justices in eyre for
Swanimotes are seldom mentioned in docu- pleas of the forest which is described on
ments earlier in date than the Charter of pp. 1 to lxxv below. The phrase ' justice
the Forest. One of the earliest instances seat ' was not in use in the thirteenth cen-
of its use is in the charter of 6 December tury.
1189 to the monks of Peterborough recorded
xxviii INTRODUCTION
Justice in eyre of the Forest, commonly called the justice seat.' In
modern English, when we speak of a court l we usually mean a judicial
session either for the purpose of deciding some issue in fact or in
law, or for the purpose of conducting some preliminary inquiry, such
as a coroner's inquest, upon which further judicial proceedings may
take place. On the other hand, in the middle ages, or at any rate in
the thirteenth century, the Latin word ■ curia ' which represented the
word ' court ' was seldom required for this purpose. The county
court was called ■ comitatus ' or the county ; the hundred court
1 hundredum ' or the hundred ; and similarly the court which Man wood
called the court of attachments was called simply ' attachiamentum '
or the attachment. Manwood was probably aware of this usage, so
when he read in the Charter of the Forest that ' suanimota ' or
swanimotes were to be held three times a year only, he thought that
the word ' suanimota ' meant a court sitting for the administration of
some particular branch of the forest law. The words of the Charter
were as follows :
Nullum suanimotum de cetero teneatur in regno nostro nisi ter in anno ;
uidelicet in principio quindecim dierum ante festum sancti Michaelis, quando
agistatores conueniunt ad agistandum dominicos boscos nostros ; et circa
festum sancti Martini quando agistatores nostri debent recipere pannagium
nostrum ; et ad ista duo suanimota conueniant forestarii, uiridarii, et agista-
tores et nullus alius per districcionem ; et tercium suanimotum teneatur in
inicio quindecim dierum ante festum sancti Iohannis Baptiste, pro feonacione
bestiarum nostrarum ; et ad istud suanimotum tenendum conueniant
forestarii et uiridarii et nulli alii per districcionem. Et preterea singulis
quadraginta diebus per totum annum conuenient uiridarii et forestarii ad
uidendum attachiamenta de foresta, tarn de uiridi, quam de uenacione, per
presentacionem ipsorum forestariorum, et coram ipsis attachiatis. Predicta
autem suanimota non teneantur nisi in comitatibus in quibus teneri
consueuerunt.
It may well be argued that the word ' suanimotum ' was intended
to apply to a court with some particular jurisdiction ; but on the other
hand such an interpretation is not necessary. The article is quite
1 It was used rather with reference to the the word ' curia ' was used to describe both
person entitled to the profits of judicial the judicial session and also the persons
proceedings than to their subject matter or who made presentments, even in the reign
the persons before whom they were held. of Hen. iii. As to this see Selden Society
Fines were made ' in the court of the lord Publications, vol. i. Again, in an ordin-
king' but ' before his justices.' Expressions ance of 11 October 1234 relating to the
such as ' the court of the bench ' were not in Sheriff's Tourn the words ' curie magnatum
official use in the thirteenth century. The Anglie ' occur (see Statutes of the Realm, i.
word ' bench ' was sufficient to describe the 118; Annates Monastici, Dunstaplia, Rolls
court. On the other hand, in manor courts Series, vol. iii. p. 139).
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xxix
intelligible if we translate ' suanimotum ' by the words ' forest
assembly,' which do not suggest any particular jurisdiction.
But, not content with asserting that there was a distinct court
called the court of swanimote which sat at regular intervals, Manwood
went so far as to describe x its jurisdiction. He says :
The court of attachments cannot determine any offence or trespass of the
forest, if the value of the same trespass be above the value of four pence, but
that the same offence and trespass, if the value be more than four pence
must be by the said verderers inrolled in their roll and so to be sent from
thence to the swanimote to have an orderly trial of the same there according
to the laws of the forest.
On another page 2 he says :
It is to be understood that the court of swanimote is a court of the forest,
which should be holden three times in the year as is aforesaid for to enquire
of vert and venison and other trespasses that are done within the forest ; and
there all the trespasses of the forest shall be enquired of and presented.
These extracts show that he thought that the swanimote was a
court held three times a year for the purpose of trying certain
offences adjourned from the court of attachments and of inquiring
into and receiving presentments of all trespasses and offences against
the forest laws. His notion that this court was held three times
a year was taken from the Charter ; his description of its juris-
diction was derived from other sources which will be discussed
presently.
The three days in every year on which Manwood thought that
the Charter authorised the holding of a court of swanimote were
1 at the beginning of the fifteen days before the feast of St. Michael,
when the agisters assemble to agist our demesne woods ' ; and ' about
the feast of St. Martin, when our agisters ought to receive our
pannage ' ; and * at the beginning of the fifteen days before the feast
of St. John the Baptist, for the fawning of our beasts.' If courts of
swanimote, having the jurisdiction and powers which Manwood
ascribed to them, were to be held three times a year only, the days
appointed for them were strangely chosen. Is it to be supposed that
offences against the forest laws were committed most frequently at
the season of pannage and when the king's deer were fawning ? If
such a court was required at regular intervals, should we not expect
to find one during the winter months, when trespassers would go by
night into the woods to take logs for fuel, timber for shelter and
• Forest Laives, ed. 1615, chapter xxi. p. 187 v". 2 p. 225 v° (chapter xxiii.).
XXX INTRODUCTION
venison for sustenance. It is easier to suppose that the swanimotes
were authorised to enable the forest officers to superintend the
depasturing of pigs in the king's woods in the autumn and the
clearance of the forest of cattle and sheep while the deer were fawning
in the summer. The subjects of agistment, pannage and fawning
would hardly be mentioned after the dates of these assemblies, if
these were not the principal subjects for which they were to be held. 1
We shall see presently that the word ' swanimote ' was a vague word
used both of the attachment courts and the forest inquisitions.
The Attachment Court.
Many rolls 2 of attachment courts still exist at the Eecord Office
which show clearly the nature of their jurisdiction. In general they were
held every forty-two days, always on the same day of the week in the
several bailiwicks into which a forest might be divided for the purpose.
Thus they were held 3 at Linby, Calverton, Mansfield and Edwinstone,
in the forest of Sherwood, on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday respectively in every sixth week ; and in most of the other
forests of which we have now rolls of attachment courts they seem
to have been held at the same intervals. There were, however, excep-
tions : for instance, in two of the bailiwicks of the forest 4 of Ingle-
wood they were held every twenty-eighth instead of every forty-second
day.
The jurisdiction of the court was small. It had no authority to
try or even to inquire judicially into cases relating to the venison, 5 and
the rolls of the courts may be searched in vain for such a case. This
1 See also the passage from the Year every forty-second day. (For. Proc, Tr. of
Book concerning Whaddon chase printed on Bee., No. 2.)
p. cxiv below. 3 See Accounts, Exchequer, Q. K., Bundle
2 The earliest is one of attachments held 134, No. 16.
in the forest of Galtres in Yorkshire in 4 Twelve attachment courts were held in
17 Ed. i. The heading of the enrolment every year in this forest towards the end
of these courts was in the following form : of the reign of Edward ii. In one baili-
1 Attaehiamenta apud Hoby die Sabati prox- wick they were held on Wednesdays and in
ima ante festum sancti Marci Ewangeliste the other on Thursdays. (Accounts, Exch.
anno regni regis Edwardi decimo septimo.' Q. K., Bundle 131, No. 22.)
Courts were held in this forest every forty- 5 Trespasses against the venison were
second day. (For. Proc. Tr. of Rec. No. 237.) investigated in inquisitions made by four
A roll of attachments held in the forest neighbouring townships before the foresters
of Inglewood in 23 Edward i. is at the and verderers. Sometimes, no doubt, these
Public Eecord Office. The heading of the inquisitions were made on the same day as
earliest of these courts is as follows, ' Per- that on which a court of attachments was
quisita de attachiamentis foreste de Engil- held. (See p. xlv note 5 below.) But it was
wude.' The headings of subsequent courts the usual practice for the inquisition to
on the same roll are simply ' Perquisita be held soon after the offence had been
foreste.' At this time the courts were held committed.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST XXXI
was not contrary to the provision of the Charter which directed
the foresters and verderers to assemble every forty days to view the
attachments as well of the vert as of the venison ; for that direction
may relate to ministerial rather than judicial proceedings. Nor had
the court jurisdiction to try cases relating to the vert except where
the trespasses were small. The distinction between small and great
trespasses was of course definite, and not in the discretion of
the forest officers ; but it seems certain that it varied in different
forests. We know what it was in the forest of Sherwood ; for in the
fifteenth year of Edward I. Sir William de Vescy and his colleagues,
then justices in eyre at Nottingham, finding that the assize of the
forest was not being properly observed, issued an ordinance l with the
object of regulating the jurisdiction of the court of attachments. It pro-
vided that the verderers were to assemble every forty days to hold at-
tachments both concerning the vert and the venison, and concerning
the holding and pleading of small pleas which ought to be pleaded
in attachments, such as those pleas which were touched upon in other
provisions of the ordinance. Though the language of the ordinance
is ill chosen, its meaning is clear. The ministerial is distinguished
from the judicial business, which is explained in some detail as follows.
People who lived in the forest and were taken in the king's demesne
woods cutting saplings or branches or dry wood from oaks, or hazels,
or thorn, or a lime, or an alder, or a holly tree and such like trees,
might be amerced in the attachment court unless the sapling were
appraised at more than four pence, in which case the offender was to
be attached to answer for his trespass at the next eyre. Again, all
trespasses in the outlying woods, outside the king's demesne woods,
were to be pleaded in the attachments unless they were pleas which
belonged to the eyre of the justices. This provision is certainly a little
vague, but it would seem that trespasses to the vert in woods within
the forest, but belonging to the king's subjects, were to be classified
in the same way as trespasses in his demesne woods for the purpose
of determining the jurisdiction of the court of attachment. Finally,
there is a provision that all escapes of beasts of the plough in the
king's demesne enclosures and woods were to be pleaded in the
attachments ; as were also other trespasses outside the assize of the
forest and against the Charter of the Forest.
Now this ordinance ought not to be considered as creating a
new law throughout England. It was issued by the justices in eyre
1 See p. 62 below.
b2
XXX11
INTRODUCTION
of the forest north of the Trent, for the benefit of the county of
Nottingham, and even if they intended it to apply to the other
northern counties, they had no power to extend it to the counties
south of the Trent. Its terms, too, are inadequate to explain the
law in many of the forests. The beech and the maple may
have been scarce in the county of Nottingham, but they grew in
abundance in many districts, and the ordinance does not tell us
whether the trespasser who took them in the forest could be punished
in the court of attachments, or could only be attached to answer for
his trespass in the court of the eyre. Nevertheless, in its broad
outlines it probably declared the law 1 which obtained on both sides
of the river Trent, even though it fails to supply us with certain
details of some importance.
Attachment court rolls, consisting as they do of constantly
recurring entries of a few particular forms, are of little interest. The
following extract from an account 2 rendered at the Exchequer in
the year 1316 shows the nature of the proceedings enrolled upon
them:
Attachiamentum 3 tentum apud Caluerton die 4 Mercurii in crastino sancti
Andree apostoli anno supradicto [10 Ed. II.] :
De I. le W. de C. pro uno blestrone 5
De R. W. de L. pro una caretta branchiarum
De I. C. de G. quia non habuit W. B. .
De I. f. S. de G. pro eodem .
De H. de L. pro uno quercu .
De E. f. I. B. quia non habuit I. f. S. .
De R. de C. de N. pro uno bletrone
De R. G. de E. pro una caretta branchiarum
Summa istius attachiamenti
. iijd.
. ijd.
• ijd.
. ijd.
. vjd.
. ijd.
• vjd.
. iijd.
ijs. ijd.
The following extracts from the accounts of other attachment
courts held in Sherwood forest in the same year are among the few
entries which are of a different nature from those occurring in the
account of the court printed above.
1 The mode of distinguishing small and
large trespasses to the vert prescribed by
the ordinance does not appear to have ob-
tained in the forests south of the Trent.
See p. xxxvi below.
2 Accounts, Exch. Q. K., Bundle 134, No.
16.
3 It must be observed that the extract
here printed is an account of amercements
made at an attachment court and not the
record of the proceedings of the court,
which would be longer and fuller. The
account, however, is sufficient to illustrate
the subject matter of the cases heard in
attachment courts.
4 1 December 1316.
5 For the meaning of this word see
' Blettro ' in the Glossary to this volume.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST XXX111
De R. L. de M. pro uno stubbe .
De R. Q. de W. pro truncacione unius stubbe
De R. D. de K. pro uno stubbe sicco .
De W. K. de* E. pro escapio bidencium
De H. de B. pro truncacione unius blestronis
xviijd.
vjd.
iiijd.
ijd.
vjd.
There can be little doubt that in some forests, if the procedure
was regular, certain ministerial work was performed at the time when
the attachments were held. By the ordinance 1 promulgated by Sir
William de Vescy in January 128f it was provided that when anyone
dwelling within the forest was found felling an oak, he was to be
attached to come to the next attachment, and there he was to find
pledges till the next eyre. If those pledges failed to produce him, we
may assume that they would be amerced and he would be again
attached by pledges. If on the other hand he was unable to find
pledges in the original instance, we may assume that the forester
would attach him by his goods and chattels instead of by pledges.
In these cases we can only assume what happened, because the rolls
of attachments give us no information about the procedure which
regulated them ; but there is no reason to suppose that the process
to compel appearance in a forest court differed from that which was
used in cases of trespasses in ordinary manor courts.
When the trespasser appeared in the attachment, he found
pledges whose names were thereupon enrolled ; but the enrolment
must have been made upon a special roll, as upon the rolls of attach-
ments which still exist we find no entries relating to the pledges for
the appearance of a trespasser at the next eyre.
The object of the finding of pledges on two occasions is not
difficult to understand. The pledges whom the forester considered
to be sufficient to ensure the appearance of the trespasser at the
next attachment might be quite insufficient to ensure his appearance
at the next eyre, which might not be held for several years. Ob-
viously the decision as to who were to be accepted as pledges for the
production of an offender at the forest eyre was a serious matter,
requiring the presence of all the parties interested and the con-
sideration of more than a single forest officer.
Where the trespasser was not an inhabitant of the forest, the
forester, instead of attaching him, was bound to send him to a prison
from which he could only be released by order of the king or the
justice of the forest. This, according to the ordinance of Sir William
de Vescy, was the procedure in all cases of trespasses in the king's
1 See p. 62 below.
XXxiv INTRODUCTION
demesnes by people who were not inhabitants of the forest, and not
merely in those cases where they were found felling oaks. The
reason of the greater severity was, no doubt, partly because a tres-
passer who was not an inhabitant could have no customary rights to
bring him into the king's demesne for a lawful purpose, and partly
because his offence would usually be harder for the forester to detect ;
but it was more especially because the foresters had no power to
attach any person outside the forest.
There was another ministerial duty which was performed in the
attachments held in the forest of Sherwood, the delivery of the price
of wood wrongfully cut in the king's demesnes and of animals for-
feited for being in the forest in forbidden places or at forbidden
times. It seems to be certain that in this matter Sir William de
Vescy merely regulated the existing practice by his ordinance ; for the
entries of pleas of the vert held at the first eyre in Nottingham
after he issued it differ only in form l from the enrolment of the pleas
of the vert in other forests North of the Trent at an earlier date.
They differ, however, both in form and substance from the entries of
pleas of the vert held in the forests South of the Trent, of an earlier
as well as of a later date. After this ordinance an account was ren-
dered at the Exchequer at irregular intervals of the amercements which
had been made in the forest of Sherwood since the last account of a
similar kind was rendered. With such amercements, being for the small
trespasses to the vert specified in the ordinance, the justices in eyre
had no concern. The amercements of all other offences to the vert
were made by the justices and entered on the eyre rolls. But from the
next eyre after the ordinance, after each entry 2 we find the words
• wherewith the verderers are charged in their roll of the price of the
vert ' or others to the same effect. At the head of another of the
rolls 3 of the same eyre, we have the words ' of the price of the
vert,' and beneath it an account of the price of the vert year by year
from the time of the last eyre.
Now this was not the ordinary procedure south of the Trent. We
do not read of accounts being rendered at the Exchequer of amerce-
ments by the attachment courts. The king and his advisers may
have claimed them, and sometimes 4 successfully, but on the other hand
the wardens and foresters in fee no doubt sometimes made a suc-
1 Thus at the Cumberland eyre of Novem- Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 5.)
ber 1285 the verderers accounted for the 2 See pp. 67, 68 below,
price of oaks unlawfully taken ; but some- 3 See p. 68 below.
times they accounted for the price of oaks ' An account of the profits of the courts
appraised at less than four pence. (For. of attachment held during the years 30 to
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST XXXV
cessful resistance. 1 Peter de Neville, for instance, the warden of
Rutland, seems to have appropriated to himself, among many other
things, pleas of thorns, hazels and such like small vert, which would
be pleaded in attachment courts. The justices in eyre, it is true, in
1269 ordered him to answer for the profits of his misappropriations, but
the eyre rolls do not tell us whether the order was obeyed or not, and
one of his successors in title undoubtedly died seised of nearly all, if
not all, that he claimed. 2
Again, we may search in vain among the eyre rolls of the reign of
Henry III. for proof 3 that the verderers accounted in the eyre for wood
which had been unlawfully cut in the forests south of the Trent.
It may be that in strict law they were bound to account for it ; but the
absence of any evidence that they did so renders it probable that the
law was not strictly observed in this respect. 4
We have seen that the rinding pledges for offences against the
vert in the forest of Sherwood, and probably elsewhere, took place in
the attachment court. But the Charter of the Forest speaks of
attachments as well of the vert as of the venison, and we should there-
fore expect to find poachers attached there in just the same way as
trespassers to the vert. It is, however, probable that in many forests
pledges for the appearance of poachers at the eyre were not found in
the attachment courts, and that the direction in the Charter was not
strictly observed in this respect. It was considered sufficient for the
offender to be attached in the presence of the foresters and verderers
in the manner which we shall describe presently. 5
To summarise ; the court of attachments was a court which,
41 Hen. iii. in some of the forests of Wilt- dated 13 September 1300. But although
shire was rendered at the eyre of 1257 by he appears to have received no privileges
John earl of Warwick. (For. Proc, Tr. of from the king which had not been enjoyed
Bee, No. 198, Roll 7.) The profits of the by his father Peter, his descendant Anne
courts were described as ' small pleas.' Chiselden was found by inquisition dated
The following is the account rendered for 23 March 144| to have died seised of the
30 Hen. iii. : custody of the forest of Eutland ' cum
'DelohannecomiteWarewyk' deherbagio wyndfallyn wode dere fallyn wode cabliciis
de Cippham, anno tri- wodsylver heggyngsylver, attachiamentis
cesimo xij sol. forestariorum, extractibus swanimottorum
4 De eodem de melle proficuis eorum et chiminagio ac faciendi
uenditoannoeodem . ij sol. vj. den. et amouendi omnes forestarios eiusdem
' De eodem de cablecio foreste ad uoluntatem suam.' (Inq. post
anno eodem .... vij sol. mortem, 23 Hen. vi. No. 14.)
1 De eodem de minutis 3 In a few cases it may be found that the
placitis et de escapiis verderers accounted at the eyre for wood
anno eodem .... viij sol.' which had been unlawfully cut, but such
1 See p. 47, below. cases are quite exceptional.
2 Peter de Neville forfeited the bailiwick * The explanation may be that the
of the forest of Kutland for his misconduct amercement at the eyre was considered to
(see note 3, p. xvii, above) ; but it was granted include the price of the wood.
back to his son Theobald by letters patent ■ See p. xxxix below.
XXXvi INTRODUCTION
sitting at regular intervals, usually every sixth week, was chiefly
concerned in trying cases of small trespasses to the vert. The
distinction between small trespasses and large trespasses varied in
different forests, 1 and it is impossible, at present, to lay down any
general rules on the subject. Persons who were accused of tres-
passes to the vert which were too large for it to try were attached
in it to appear before the justices in eyre of the forest. In the matter
of venison it had no judicial functions at all, and pledges were not
found in it by trespassers for their appearance before the justices in
eyre as was the case in trespasses to the vert. In the forest of
Sherwood, and probably in the other forests north of the Trent, the
price of beasts forfeited for being in the forest in forbidden places or
at forbidden times, and also the price of wood felled or carried away
by trespassers were paid to the verderers in the court of attachments,
for them to keep until the next forest eyre. No doubt, too, other
small ministerial duties, varying in the different forests, were per-
formed in the same court.
Before leaving the subject it should be noticed that in some
forests the courts of attachments were called swanimotes. There is " 2
a roll of attachment courts held in the forest of Cliffe in the early
years of the reign of Edward III. in which the proceedings of each
court are styled * Swanimotum tentum apud Cliue die Mercurii etc'
There can be no doubt that these courts were attachments. They
were held every forty- second day, and they were concerned with the
same matters as were the attachment courts which were held in the
forest of Sherwood. Nor should we suppose that this was an isolated
practice. We have seen 3 that Peter de Neville appropriated to him-
self pleas of thorns, hazels and such like small vert in the forest of
Rutland, pleas which would certainly be held in the attachment courts
in any other county. But the entry from which we learn of this
1 In the forest of Bernwood in Bucking- presentent attachiamenta senescallus inter-
hamshire attachments of small thorns be- rogat eis per sacramentum domino regi
longed to the chief forester and those of factum utrum spine fuerint pertinentes ad
large ones to the king. It was found by an dominum regem uel ad f orestarium, et cum
inquisition held in 1266 that small thorns dicunt ad regem, tunc senescallus placitat
in this forest were those which could not illud placitum ad opus domini regis; et si
be pierced by an auger called a ' restauger ' dicunt quod ad forestarium, tunc idem
(see p. 122 below) , On another occasion forestarius placitat illud placitum ad opus
certain jurors gave the following answer to suum.' (Rotuli Hundredorum, i. 26.)
the question how the division was made The steward here mentioned was the
between thorns belonging to the king and warden of the forests between the bridges
the forester : of Stamford and Oxford, and the forester
• Dicunt quod omnes forestarii qui was the forester in fee of the forest of Bern-
faciunt attachiamenta in foresta iurati sunt wood (see p. xvii above),
domino regi de fidelitate et cum uenerint 2 For Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 96.
coram senescallo ad swanimotum et ibi 3 See p. 47 below.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xxxvii
appropriation continues with the words * and pleaded them in his
swanimotes.' Eemembering that the forest of Kutland was on the
one side of the river Welland and the forest of Cliffe on the other,
we may conclude from the words we have quoted that the attachment
courts were called swanimotes in the former forest as well as in the
latter. 1 The word ' attachment ' apparently was not the recognised
designation of the court in all parts of the country. At an inquisition 2
held in the forest of Essex in the year 1239, a man was put by gage
and pledge to be at the next forest hundred because he was not
present at the inquisition. Now the hundred was a civil court, which
was held every third week in each of the territorial divisions of a
county called hundreds, and had a small jurisdiction in civil matters.
It would seem, then, that the forest hundred was the term used to
describe the court of attachments in the county of Essex at this time,
as a court analogous in functions to the civil hundred.
The Special Inquisition. 3
Although the courts of attachments were only concerned with the
small cases of trespasses to the vert and had no judicial power in
cases of trespasses to the venison, there was no other forest court
which sat at regular intervals, and none which had any final juris-
diction in the intervals between the sessions of the justices in eyre.
But it must not be supposed that the attachment courts and the court
of the justices in eyre were the only tribunals which administered or
assisted in administering the forest laws. The forest inquisitions — of
which there were two sorts, the special and the general — formed the
basis of proceedings for trespasses to the venison.
By the articles known as the ' Consuetudines et Assise Foreste,'
which are included among the ' Statuta Incerti Temporis ' of the
* Statutes of the Bealm,' 4 it was provided that if any beast of the forest
1 It appears from the following extract coram iusticiariis et eciam de aliis que
from the Gloucester eyre rolls of 10 Ed. i. balliuas suas contingunt.' (For. Proc, Tr.
that the attachment courts in the forest of of Bee, No. 30, Roll 33.)
Dean were sometimes called swanimotes : 2 See p. 70 below.
4 Et quia placita de uiridi in swanimotis 8 It must be understood that the phrase
foreste hactenus in debito modo placitata • special inquisition ' was not in use at the
sunt et presentata preceptum est constabu- time when the forest laws were enforced,
lario et forestariis et uiridariis quod de It has been adopted in this book as a con-
cetero attachiamenta de uiridi racionabiliter venient one for describing the forest inquisi-
fiant et placitentur et de quolibet attachiato tion of the reign of Henry iii. It after-
duo salui plegii capiantur et irrotulentur, et wards gave place to the * general inquisi-
quod quilibet forestarius de feodo habeat tion ' which is described on a subsequent
erga se rotulum de omnibus attachiamentis page,
de uiridi et de uenacione, presentandum * Vol. i. p. 243. According to Manwood
xxxviii INTRODUCTION
were found dead or wounded an inquisition was to be held by four
neighbouring townships of the forest ; the finder of the deer was to
be put by six pledges, the flesh was to be sent to a neighbouring
spittal house or given to the sick and poor ; the head and the skin
were to be given to the freemen of the neighbouring township, and
the arrow was to be presented to a verderer. The word which repre-
sents beast of the forest in the original is ' fera,' which is usually
translated by the word ' deer.' As, however, inquisitions l were held
on dead or wounded wild boars and on hares in those districts where
they were preserved by the forest laws, we may reasonably render
1 fera ' by beast of the forest in this passage.
It is very doubtful when these articles were first issued, but our
earliest record 2 of an inquisition which seems to have been made
pursuant to them is of the year 1238. 3 In another inquisition made
two years later we read of a buck which was found one Sunday lying
dead in a field in the forest of Essex. On the same day an inquisi-
tion was held by four neighbouring townships, who said that it died of
murrain and was almost dragged to pieces by the pigs. Each of the
townships found pledges of being before the justices in eyre at their
next pleas, as also did the four neighbours, the finder of the buck and
the lady in whose field it was found. The head with its antlers was
entrusted to a man — presumably a freeman of one of the neighbouring
townships — to produce before the justices, while the mutilated flesh
and the skin were, no doubt, left for the pigs to devour. Here we
have some observances which were not directed by the ' Consuetudines
et Assise ' — namely, the finding pledges by the four townships, the
four neighbours and the owner of the field respectively. Probably
the procedure was adopted which obtained in inquisitions before the
coroners 4 on the bodies of dead men, it being usual for the four neigh-
bours, and all suspected persons, as well as the four townships which
(Forest Lawes, ed. 1615, p. 8) they were compliance with the articles relating to the
issued in 6 Edward i., but he gives no autho- venison than those of 32 to 39 Henry iii.
rity for his statement. No official version of printed on pp. 74 to 116 below. It is pro-
them is to be found on the rolls at the Public bable that the first eleven articles were
Record Office, but there are many copies of issued in the early years of the reign of
them in private collections of statutes at Henry iii. or even in the reign of John,
the British Museum and elsewhere. It is The eyre rolls certainly show no change in
possible that the articles are not all of the the forest law or its administration after
same date. The directions as to attach- 6 Edward i. which in any way corroborates
ments for trespasses to the vert are of a de- Manwood's statement that they were issued
tailed character, and they do not appear to in that year,
have been strictly observed in the latter ' See p. xii, note 2, above,
part of the reign of Henry iii. On the other 2 See p. 69 below. 3 See p. 71 below,
hand, the inquisitions of 22 to 26 Henry iii. 4 As to this see the Introduction to vol. ix.
printed on pp. 69 to 74 below, show a stricter of the Publications of the Seidell Society.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST XXxix
made the inquisition, to find pledges to come before the justices in
eyre. The owner of the field was, no doubt, considered a suspected
person. Subsequent inquisitions, however, show that the four
neighbours usually found no pledges, although it frequently happened x
that the four townships and the finder of the beast and persons under
suspicion did so.
Numerous examples 2 show that when an arrow was found in a
dead or wounded beast of the forest, it was delivered to the verderer.
But the verderer, instead of being allowed to retain it for his own use
as the words of the ' Consuetudines et Assise ' suggest, was bound to
keep it for production before the justices at the next forest eyre. The
justices probably received them, together with any antlers 3 and skins
which might be produced at the eyre, for the use of the king and not
as perquisites for themselves. Being articles of small value, they
were not sent to the king one by one, but were collected instead by
the justices in eyre.
Inquisitions by the four neighbouring townships were also held
when trespasses had been committed in the forest. Persons whom the
townships found to have been guilty of offences against the venison,
were either sent to prison 4 or attached there and then to appear before
the justices in eyre according to the gravity of the trespass. The
bows, arrows and snares 5 which were found upon a trespasser were
delivered to a verderer for him to produce before the justices just as
were arrows found in wounded beasts. On the other hand, if grey-
hounds were found in the forest belonging to poachers or straying in
pursuit of venison, they were sent 6 forthwith to the justice of the
forest and not detained for production before the justices in eyre ;
but it is probable that the justice handed them over to the king, as
soon as he received them.
The ordinary ministerial work of attaching trespassers against the
venison to appear at the next forest eyre seems to have been done
in the special inquisition, and not in the court of attachments. If
we look at the records of special inquisitions, we find repeated in-
stances of persons being attached to appear at the next forest eyre,
and the statement of the attachment always forms part of the record
1 See pp. 80, 81, 85, 87, 89 below. 5 See pp. 84, 85, 95 below.
2 See p. 87 below. " See p. 81. In one case they were sent
3 See pp. 83, 87, 90 below. to John Mansel, the warden of the forest
4 The trespasser was imprisoned only to in which they were taken (see p. 13 below),
secure his appearance at the forest eyre. It should be remembered that John Mansel
It was usual for him to be released to was a member of the king's council and
pledges until the coming of the justices in was constantly with him.
eyre.
xl INTRODUCTION
of the inquisition. There is nothing to suggest that the attachment
was made on any other occasion, or at the court of attachments
in particular. The Charter of the Forest certainly directed the
verderers and foresters to assemble every forty days to view the
attachments not only with respect to the vert, but also with respect
to the venison. But the spirit of the provision was in no way violated
by the attachments of trespassers to the venison being made in the
forest inquisitions. The purpose of the charter was, no doubt, to
secure publicity, but this was quite sufficiently assured by an attach-
ment at an inquisition, which was made before the foresters and
verderers by four neighbouring townships.
The forest inquisition was necessary only when a beast of the forest
was found dead or wounded, or when a trespass had been committed
in the forest. If a man was caught in the act of taking venison he
was forthwith imprisoned and could only be set at liberty by a writ
from the king or the justice of the forest. According to the Charter
of the Forest, if a man was arrested and convicted of taking
venison he was to be heavily ransomed, if he had wherewith he could
be ransomed, and if he had not wherewith he could be ransomed he
was to lie in prison for a year and a day, and if after a year and a
day he could find pledges he was to come out of prison, and if he
could not find them he was to abjure the realm. 1 Thus the longest
term of imprisonment was to be a year and a day. But in the middle
of the reign of Henry III., and perhaps at the beginning of his
reign, when a man who had taken venison was arrested and sent
to prison, he was imprisoned in the first instance by way of process
and not by way of punishment. He was usually released by writ 2
to twelve persons, who undertook to produce him at the next eyre and
that he would commit no trespass in the meantime. His punishment
was always reserved for the justices in eyre, and to this rule there
were no exceptions. It is difficult to say how long men might lie in
prison before they were released on pledge. Certainly they sometimes
lay there more than a year and a day, but these were exceptional
1 The article of the Charter which pro- ke le eyent pris en bail a auer le deuant
vides these penalties is printed on p. lxv iustices procheyn erranz a lez plez de la
below. forest en tel conte a respondre de le auawt-
2 The writ by which the king directed dit trespas e ke desoremes ne mesfra de
delivery was in the following form : nostre veneson, dunkes le facez deliuerer de
• Le rey salue tel yisconte. Nus vws maun- la prison en la quele il est detenu ke cez
dows ke si vn tel pns e enprisone a tel lyu plegges de luy respoynewt sicuw est dit. E
pwr trespas de veneson in tele forest ou en eyez lez nons dez plegges e ceo bre/.' (Add.
tel park eyt troue xij bons e sauues plegges MS. 32085 at British Museum, fo. 142 r°.)
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xli
cases of which the justices took note, in considering the punishment l
in the eyre.
The practice as to enrolling special inquisitions probably varied in
different forests, and as we have but few records of them it is im-
possible to speak with any confidence on the subject. The rolls on
which they are recorded and which still survive contain besides the
inquisitions other memoranda relating to the venison. When a man
was taken in the act of unlawfully killing venison, the story of the
trespass is duly enrolled. When an archbishop, bishop, earl or baron
passed through the forest, he was entitled 2 under the Charter of
the Forest to take one or two beasts. On the rolls 3 of the special
inquisitions in the forest of Kockingham for the years 30 to 39
Hen. III. all the cases in which venison was taken in exercise of this
right are recorded under the headings ' Yenison taken without
warrant.' In like manner the king's presents of venison are recorded
under the heading ' Venison given by the king's writ.'
There is some ground for thinking that the verderers had one roll
of special inquisitions in a particular forest ; and that the foresters
had another. 4 A roll, 5 or portion of a roll, relating to the venison in
the forest of Huntingdon during the years 1248 to 1252, which is still
in a good state of preservation, is printed in this volume. A portion of
a second roll, 6 which is in a very bad state of preservation, contains
1 The following entry occurs on the this article was amended by the addition
Buckinghamshire eyre roll of 1256 : after the word ' baro ' of the words ' ueni-
' Presentatum est pereosdemetconuictum ens ad nos ad mandatum nostrum ; ' and
quod .... una dama inuenta fuit in domo by the addition of the words, ' Idem liceat
W. A. et I. fratris eius de F. quam damam eisin redeundo facere sicut predictum est.'
cognouerunt se cepisse cum quadam ma- 3 See pp. 79 to 116 below,
china ferrea. Qui W. et I.' capti et missi 4 The roll of the foresters, if they had
fuerunt ad prisonam apud E. qui ibi iacue- one, would probably be kept by the warden
runt usque nunc. Et modo ueniunt, et of the forest,
quia non habent unde redimi possint nee 5 See pp. 74 to 79 below,
plegios inuenire possunt etc., ideo remane- • The following extract from this roll
ant in prisona per unum annum et unum should be compared with a corresponding
diem ; et postea si invenire possunt plegios entry on tbe roll printed on p. 75 of this
etc., sin autem abiurent regnum etc. Postea volume :
quia pauperes et per prisonam in qua iacue- ■ [Contigit die] dominica in ramis Pal-
runt per unum annum et dimidium et marum quod cum forestarii domini regi3
amplius ualde debilitati sunt corporibus de Wauberge et forestarii de Sappele
suis condonatur pro rege transgressio sua [fecissent ujigiliam sub haya de Sappel'
predicta.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Rcc, No. 2, perceperunt in crepusculo noctis male-
Roll 2.) See also p. lxvi below. factores cum leporariis sub haya
1 The article in the Charter of the predicta, et cum malefactores percepissent
Forest of 6 November 1217 is as follows : forestarios in f ugam conuersi sunt, set
' Quicunque archiepiscopus, episcopus, predicti [forestarii] ceperunt vnum de
comes, uel baro transient per forestam malefactoribus, qui uocabatur Radulfus de
nostram liceat ei capere unam uel duas Fentone ; quern cum forestarii cepissent
bestias per uisum forestarii si presens fuerit, [interrog]auerunt eum quis esset et cum
sin autem faciat cornari ne uideatur furtiue quo et eorum nomina qui cum eo fuerunt.
hoc facere.' Et cognouit quod ipse uocabatur Radulfus
In the charter of 11 February 122? de Fentone; et alius qui cum eo erat
xlii INTRODUCTION
the same subject matter. But a comparison of the two documents
shows that neither of them is a copy of the other. Again, in the
roll 1 of the Eutland eyre of 1256, the following passage occurs :
Et quia uiridarii predicti non faciunt aliquam mencionem in rotulo suo
de correo predicte dame et in rotulo forestariorum inde sit mencio et dictum
correum modo presentatum est ; ideo in misericordia.
It may be that these are exceptional cases ; but we find in the forest
of Kockingham that the two rolls 2 of inquisitions held during the years
1246 to 1250 and 1250 to 1255 respectively which happen to have
survived differed in form from one another, and that one is more
faithfully followed in the rolls of the eyre than the other ; we may
therefore reasonably suppose that in the forest of Kockingham 3 as well
as in that of Huntingdon there was more than one set of rolls of the
venison for the same period.
The General Inquisition.
We may observe the special inquisition as part of the forest pro-
cedure elsewhere than in the few surviving rolls which record
examples of it. On the eyre rolls of the reign of Hen. III. we fre-
quently meet with a passage 4 in these or similar words :
An inquisition was held by four neighbouring townships, to wit . . . . ;
and because the said townships did not come fully, therefore they are in
mercy.
uocabatur Osebertus Marescallus [etterci]us malefactores per [indiccionem] Radulfl de
Geruasius cocus et fuerunt cum domino Fentone prenominati.
Ieremia de Kaxton' ; et venerunt ibi qausa * [Magna et Parua SJtiuecle veniunt et,
uenacionis querende. Et super hec facta iurate, dicunt idem.
fuit inquisicio sub Sappele die Martis ' [Eeptona R]egis venit et, iurata, dicit
proxima post . . . Pasche anno rengni idem.
regis Henrici filii regis Iohannis tricesimo ' [Reptona] Abbatis venit et, iurata, dicit
tercio coram viridariis et forestariis patrie idem.
per quatuor uillatas propinquiores, vide- ' [Hereford] venit et, iurata, dicit idem,
licet, per Magnam Stiuecle et Paruam • [Radulf us de] Fentone, qui captus fuit
Stiuecle, Eeptona Regis, [Repton]a Abbatis missus fuit apud Huntedon' ad inprison-
et per Herefordiam. andum et liberatus domino Philippo [de
' [Magna] Stiuecle uenit et, iurata, dicit Stanto]n\ tunc vicecomiti Huntedon'. Et
quod Radulf us de Fentone, Osebertus prenominati Osebertus et Geruasius hue
Marescallus [et Geruasius] cocus homines usque non fuerunt [attachiati].' (For.
domini Ieremie de Kaxton' venerunt die Proc., Tr. of Bee., No. 39.)
Dominica in ramis palmarum in [crepu- ' For. Proc, Tr. of Bee., No. 139, Boll. 3.
sculo] noctis cum leporariis sub Sappele 2 See pp. 79 to 116 below,
causa uenacionis querende et ad male- 3 The verderers' rolls are expressly men-
faciendum [de uenacione] domini regis et tioned on p. 27 below,
neminem alium habent suspectum nisi 4 Examples of this passage occur on
predictos malefactores ; et hos habent pp. 31, 35, 41 and 42 below.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xliii
Now in the records l of the special inquisitions which still survive
we find nothing about the townships not coming fully. There can be
little doubt, however, that the question whether a township came
fully or not was never debated in the inquisition or at the eyre or
anywhere else. There are a few cases 2 in the eyre rolls of a township
being amerced for not having come at all to the inquisition, and if
the corresponding records 3 of those inquisitions be examined, it will
be found that the failure to come at all is expressly mentioned in
them. Yet, as we have already observed, when the townships are
stated not to have come fully there is no corresponding statement in
the record of the inquisition. The explanation is that the not coming
fully was in certain events a presumption in law, which required no
proof, while the not coming at all was always a fact, which, if the
township was to be amerced for its default in the eyre, had to be
found by the inquisition. The presumption arose when the townships
could ascertain nothing about the matter for which they were assembled,
or not sufficient about it to satisfy the justices.
Although the passage which records the amercement was usually
in the form described aJbove, we occasionally meet with other forms,
which seem to explain the reason of the amercement. Thus in the
Huntingdon eyre rolls of 39 Henry III., we usually have :
And an inquisition was held by four neighbouring townships, to wit
. . . . , who could ascertain nothing thereof, and because the townships
did not come fully, therefore they are in mercy. 4
As the inquisitions by the townships are never mentioned on the eyre
rolls except when they are amerced for not coming fully, and as the
finding that they could ascertain nothing is the only one which is ever
mentioned in connection with the not coming fully, we might assume
that the statement of the not coming fully depended on the failure to
ascertain anything, even if we had no other proof that it did so. It
is significant too, that we never find that some only of the four town-
ships are amerced for not having come fully. Either 5 all of them are
amerced or none of them.
1 Records of special inquisitions of the 3 See pp. 87 and 111 below.
reign of Henry iii. are printed on pp. 69 4 Examples of this or similar expres-
to 116 below. In only one inquisition, sions will be found on pp. 13, 15, 18, 19,
namely that of the 22 August 1255, is 21, 23, 28, 29 below. In the case at the
there a statement that the townships top of p. 22 it is not stated that the town-
came fully, and it will be observed that ships had ascertained nothing ; but the
this inquisition was held after the justices enrolment shows that they failed to ascer-
in eyre had begun their session. It was tain the name of one of the trespassers,
probably an experiment on the part of the The name was supplied to the justices in
townships. eyre by the verderers.
2 See examples on pp. 31 and 36 below. 4 No instance occurs in this volume of
xliv INTRODUCTION
If we examine the rolls of the eyres which were held about
40 Henry III., we find that the amercement of the townships for not
coming fully was a common event in all the forests. We find it in
entry after entry and we may therefore assume that the special
inquisition was part of the forest procedure everywhere. If, however,
we examine the rolls of the eyres which were held about fourteen years
later, we find that the townships were amerced less often for not
coming fully, and except in the early years of his reign they were
seldom amerced for this default during the reign of Edward I.
Now it is very improbable that the townships throughout England
during the reign of Edward I. became so careful that they always
ascertained facts in their inquisitions which were sufficient to satisfy
the justices in eyre, and it is even more improbable that the justices
gradually became more lenient to the townships and thus deprived
the king of a source of revenue. It is much more probable that
owing to some alteration in the forest procedure the special inquisi-
tion gradually ceased to be held. We shall see presently that this
was actually the case. 1
The features of the special inquisition were, first, its purpose,
which was that of inquiring into some particular trespass or event
relating to the venison ; next its date, which was always soon after
such trespass had been committed or such event had happened ;
and lastly the persons by and before whom it was held — namely, by
the four neighbouring townships and before the foresters and verderers
of the forest. Now there exists a roll of inquisitions which were held
one of four townships being amerced for possint.'
not coming fully to an inquisition, without See Statutes of the Realm, i. 11.
the other three townships being also Article 24 of the Provisions of Marl-
amerced for the same reason. The editor borough of 1267 was in the following
of this volume is not aware of any such words :
instance in other unprinted forest eyre rolls. ' Iusticiarii itinerantes non amercient de
1 The legislation concerning the amerce- cetero uillatas in itinere suo, pro eo quod
ments imposed by justices in eyre for singuli duodecim annorum non uenerint
pleas of the crown upon townships which coram uicecomitibus et coronatore ad in-
did not come fully to make inquisitions quisiciones de robberiis et incendiis aut
before the sheriffs or coroners is of some aliis ad coronam spectantibus faciendas,
interest in relation to the history of the dum tamen de uillis illis ueniant sufricien-
forest inquisitions. By article 24 of the ter per quos huiusmodi inquisiciones plene
Provisions of Westminster of the year 1259 fieri possint, exceptis inquisicionibus de
it was provided as follows : morte hominis faciendis, ubi omnes duo-
' Iusticiarii itinerantes de cetero non decim annorum uenire debent nisi raciona-
amerciant uillatas in itinere suo, pro eo bilem causam absencie sue habeant.'
quod singuli duodecim annorum non uene- See Statutes of the Realm, i. 25. In
rint coram uicecomitibus et coronatoribus the text printed in the Appendix to de
ad inquisiciones de morte hominis aut Antiauis Legibus (Works of the Camden
aliis ad coronam pertinentibus, dum Society, vol. 34, p. 233) the words ' uiginti
tamen de uillis illis ueniant sufficienter per unius ' occur in place of ' duodecim.'
quos inquisitiones huiusmodi plene fieri
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xlv
in the forest of Kockingham in the years 19 to 24 Edward I., 1 upon
which the lost rolls of the next forest eyre were, no doubt based, but
the inquisitions have none of the features of the special inquisition.
They were not held for the purpose of inquiring into any particular
trespass or events. On the contrary, they were concerned with any
trespasses which might have been recently committed, trespasses
against the vert as well as trespasses against the venison. They were
held, too, at such irregular intervals and in so many different places
that it w 7 ould be impossible to arrive at any general rule as to when
and where they were held. One 2 was held at Brigstock on the 6th Sep^
tember 1292 before the deputy justice of the forest south of the Trent
by the deputy warden or steward of the forest between the bridges of
Oxford and Stamford, two riding foresters, three verderers and twelve
as well knights as free and loyal men of the neighbouring parts of
the forest. Another 3 was held at Geddington on the 2nd January
129f before two deputy justices of the forest south of the Trent by the
verderers, 4 foresters, regarders; woodwards and neighbouring town-
ships. Usually, however, the inquisition was held before the justice
of the forest or his deputy by the foresters, verderers and twelve
jurors.
These inquisitions, which gradually took the place of the special
inquisitions of the reign of Henry III., may be conveniently called
general inquisitions, but they sometimes received the name of swani-
motes. Many of the general inquisitions 5 which were held in the
forest of Whittle wood during the years 22 to 31 Edward I. are de-
scribed 6 as having been held 'in pleno swanimotto.' In the year
1306 the new designation ' swanimote ' obtained a statutory sanction.
In the statute 7 of that year known as * Ordinatio Forestae,' the general
inquisition is called the swanimote and the mode of holding it is
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 82. attachments, but general inquisitions were
* Ibid. m. 2. also held from time to time (For. Proc,
* Ibid. 4. Tr. of Bee, No. 79). In the forest of
* In this inquisition the names of the Salcey both special and general inquisitions
individual officers are not recorded. were held at intervals from 15 to 33 Ed-
5 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 83. The ward i. {For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 78).
roll contains both general and special in- The three rolls mentioned in this note are
quisitions held at irregular intervals. It of considerable length, and supply useful
should not be assumed that the special material for the history of the lesser courts
inquisition fell into disuse in some forests of the forest in the reign of Edward i.
as soon as it did in others. The procedure Few records of inquisitions, held at this
in the middle of the reign of Edward i. period, in other forests still exist,
seems to have varied considerably in 6 It will be remembered that in the neigh-
different forests. Thus in the forest of bouring forests of Cliffe and Rutland the
Cliffe from 16 to 34 Edward i. it was quite courts of attachment were called ! swani-
usual for a special inquisition to be held, if motes ' (see p. xxxvii above),
there was need for one, at the court of T Statutes of the LUuilm/i. 148.
xlvi INTRODUCTION
declared in detail. The following is a translation of the first chapter
of the statute :
First we will and ordain for us and our heirs that with respect to all
trespasses hereafter committed in our forests, against our vert and venison,
the foresters wdthin whose bailiwicks such trespasses may chance to be
committed, do present the same at the next swanimotes before the foresters,
verderers, regarders, agisters and other ministers of the same forests, and
upon such presentments there, before the foresters, verderers and all other
ministers aforesaid, by the oath as well of the knights as of other good and
loyal men of the neighbouring parts where the trespasses so presented shall
have been committed, not being under suspicion, let the truth be fully in-
quired, and when the truth has been so inquired let those presentments be
solemnly confirmed by the common accord and consent of all the ministers
aforesaid and let them be sealed with their seals. And if an indictment be
made in any other way, let it be held entirely void. 1
After the date of this statute general inquisitions were held at
frequent intervals in all the forests. The justice of the forest or his
lieutenant was invariably present, and the inquisitions were made
before him by the forest officers and a body of jurors. An inquisition 2
was made at Guildford on the 9th May 1363 concerning the state of
the forest of Windsor by the warden, four foresters, five verderers,
twelve regarders and twenty-four free tenants within the metes of the
forest. Another inquisition, 3 held at Wokingham on the 11th July
1372, was made by the warden, eight or nine foresters, three verderers,
twelve regarders, two agisters, eighteen free tenants within the metes
of the forest and twelve free tenants without the metes. But a third
inquisition, 4 held at Windsor on the 21st April 1366, was made by
the warden, three foresters, four verderers, twelve regarders and twelve
free tenants, and also twelve more free tenants within and twelve
free tenants without the forest. In inquisitions held in other forests
about this time similar variations occur.
The general inquisitions, although sometimes called swanimotes,
were not held at the dates on which swanimotes were authorised to be
held by the Forest Charter. They were probably held at such times
as were convenient to the justice of the forest or his deputy. A con-
siderable number of records of such inquisitions held during the last
fifteen years of the reign of Edward III. still exist. Many of them,
however, have been lost, and it is therefore difficult to say with any
precision at what intervals the inquisitions were held. But some
1 The name swainmote is applied to these courts in other chapters of the statute.
7 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee., No. 286.
s Ibid. No. 271, 290. * Ibid. No. 317.
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST
xlvii
information on this point may be derived from the records l of the
forest of Windsor, which was situate partly in Surrey and partly in
Berkshire. It seems to have been usual for the justice to hold two
inquisitions on the same day, one concerning the Surrey portion of
the forest, the other concerning the Windsor portion. The first
column of the following table consists of the dates of all the recorded
inquisitions between the years 1363 and 1375 ; the second, of the
places at which they were held ; and the third, of the numbers by
which the records of them are now cited.
Berkshire
Date
Place
Recokd *
9 May 1363
Guildford
No. 286
3 January 136|
Windsor
No. 287
21 April 1366
Windsor
No. 288
1 August 1368
Bagshot
No. 270
17 September 1368
Windsor
No. 270
8 November 1369
Bagshot
No. 270
14 July 1370
Wokingham
No. 272
11 July 1372
Wokingham
No. 271, 290
26 April 1375
Wokingham
Surrey
No. 291 3
9 May 1363
Guildford
No. 317
21 April 1366
Windsor
No. 317
1 August 1368
Bagshot
No. 270
17 September 1368
Windsor
No. 270
8 November 1369
Bagshot
No. 270
4 April 1370
Guildford
No. 272
14 July 1870
Wokingham
No. 272
23 February 137^
Wanborough
No. 317, 271
4 July 1372
Guildford
No. 317, 271
26 April 1373
Windsor
No. 317, 274
17 July 1373
Windsor
No. 274
It will be seen from this table that two inquisitions were sometimes
held in the same year. Whether or not this was the usual practice
1 Some of these are the original records
of inquisitions, and others are the enrol-
ments of them. In some cases both the
original record and the enrolment still
exist.
2 All the documents in this column
belong to the class For. Proc, Tr. of Bee.
* At this inquisition two agisters are
included among the forest officers. Al-
though mentioned in the Statute of the year
1306 (see p. xlv), the agisters were seldom
included among the forest officers by whose
oaths the inquisitions were made. It is
possible that in many forests, even where
pigs and cattle were agisted, there were no
agisters and that their work was performed
by the foresters.
C 2
xlviii INTRODUCTION
can only be ascertained from a careful study of the dates of
inquisitions in other forests. Fewer inquisitions, however, held in
other forests have survived to the present day than is the case in the
forest of Windsor.
General inquisitions, such as those just described, were certainly
not the swanimotes authorised by the Charter of the Forest. The
swanimotes there mentioned were to be held three times a year at
specified dates ; and certain forest officers and none other were to be
distrained to come to them. On the other hand, the general
inquisitions were held at irregular intervals ; and they were usually
made before the justice of the forest by the regarders and a body of
jurors as well as by the officers mentioned in the Charter. Moreover
the authorised swanimotes were clearly not intended to form an
essential part of the forest procedure, as they were not to be held
except in those counties in which they were wont to be held l ; but the
general inquisitions of the fourteenth century were held in all the
counties in which there were forests and formed the basis of the
forest procedure.
It is probable that the wardens of the reign of John were in the
habit of summoning the inhabitants and officers of their forests to
come to assemblies, called swanimotes, for no other purpose than that
of amercing those who failed to come. To check this abuse the
Charter declared that swanimotes were only to be held on certain
occasions and in a particular manner. The inquisition by four
neighbouring townships may have been an existing institution
which was not intended 2 to be abolished by the Charter, or it may
have been introduced shortly after the grant of the Charter, as an
institution without which the beasts of the forest could not be pre-
served. But, however it arose, it was well established in the middle
of the reign of Henry III., and it was* as a development of these in-
quisitions by the four townships that the general inquisition came into
being.
The following is an example of a general inquisition, of the year
1369:
1 As to this see the concluding words found dead or maimed. They complained
of chapter eight of the Charter of the that notwithstanding the Charter the
Forest printed on p. xxviii above. warden was in the habit of summoning the
2 The terms of the complaints made by freemen and townships to inquisitions,
the inhabitants of the Forest of Mendip in ' although there is no beast dead or
the year 1277, seem to show that they did maimed nor any lawful indictment by a
not consider that the Charter of the Forest forester or any other certain man accord-
prohibited inquisitions by four neighbour- ing to the assize of the forest ' (see p. 127
ing townships when a beast had been below).
THE LESSER COURTS OF THE FOREST xlix
Inquisicfo l facta apud Uppingham die 2 Martis proxima post festum
apostolorum Petri et Pauli anno regni regis Edwardi tercii post conquestum
quadragesimo tercio coram Petro atte Wode, locum tenente Iohannis 3 de
Foxle, custodis foreste domini regis citra Trentam de statu foreste de
Rotiand' in comitatu Rotland per sacramentum Henrici Boyuille locum
tenentis Iohannis Wardedeu senescalli foreste predicte . . . . 4 foresta-
riorum . . . . 6 uiridariorum . . . . 6 regardatorum . . . . 6 liberorum
tenencium infra metas foreste . . . . 6 liberorum tenencium extra metas
foreste ; qui dicunt quod Iohannes Wardu et Willelmus Wardu, uicarius
ecclesie de Bodyham, ocupauerunt quamdam porcionem terre de solo
domini regis uocatam Calkeleghes in Leyefeld' continentem per esti-
macionem triginta acras terre et proficuum inde recepere per sex annos,
uidelicet, ab anno regni regis nunc tricesimo septimo usque annum quadra-
gesimum tercium et ualet per annum xiij sol. iiij den'.
Item dicunt quod idem Iohannes succidit de magnis ramis quercuum
domini regis tarn in parco quam extra per annos supradictos ad ualenciam
lx sol'.
Item dicunt quod idem Iohannes et Alicia uxor eius feoffati sunt de
balKua senescalcie foreste Rotland' per Robertum Wardu et Iohannem
Porte per simplicem factum in patria sine breue uel licencia domini regis,
tenenda dicto Iohanni Wardu et Alicie uxori eius et heredibus dicti Iohannis
Wardu imperpetuum.
Item dicunt quod Iohannes Wardu custos dicte foreste afferat presenta-
ciones presentatas 7 per forestarios in swanemotis 8 dicte foreste per semet-
ipsum absque aliquibus aliis afferatoribus ad hoc iuratis et hoc ad domum
suam 9 propriam 10 extra comitatum sine presencia uiridariorum dicte foreste,
ubi de iure et consuetudine a tempore quo non exstat memoria solebant
afferari in swanimotis in presencia uiridariorum et per homines iuratos ; et
sic per extorcionem leuari fecit vj sol' viij den' ad usum suum proprium de
diuersis hominibus patrie predicte.
Item dicunt quod predictus Iohannes Wardu, custos dicte foreste, pre-
posuit quemdam Robertum Brerlee in officium forestarii in foresta
predicta, ubi dictus Robertus Brerlee antea indictatus fuit de transgressione
uenacionis in foresta predicta, et ea de causa ab officio forestarii remotus,
manutenendo ll ipsum in transgressione predicta contra assisam foreste.
The verdict of the officers and freemen in this inquisition relates
solely to the misdeeds of the warden of the forest. Any offence,
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 307. steward and in another part as warden.
2 3 July 1369. 4 Six names.
8 John of Foxley was appointed warden 5 Two names,
of the forest South of the Trent by letters 6 Twelve names,
patent dated 26 April 1368 (see Fine Koll 7 MS. • presentatos.'
169, m. 15). At this date the justices ■ These swanimotes were almost cer-
of the forests north and south of the tainly the courts of attachment for the
Trent were styled wardens, and the wardens forest. See p. xxxvii above,
of the individual forests were distinguished " MS. ' suum.'
by the title of stewards (see p. xv above). ,0 MS. 4 proprium.'
It will be observed that John Wardeu is M MS. ' matenendo.'
described in one part of this inquisition as
1 INTRODUCTION
however, against the laws of the forest might be proved in the forest
inquisitions, which therefore supply a vast body of material for the
history of the forests in the fourteenth century. The following are a
few further extracts from inquisitions l made in the forest of Eutland
towards the close of the reign of Edward III.
6 October 1365. Quod I. de T. die 2 Martis proxima ante festum Natiui-
tatis beate Marie interfecit unum prikettum cum arcu et sagittis in balliua
de Beaumond in foresta predicta et inde fecit uoluntatem.
Quod T. le E. habuit tempore pessone sex porcellos sine agistamento
agistatorum precii in toto iij sol.
21 May 1372. Quod L. H. equitabat in Leyefeld cum leporariis ligatis
superuidendo balliuam suam die 3 Lune proxima ante festum Omnium Sanc-
torum anno predicti domini regis xliiij ; et predicti leporarii fregerunt dictum
ligamen et ceciderunt super unam damam ; et dictus L. in auxilium eiusdem
dame dictos leporarios fugauit a dama predicta, quam quidem damam dictus
L. nequiter uulnerauit et recessit.
18 March 137f. Quod prior de Landa habet parcum iuxta forestam
domini regis predicti non inclusum ; utrum sit ad nocumentum uel non
ignorant, quia fere domini regis intrare possunt et redire.
IV.
THE FOBEST EYEE.
The Forest Eyre of the year 1255.
The forest eyre 4 was a court called into being by the king's letters
patent appointing justices to hear and determine pleas of the forest
in a particular county or group of counties. Thus in the year 1255
William le Breton, Nicholas of Eomsey, Geoffrey of Lewknor and
Simon of Thorp were appointed itinerant justices in the counties
of Huntingdon, Northampton, Buckingham and Oxford, by letters
patent 5 which may be translated as follows :
The king to the archbishops, abbots, priors, earls, barons, knights,
freemen and all others of the counties of Huntingdon Northampton
1 For. Proe., Tr. of Bee, No. 307. to speak of the whole series of rolls of an
2 2 September 1365. eyre in any county as a • file.' In some
■ 28 October 1370. letters patent of 2 November 1283, we
4 The proceedings of the forest eyres have ' uiginti et octo rotulos in uno liga-
are enrolled on oblong-shaped pieces of mine de placitis foreste in comitatu
parchment sewn together at one end. Suthampt' de itinere Eogeri de Clifford.'
Each piece of parchment was called a (See Patent Eoll 101, m. 4.) In this
' roll,' and the words ' primus rotulus ' are passage the word • ligamen ' is properly
often on the first roll, ' secundus rotulus ' translated as ' file.'
on the second, and so on. It is convenient * Patent Roll 65, m. 7.
THE FOREST EYRE li
Buckingham and Oxford greeting. Know ye that we have appointed our
beloved and faithful William le Breton, Nicholas of Romsey, Geoffrey of
Lewknor and Simon of Thorp, our justices in eyre this time for pleas
of our forest in the counties aforesaid. And therefore we send you word
that to the same William, Nicholas, Geoffrey and Simon as to our justices
in eyre for the aforesaid pleas you be intendent and respondent in all
things which to those pleas belong as is aforesaid.
In testimony whereof etc.
Witness the king at Woodstock on the first day of June.
Ten days later the king had addressed letters close l to the sheriffs
of the counties of Huntingdon, Northampton, Oxford and Bucking-
ham relating to the business of the eyre. The following is a transla-
tion of the Latin enrolment :
Concerning the eyre of Justices for pleas of the forest.
The king to the sheriff of Huntingdon greeting. Summon by good
summoners the archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, earls, barons, knights and
all free tenants who have lands or tenements within the metes of our forest
in your bailiwick and from every town within your county within the metes
of our forest in your bailiwick four men and the reeve and the foresters of
the towns and all others who are wont and ought to come before justices in
eyre for pleas of the forest, that they be at Huntingdon on the quinzaine 2
of the Holy Trinity in the thirty-ninth year of our reign before our beloved
and faithful William le Breton, Nicholas of Romsey, Simon of Thorp and
Geoffrey of Lewknor, whom we have appointed our justices in eyre for pleas
of our forest in the county aforesaid, to hear and do our precept concerning
those things which belong to the aforesaid pleas.
Cause also to come before our same justices all our foresters and verderers,
as well those who now are as those who have been foresters and verderers
since the last pleas of the forest, with all their attachments as well of the
vert as of the venison, which have arisen since the last pleas of the forest
and have not yet been determined, to wit, as well of those persons attached
who dwell within the metes of the forest as of those who dwell outside the
forest.
Cause also all the regarders of your bailiwick to come before the same
justices, so that they have all their regards sealed with their seals, and also
all the agisters of your same bailiwick with the agistments ; and have there
the summoners and this writ.
Witness the king at Clarendon the twenty-first day of May.
1 Close Boll 70, m. 12 d. forest eyre :
2 6 June 1255. According to Bracton * Facta coram iusticiariis itinerantibus
fifteen days must elapse between the date generali summonicione ad certos diem et
of the summons for a general eyre and the locum que ad minus continere debet
date of the eyre. It would seem that the spacium quindecim dierum.' (De Legibut
same interval was observed in the case of a Anglie, Rolls Series, ii. 234.)
lii INTRODUCTION
In the same manner an order is sent to the sheriff of Northampton that
on the day which the same justices shall make known to him he cause to
come etc. at Northampton. Witness as above.
To the sheriff of Oxford that at the day etc. at Oxford.
To the sheriff of Buckingham that at the day etc. at Buckingham.
The four justices in eyre began their work at Huntingdon l on the
6th June, and finished it before the 20th June, when they had arrived
at Northampton and had begun to hear pleas relating to the forests
of Bockingham 2 and Cliffe. We cannot say how long they were so
engaged at Northampton, but it is probable that they adjourned for
a vacation after they had been there two or three weeks, for they can
hardly have had sufficient business to occupy their time in this way
until the 30th September when we again find them at Northampton. 3
At this date they seem to have begun hearing pleas relating to the
forests of Whittlewood and Salcey, which lay partly in the county of
Northampton and partly in the county of Buckingham. While at
Northampton, however, the justices seem to have been concerned with
those pleas only which related to the parts of the forest of Whittle-
wood which lay in Northamptonshire, leaving those relating to the
parts in Buckinghamshire for subsequent consideration. On the other
hand, they heard all the pleas 4 relating to the parts of the forest of
Salcey which were in Buckinghamshire as well as those which were
in Northamptonshire while they were at Northampton. The reason
for this difference in procedure may have been that considerable
portions of Whittlewood lay in both counties while nearly the whole of
Salcey lay in the county of Northampton.
On the 15th November 1255, the same four justices were at
Buckingham hearing pleas of the parts of the forest of Whittlewood and
Bernwood which lay in Buckinghamshire 5 ; and on the 24th January
1 The pleas of the venison heard at No. 2) show that the justices were at
Huntingdon are printed on pp. 11 to 26 Westminster on 13 October 1255 : ' A die
below. sancti Michaelis in quindecim dies anno
2 The pleas relating to the venison in etc. tricesimo nono quando iusticiarii pre-
the forest of Eockingham are printed on ceptu domini regis f uerunt apud WestmV
pp. 27 to 38 below. 4 An inquisition is recorded on these
3 The pleas of the forests of Whittle- rolls to have been made by the townships
wood and Salcey are recorded on a separate of Lathbury, Gay hurst, Haversham and
file, to which the reference is For. Proc, Hanslope, all in the county of Buckingham,
Tr. of Rec, No. 70. This file has no and forest of Salcey, concerning the taking
general heading on any of its rolls ; but the of a buck, in Little Lenford in the same
pleas of the forest of Whittlewood, which county. (For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 70,
pegin in the middle of a roll, have above Roll 8.)
them the words, ' De balliua de Witle- 5 The rolls of the eyre in this county
wode ; de in crastino sancti Michaelis.' are headed : ' Placita foreste in comitatu
The following words on roll 1 d of the Buk' apud Buk' die Lune proxima post
Buckingham eyre (For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, festum sancti Martini anno regni Henrici
THE FOREST EYRE liii
125f they were at Oxford x hearing pleas of the forests of Whichwood
and Shotover and that part of the forest of Bernwood which lay in
Oxfordshire.
Three days after their arrival at Oxford William le Breton and his
colleagues were appointed 2 justices in eyre for pleas of the forest in
the counties of Berkshire, Butland and Essex; and on the same day 3
letters close were addressed to the sheriffs of Essex, Butland, Berk-
shire and Surrey in the same form as those which were sent to the
sheriff of Huntingdon on the 1st June of the preceding year. As
there was but one forest in the counties of Surrey and Berkshire,
frequently called the forest 4 of Windsor, it is improbable that the king
ever intended a session in eyre to be held in one county and not in the
other. There can be little doubt, therefore, that the word ' Surreia ' was
accidentally omitted from the enrolment of the letters patent of the
28th January, more especially as letters close were, as we have seen,
addressed on that day to the sheriff of Surrey as well as to the sheriffs
of Essex, Butland and Berkshire.
So far the eyre rolls have enabled us to state positively the days
on which the justices began their sessions in the different counties
which they visited. At the head of the first eyre roll of each county
we have some such words as ' Pleas 5 of the forest in the county of
Huntingdon on the quinzaine of the Holy Trinity in the thirty-ninth
year of the reign of King Henry the son of King John before William
le Breton .... justices itinerating for pleas of the forest in the
county of Huntingdon.' But as the rolls of the eyre of William le
Breton and his fellows in Essex, Berkshire and Surrey no longer
exist, it is impossible to trace their movements through these counties
with any precision. We know, however, from the rolls 6 of the Rut-
land eyre that they were holding pleas in Rutland on the 12th June
1256 ; and an entry 7 on the same rolls shows that they intended to
quadragesimo coram . . . iusticiariis as- latter name seems to be identical with
signatis ad placita foreste in eodem comi- the one to which the ancient name was
tatu.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 2.) properly applied.
1 The heading of the rolls of the 5 See p. 11 below.
Oxfordshire eyre is as follows : " Placita 6 The" general heading of the Rutland
foreste apud Oxon' coram . . . die Lune eyre is : ' Placita uenacionis coram
proxima post octabas sancti Hyllarii anno Willelmo Briton' .... apud Okham in
regni regis Henrici filii regis Iohannis comitatu Roteland' in crastino sancte
quadragesimo.' (For.Proc.,Tr.ofRec.,No. Trinitatis anno regni regis Henrici quad-
251.) ragesimo.' The reference to the rolls of
2 Patent Roll 67, m. 17. the eyre in this county is For. Proc., Tr. of
■ Close Roll 74, m. 16 in dorso. Bee, No. 139.
4 This forest was sometimes called the 7 ' Ideo mandatum est uicecomiti Leyc'
forest of Colynridge, a name which has per- quod distringat dictum R. quod habeat eum
haps become by corruption Cobham Ridge. coram iusticiariis itinerantibus ad placita
The district which is now known by the foreste apud Rading' a die sancti Iohannii
liv INTRODUCTION
be at Beading on the 8th July. We may therefore assume that they
held a session in eyre in Essex in the spring, after leaving Oxford and
before going into Eutland, and another session in Berkshire and Surrey
in the autumn after leaving Eutland.
On the 17th October 1256 the king sent letters patent l to William
le Breton and his fellows appointing them justices in another group of
counties. By a strange error the enrolment of the letters patent
omits the names of these counties, and has instead the words ' in
predictis comitatibus.' It is probable that the counties mentioned in
the original letters patent were Hampshire and Wiltshire, as there
was a forest eyre in both of these counties in the following year. Bolls
of the Hampshire and Wiltshire eyre still exist ; but they happen to be
peculiar in having no headings 2 giving the dates at which the justices
began to hear their pleas. Internal evidence, however, proves that
the sessions 3 in eyre in these counties, which comprised a large
number of forests, were held in the year 1257.
The history of the rest of the eyre is not obscured by the want of
documentary evidence. We learn from a memorandum 4 on the Close
Boll of 41 Hen. III. that William le Breton, Nicholas of Bomsey,
Geoffrey of Lewknor and Alexander de Montfort (who took the place
of Simon of Thorp) were directed to hold pleas of the forests of Dorset
at Dorchester on the 12th November 1257. It appears, however,
from the rolls 5 of the eyre that the justices actually began their work
on the 7th November. On the 26th November they were hearing
pleas 6 of the Somerset forests, having been constituted justices for the
purpose by letters 7 patent dated the 8th November ; and on the 20th
January 1258, they were at Gloucester hearing pleas 8 of the forest
Baptiste in quindecim dies.' There is a taken by Alexander de Montforfc.
similar entry on the rolls of the Oxford 3 The letters patent of the bishop of
eyre. (For. Proc, Tr. of Rec., No. 251, Salisbury extracted from the rolls and
Boll 2 d.) printed on p. lxxxix below show that the
1 Patent Eoll 67, m. 1. Wiltshire eyre almost certainly took place
2 Although there is no general heading after 15 June 1257.
to the rolls of the Wiltshire eyre, the 4 Close Eoll 75, m. 1 d.
following special heading occurs on one of 5 The heading of the Dorset eyre rolls
the rolls, which contains some transcripts is as follows : ' Placita foreste in comitatu
of forest charters :' Transcriptum cartarum Dors' coram Willelmo Britone, Nicholao
in comitatu Wiltes' de itinere R. Walarund, de Romes', Galfrido de Leukenour' et
W. le Bretun, N. de Romes' et G. de Alexandro de Monteforti in crastino sancti
Leukenour' apud Wilton' anno regni Leonardi anno regni regis quadragesimo
regis Henrici quadragesimo primo.' (For. secundo.' The reference to these rolls is
Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 198, Boll 20.) Robert For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 10.
Walerand was justice of the forest south of 6 See p. 41 below.
the Trent at this time, but he took no part 7 Patent Roll 69, m. 17 d.
in the forest eyre in any of the other 8 There is no general heading to the
counties (except perhaps Hampshire). He rolls of the Gloucestershire eyre, but there
was probably merely filling the place of is a special heading to the essoins :
Simon of Thorp, which was afterwards ' Essonia cap ta coram Willelmo Briton ',
THE FOREST EYRE lv
of Dean, pursuant to letters patent 1 dated the 15th December
1257.
"We have now traced the progress of the justices through a group
of thirteen counties. There remain four others, all lying south of the
river Trent, in which there were royal forests of considerable extent ;
namely, Staffordshire, Salop, Worcestershire and Herefordshire. 2
William le Breton, however, and his fellows never held a session in
eyre in any of these counties. There are no rolls which record pleas
held by them there ; nor are there any entries on the Patent and
Close Eolls, which relate to their appointment as justices. On the
other hand, by letters patent 3 dated the 3rd December 1261, the king
appointed Alan la Zouche, Nicholas of Komsey and William of Powick
justices in eyre for pleas of the forest in the counties of Stafford,
Salop, and Hereford, and on the 15th February in the following
year he sent letters close 4 to the sheriff of Worcester directing him to
summon all those who were wont and ought to attend the forest eyre
to come before the same justices.
The rolls of the forest pleas 5 held in the counties of Worcester
and Salop in the year 1262 pursuant to these letters patent still
exist, and, as they contain many pleas of the venison of an earlier
date than 1255, they show clearly that no eyre was held by William
le Breton and his fellows in either of these counties after they left
Gloucester in 1258. The same point is established in the case of
Staffordshire by an official transcript 6 of the eyre of Alan la
Zouche in 1261, made for the use of the king some forty years later.
In the case of Herefordshire the rolls of the year 1262, which might
establish in the same way that there was no eyre in that county in
1258, no longer exist. We may assume, however, that, as in the case
of Staffordshire, Worcestershire and Salop, there was no eyre in that
year.
There can be little doubt that the king originally intended
William le Breton and his fellows to hold forest pleas, in all the
Nicholaode Roraes', Galfrido de Leukenore Rutland respectively. It is probable that
iusticiariis itinerantibus ad placita foreste the pleas of the forest in Warwickshire
apud Gloucestr' in octabis sancti Hyllarii were heard at Worcester, and those of the
anno quadragesimo secundo.' forest in Leicestershire at Oakham.
There is a similar heading to the first s Patent Roll 75, m. 19.
roll of the venison at the same eyre. The 4 Close Roll 82, m. 15 d.
reference to these rolls is For. Proc, Tr. of 5 The reference to the eyre in Worces-
Rec No 28. tershire is For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 227,
1 Patent Roll 69, m. 15. and to the eyre in Salop For. Proc., Tr. of
2 There were also small tracts of forest Rec, No. 145.
in Warwickshire and Leicestershire which " For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 183 .
were on the borders of Worcestershire and
lvi INTRODUCTION
counties of England south of the river Trent in which there were
forests. They were to begin with the forests in the counties of
Huntingdon, Northampton, Buckingham and Oxford, and to journey
through the other forests in the order which the king should from
time to time direct. They probably held no pleas in Staffordshire,
Worcestershire, Herefordshire and Salop, because their services were
wanted elsewhere. It must be remembered that the year 1258 was an
eventful one in English history. A parliament met in London on the
9th April, and on the 2nd May the king assented to the election of
twenty-four persons to prepare a scheme of reforms which were to be
submitted to an adjourned session of the Parliament at Oxford on the
10th June. The council of twenty-four drew up the famous Provisions
of Oxford, to which the king gave his consent on the 12th October.
While events 3 such as these were taking place, it is easy to believe
that the presence of the justices in eyre or of some of them was
required at the parliament, more especially as certain of the
grievances of the barons related to the king's forests.
The Periodicity of the Eyre.
We have already seen that in December 1261 the king appointed
Alan la Zouche and two other justices in eyre to hold pleas of the
forest in the group of four counties, which William le Breton left
unvisited in the year 1258. After Alan la Zouche finished his work
in this group, the king by letters patent 2 dated the 10th April 1262,
appointed him and his two fellows justices in eyre for pleas of the
forest in Huntingdonshire, Northamptonshire and Buckinghamshire.
It would seem that the king intended them to hold forest pleas in
all the counties of England in which there were forests. But just as
the eyre of William le Breton came to an end without pleas being held
in four counties south of the Trent in which there were forests, so
again the eyre 3 of Alan la Zouche was incomplete, and a few
1 As to these matters of history, see there was an eyre before Alan la Zouche
Stubbs, Constitutional History, ed. 1875, and his fellows in Essex in 47 Hen. iii. (See
vol. ii, p. 73. For. Proc, Ex. Q. B., Bundle L, No. 20.)
2 Patent Roll 75, m. 12. The rolls of the eyre held in 53 Hen. iii.
3 No records of this eyre now exist, (see p. lvii note 1 below) show conclusively
except the rolls of the Wiltshire eyre, to that no eyre was held by Alan ZouGhe in
which the reference is For. Proc, Tr. of 46 Hen. iii., except in those counties for
Bee, 199, and of Worcestershire, Salop which records of an eyre in that year still
and Stafford, to which the references have exist, and except also in the counties of
been given above. There is, however, a roll Hereford, Oxford, and perhaps also Buck-
of fines and amercements which show that ingham and Northampton.
THE FOREST EYRE lvii
counties only were visited by him. This, again, was probably owing
to political reasons.
There was one more eyre l in the reign of Henry III. The justices 2
were Eoger of Clifford, Matthew de Colombieres, Nicholas of Eomsey
and Keynold of Oakley. It began in the year 53 Hen. III., and
continued to the end of the reign, extending over nearly all the
counties of England south of the Trent in which there were forests.
It was probably the death of the king, in 1272, which prevented the
justices from visiting the remaining counties. Thus it seems that in
the latter half of the reign of Henry III,, three forest eyres were held
south of the Trent at intervals of about seven years. The first began
in 39 Henry III., the second in 46 Henry III., and the third in
53 Henry III. In some counties the interval was longer and in some
shorter, but it would seem that seven years was supposed to be the
proper interval between one eyre and another. It was a recognised
rule 3 that this was the shortest interval between successive eyres of
justices for pleas of the crown and common pleas ; and it is probable
that the holding of the forest eyre was considered subject to the same
limitation.
In the reign of Edward I. the eyres began to be held much more
irregularly ; thus there was one in Sherwood Forest in 1287, and not
another 4 until 1334. This was an exceptionally long interval, but
in all the forests the intervals became longer and longer.
The Justices in Eyre.
It was usual for the justices of the forest north and south of the
Trent to be placed in all commissions of eyre in their respective
provinces.
1 The records of this eyre are in the 30 September 1272, No. 72.
class of documents known as For. Proc, 2 They were appointed justices in eyre
Tr. of Bee. Their numbers in the class for pleas of the forest in the counties of
and the dates of the sessions in the differ- Eutland, Surrey, Hants, Dorset, Somerset
ent counties, to which the records relate, and Gloucester, by letters patent dated
are as follows :— Rutland, 25 June 1269, 9 June 1269. (See Patent Roll 86, m. 12.)
No. 140. Hampshire, 30 September 1269, The usual writ to the sheriffs for an eyre
No. 158. Dorset, 25 November 1269, No. in the counties of Hereford and Stafford
11. Wiltshire, 14 January 12fg, No. 200. was dated 16 September 1271. (See Close
Somerset, 23 May 1270, No. 153. Surrey, Roll 92, m. 7 d.)
8 June 1270, No. 194. Gloucestershire, 8 As to this see Pollock and Maitland,
6 October, 1270, No. 29. Worcestershire, History of English Law, ed. 1898, vol. i.,
29 October 1270, No. 229. Staffordshire, p. 202.
30 September 1271, No. 184. Salop, * For the date of the eyre of 1287 see
3 November 1271, No. 147. Herefordshire, p. 61, and for that of 1334 see p. 65, below.
1 December 1271, No. 35. Oxfordshire, The rolls of the eyre of 1334 show that
22 May 1272, No. 137. Northamptonshire, there had been no eyre since 1287.
lviii INTRODUCTION
Alan la Zouche ' and Eoger of Clifford who were included in the
commissions of 46 Henry III. and 53 Henry III. respectively were
justices of the forest south of the Trent, while William 2 de Vescy and
Kalph de Neville, who were among the itinerant justices at Notting-
ham in 15 Edward I. and 8 Edward III. respectively, were justices
of the forest north of the Trent. It was a remarkable feature of the
eyre of William le Breton which began in June 1255 and ended in
the spring of 1258, that neither he nor any one of his colleagues was
a justice of the forest. At the beginning of the eyre Arnold 3 de Bois
held the office, but on the 1st September 1256, he was succeeded by
Eobert Walerand 4 who was still justice of the forest south of the
Trent when the eyre closed.
The forest justices in eyre were usually men of some position.
William le Breton 5 held lands of the king in chief ; and had been
sheriff of the county of Essex. He was a lawyer who from time to
time filled various offices. He was one of the justices assigned for
the custody of the Jews in 36 Henry III. He was more than once a
justice in eyre for pleas of the crown and common pleas, and he was
for many years constantly employed as a justice specially com-
missioned to take particular assizes.
Geoffrey of Lewknor, one of the colleagues of William le Breton,
had a very similar career. He was at one time a justice assigned
for the custody of the Jews ; he was also more than once a justice in
eyre for pleas of the crown and common pleas ; and he was fre-
quently commissioned to take particular assizes. Unlike William le
Breton, who was only an itinerant forest justice late in life, Geoffrey
of Lewknor was employed in this way early in his official career.
Nicholas of Eomsey was a man who seems never to have per-
formed any important duties, either judicial or administrative,
except as an itinerant forest justice. He was one of the colleagues
of William le Breton in 1255, of Alan la Zouche in 1262, of Boger
1 Alan la Zouche and Eoger of Clifford (See p. 42 below.)
were appointed by letters patent dated 2 William de Vescy and Ralph de
12 June 1261 and 8 August 1265 re- Neville were appointed justices of the
spectively. (See Patent Eoll 74, m. 10, forest north of the Trent by letters patent
and Patent Roll 82, m. 11.) It is pro- dated 30 June 1285 and 9 October 1311
bable that Roger of Clifford was not a respectively. (See Patent Roll 103, m. 12,
justice in eyre in all the counties, as he and Fine Roll 131, m. 8.)
was succeeded in the office of justice of the 8 See p. 15, n. 3, below,
forest south of the Trent by Roger of 4 See p. xvi, note 3.
Clifford junior, who was appointed to the 5 For particulars concerning William
office by letters patent dated 1 August 1270. le Breton and his fellows, see Foss's
(See Fine Roll 67, m. 5.) It should be Judges of England. As to William le
noticed that at the Somerset eyre which Breton see also Britton, ed. 1867, pp. xxi
began on 23 May 1270 the place of Roger and xxii.
of Clifford was taken by Henry of Burghill.
THE FOREST EYRE Hx
of Clifford in 1269 and of Eoger of Clifford the younger l in 1277.
It was probably thought desirable to include in a commission where
possible some person who had acted as a forest justice in a previous
eyre.
Pleas of the Vert.
The enrolment of the proceedings of a forest eyre is usually
divided into several sections, of which the two most important are
entftled ' Pleas of the Vert,' and ' Pleas of the Venison ' respectively.
The language in which the pleas of the vert are recorded is of a
monotonous character. Usually the nature of the trespass is not
mentioned, and the trespasser is merely stated to be liable for a small
sum of money ' for vert.' If the trespass was committed in the
king's demesne, the additional words ' in dominico ' are entered on
the roll. The following is a portion of the record 2 of the pleas of
the vert in the forest of Huntingdon at the eyre of July 1255.
PLACITA DE UIRIDI
De Ricardo Truke de Dulinton' pro uiridi . . . xijd.
De Rogero Fabr' de Pyrie pro eodem . . . .xijd.
De Willelmo le Pestur de Pyr' pro plegio eiusdem Rogeri xijd.
De Galfrido Rede de eadem pro eodem . . . .xijd.
De Albino Loom de Brampton' pro uiridi . . . xijd.
De Alano Kyng' de eadem pro eodem . . . .xijd.
De Laurencio filio Oseberti de Suho pro eodem . . xijd.
De Godefrido filio Roberti de Suho pro plegio . . . xijd.
De Rogero filio Emme de Bugeton' pro eodem . . xijd.
De Willelmo de Pentham in Suho pro uiridi . . . xijd.
De Laurencio filio Gileberti in Suho pro plegio . . xijd.
De Thoma filio Walteri de Dudincton' pro eodem . . xijd.
De Augustino Paum' de Aukenbir' pro uiridi . . . xijd.
De Godefrido de Suho pro uiridi xijd.
De Laurencio de Suho pro plegio .... fugitiuus ; nichil.
De Willelmo de Pentham pro eodem .... alibi
De Henrico de Litlehey pro uiridi xijd.
De Rogero filio Thome de Raueleye pro plegio eiusdem . i ,
De Roberto le Carpent' de eadem pro eodem . . . J
De Ricardo ad Molendinum de Dylinton' pro uiridi . .xijd.
De Willelmo de Wynewich pro uiridi .... pauper
1 Roger of Clifford and three others the rolls of the eyre held pursuant to these
were appointed justices in eyre for pleas letters patent is For. Proc. Tr. of Bee,
of the forest in the county of Essex by No. 12. The same justices afterwards
letters patent dated 4 February 127f . (See held sessions in eyre in other counties.
Patent Roll 95, m. 22.) The reference to 2 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 41, Roll 2.
lx INTRODUCTION
De Henrico filio Walteri de eadem pro plegio . . . xijd.
De Gileberto filio Eanulfi de eadem pro eodem . . mortuus
De Roberto de Elyngton' pro uiridi . . . .xijd.
De Roberto filio Sweyn pro plegio Rames'
The total number of entries is seventy-six, of which the remainder
are in one or other of the forms just printed, except the four following.
De Waltero preposito de Elynton pro uiridi l . . . iiijs.
De Ricardo Ulf de Wodehurst quia fuit inuentus in
foresta contra assisam Ram'
De Roberto filio Uyel de Grafham quia cepit sex quercus
sine uisu et liberata xxs.
De abbate de Rames' pro boscis suis uastatis de ueteri et
pro defalta forestariorum suorum . . . . xx marce
The words ' pro plegio ' seem to have been used of the pledges who
failed to produce a trespasser at the forest eyre. Where a sum of
money is placed opposite a name and that name occurs again in the
list, the word ' alibi ' is placed after the name instead of a second sum,
and the first sum represents the total sum for which the trespasser
is liable for all his trespasses. Probably the word ' Eamesia,' written
instead of a sum of money, means that the trespasser against whose
name it is placed was a tenant of the abbot of Eamsey, w T ho made fine
at the eyre for all the trespasses of his tenants. 2
The Pleas of the Venison.
The forest eyre was chiefly concerned with fines and amercements
for breaches of the laws of the forest. It was almost as much a
financial assembly as a court of law. The records of its proceedings
are memoranda of sums of money owing to the king rather than
registers of process and judgments. For this reason the pleas of the
venison, which might be expected to throw some light on the manners
and customs of the English peasantry, are disappointing. In general
they record those facts only from which the king might derive a fine
or an amercement. Often 3 they tell us nothing of a trespass, except
the sum by which the trespasser made fine for his release from
prison. It is even difficult to deduce from the mass of common form
in which the pleas are recorded the nature of much of the ordinary
process adopted in the administration of the forest law.
1 The word ' Dominicum ' is written in Ed. iii. see p 67 below,
the margin of the roll opposite this entry. 3 See, for example, the case of Walter
1 For pleas of the vert of the reign of the son of Robert Perchead on p. 36 below.
THE FOREST EYRE Ixi
It was the usual practice l for the first enrolment to begin
with some such words as, * It is presented by the foresters and
verderers, to wit . . . and proved ; ' while the first words of subse-
quent enrolments were, ' It is presented and proved by the same
persons.' Apparently they mean that the presentment was made by
the foresters and verderers in the forest eyre, and that the fact was
proved by the production of the record of a special inquisition. We
may search in vain for any signs of a jury 2 at the forest eyre. Some-
times, indeed, the townships 3 were required to come before the justices
so that they might certify them of the fact found by them in the inqui-
sition ; but there is nothing in the eyre rolls, which can lead us to
suppose that in ordinary cases they were consulted by the court.
The record of the inquisition seems to have been considered a satis-
factory proof of the facts which it contained, without the aid of
further evidence.
If the forest officers made a presentment which was inconsistent
with their records, they were either imprisoned or amerced according
to the gravity of their offence. An example 4 of a verderer being
imprisoned occurred in the Northampton eyre of 1255, when it was
presented and proved that a certain ' beast ' was taken beneath the
hedge of the castle of Eockingham by the men of the parson of
Easton. The word ' beast ' is vague, but it can hardly be doubted
that it meant ' beast of the forest.' Yet one of the verderers, John
Lovet contradicted his roll, by saying that the beast which was taken
was a certain sheep, and on being convicted of this by the verderers,
foresters and his other fellows, was sent to prison. Probably the
justices asked him to explain the word ' beast ' and he gave, a false
explanation with a view to screening a friend or avoiding censure for
1 It is difficult to say precisely what presentment of the foresters, on the ground
was the procedure followed in the matter that the former could only enrol what the
of presentments at the forest eyre. On latter had presented to them. In the
p. 22 below, it is stated that the verderers Pickering eyre of 8 Ed. iii. the introductory
ought not to enrol anything in their rolls words are not in the usual form. Thus :
except a presentment of the foresters. It • Presentatum est per predictos forestarios
seems clear, however, notwithstanding this et conuictum per uiridarios ' (Duchy of
statement, that they might enrol inquisi- Lancaster Miscellaneous Book, No. 1 fo.
tions. The presentments appear to have 203 r°.) See also the following note,
been entered on the rolls, as memoranda : 2 At the Pickering eyre of 8 Ed. iii.
that is to say, they were not expressed to be the introductory words to the pleas of the
presentments. See, for example, the case venison in some of the wards are as follows :
on p. 83. In such cases there seems to ' Presentatum est per forestarios et duo-
have been no inquisition or trial to which decim iuratores warde predicte et conuictum
the word ' conuictum ' can refer. It is a per uiridarios.' (Duchy of Lancaster Mis-
matter of doubt whether the foresters and cellaneous Book, No. 1, fo. 102 r°, 104 v°.)
verderers made their presentments jointly The mention of jurors in this case is quite
or severally. It may even be the case that exceptional,
the presentment of the verderers was the * See pp. 71,72 below. 4 See p. 35 below.
d
lxii INTRODUCTION
an inadequate enrolment. The colloquy between the verderer and
justices would help us to understand some of the details of the pro-
cedure of the court, but nothing so frivolous adorns the records of a
forest eyre. This and other causes, however, tend to show that when
any further inquiry ! was made before the itinerant justices about the
matters presented to them, it was by way of certification rather than
of rehearing. 2
We have already seen 3 that the townships were amerced in the
forest eyre for not having come fully to make an inquisition, if they
had been unable to ascertain anything about the matters for which
they were summoned or anything sufficient to satisfy the justices.
In many of the forest eyre rolls the amercements of the townships are
written above their names in the clauses which state their defaults.
But sometimes instead of seeing a sum of money thus interlineated,
we see the word * alibi ' in its place. This, however, only happens
where the township, above the name of which the word ' alibi ' is
found, has aleady been amerced for not having come to some other
forest inquisition. Thus at the Huntingdon eyre of 1255 the townships 4
of Great Stukeley, Abbots Eipton, Hartford and King's Eipton were
amerced for not having come fully to a special inquisition held 5 on the
22nd March 125|, and the amercement of each of these townships is
duly written above its name in the eyre roll. In the month of April,
1255, another special inquisition was held by the townships of King's
Eipton, Abbots Eipton, Hartford and Little Stukeley. At the eyre
held shortly afterwards, all these townships were put in mercy 6 for
not having come fully to the inquisition. But instead of a sum of
money, the word ■ alibi ' appears in the eyre roll above the names
of three of the townships — namely, Kings Eipton, Abbots Eipton and
Hartford — all of which had been amerced for not coming fully to the
inquisition of the 22nd March 125|. On the other hand, the amerce-
1 A good example of certification by the uiridarii et debent concordare et ueritatem
verderers occurs in the Northamptonshire dicere in omnibus et modo uariant in
eyre roll of 1256 : sermone coram iusticiariis, ideo comit-
1 Philippus de Stanes homo domini tuntur gaolle.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No.
Hugonis filii Radulfi inuentus fuit in 68, Roll 1.)
parco de Clyue cum arcu et quatuor 2 In the record of the inquisition printed
sagittis barbatis et cum uno cane et duobus on p. 72 below, it is expressly stated that
garcionibus. ... Et Rogerus de Fodringhe the four townships were to come before the
et Iohannes Caperun, uiridarii, requisiti de justices to certify them,
garcionibus, qui fuerunt et quo deuenerunt, 3 See pp. xliii, xliv above,
dicunt quod fugerunt nee potuit inquiri * See p. 13 below,
qui fuerunt. Requisiti de canibus, cuius- 5 See p. 78 below.
modi canes essent, et Rogerus de Fodringhe 6 See p. 15. The record of the inquisi-
dicit quod brachettus et Iohannes Caperun tion itself no longer exists.
dicit quod fuit mastinus. Et quia sunt
THE FOREST EYRE bdii
merit of the fourth township, Little Stukeley, which had not already
been amerced for not having come fully to some inquisition, is duly
recorded on the eyre roll.
The amercements of the townships varied considerably in severity.
At the Huntingdon eyre of 1255 the township of Yaxley, which
is recorded 1 as having failed to come fully to an inquisition on
one occasion only, was amerced six marks. On the other hand,
Brampton, which failed in this way no less than six 2 times, was only
amerced two marks. The smallest amercements for a single default
were of half a mark 3 each.
On the file of the rolls of the Huntingdon eyre the amerce-
ments of trespassers against the venison were written above their
names as in the case of the townships. But on some files of eyre
rolls none of the amercements, whether of townships or of trespassers
to the venison, were interlineated in this way. For example, on the
rolls 4 of the Northampton eyre of 1255 there is no interlineation of
amercements among the pleas of the venison, but on one roll 5 of the
file there is a list of fines and amercements for trespasses against
the venison.
Just as the eyre rolls only inform us that a special inquisition has
been held when the townships which held it were amerced for not
coming fully, so they only inform us that a trespasser has been
imprisoned to secure his appearance at the forest eyre when some event
has happened which has given rise to an amercement. Thus the
record tells us of a trespasser being imprisoned when the sheriff had
released him without an order 6 from the king or the chief justice of
the forest ; or when he had been delivered to pledges pursuant to such
an order, and the pledges failed to produce him at the forest eyre. In
the one case the sheriff, in the other the pledges, 7 would be amerced ;
and consequently the fact of the imprisonment and the subsequent
default would be recorded. But if the sheriff had released his
prisoner to pledges upon the receipt of a proper mandate directing
him to do so, and the pledges produced him at the eyre, there would
1 See p. 12 below. printed in this volume.
2 Namely, once on p. 19 below, once on * See the case of Alan of Maidwell on
p. 21, three times on p. 22, and once on p. 28 below. The fact of the imprison-
P- 24. ment also appears on the rolls when
* The following are examples of town- there was any irregularity about the
ships being amerced at this sum : Little delivery of the prisoner. See, for example,
Raveley (p. 18 below), Wennington (p. 18) the case of Henry de Colleville on p. 12
ami Woolley (p. 19). below, and the case of Simon of Houghton
4 See pp. 27 to 38 below. on p. 14.
* Namely, on Roll 7, which is not 7 See p. 85 below.
d 2
lxiv INTRODUCTION
be no amercement ; and consequently the fact of the imprisonment
would not be recorded.
If the trespasser had never been attached or, having been attached,
failed to appear before the justices in eyre, there were two modes of
proceeding. Either the sheriff of the county in which he lived or had
property was ordered to cause him to appear ; or if he could not be
found and had no property by which he could be distrained, the
justices directed him to be exacted in the county court, and if he
failed to appear in due course, he was outlawed. If, however, the
trespasser was a beneficed clerk who had no lay fee, the order was
sent to the bishop of his diocese, instead of to the sheriff, but if
he had no benefice he was exacted and outlawed as if he were a
layman. When the trespasser appeared, if the presentment of the
verderers was in proper form, the justices almost invariably
adjudged that he be sent to prison. But just as he might already
have been imprisoned in order to secure h]s appearance before the
justices, so now he was imprisoned not so much by way of punishment
as for the purpose of securing payment of a fine for his ransom.
In the eyre of William le Breton, the record usually states that
the trespasser ' comes l and is detained in prison.' In some cases
nothing more is said of him, but in others the record continues,
* Afterwards he came and made fine by so many marks or shillings.'
In subsequent eyres, in place of the last entry we usually have, 2
'Afterwards the aforesaid . . . being brought out of prison, made
fine by so much money.' Even where the enrolment of a plea ends
with the words, ' he is detained in prison,' there is generally evidence
that a fine was paid. Thus, although the pleas of the venison only
inform us of the imprisonment 3 of John Lovet for the false statement
which we have already noticed, and say nothing of any fine for his
release, yet the list of amercements 4 and fines on another roll of the
same file of eyre rolls shows that he made fine by twelve marks for
his mendacity and concealment. In several other instances the same
list supplements the deficiencies in this respect of the enrolment of
the pleas of the venison. It would seem that the clerk began enrolling
1 A difficulty in translating may con- some cases the intention of the scribe can
veniently be noticed here. In some rolls the be gathered from other passages on the
expression, ' modo non ueniunt ' is used ; in same roll, but often no such assistance is
others ' modo non uenerunt.' Frequently, to be obtained.
however, the verb is not extended and its 2 See pp. 43, 54, 55, 56 and 57 below,
first three letters only are written, so that 3 See p. 35 below.
it is difficult to say whether ' ueniunt 'or 4 On roll 7 in dorso there is an entry
' uenerunt ' is intended. It is also often as follows : ' De Iohanne Louet, uiridario,
impossible to say whether 'uenit' repre- conuicto de mendacione et concelamento
sents the present or the perfect tense. In duodecim marce.'
THE FOREST EYRE lxv
the proceedings of this eyre before they were actually concluded. It
certainly was the usual practice for all or nearly all the fines made
in this way to be enrolled as part of the record of their respective
cases, and not be enrolled separately as in the rolls of the Northamp-
tonshire eyre of 1255.
The justices in eyre were appointed to hear and determine pleas of
the forest. But in the reign of Henry III. imprisonment for a defi-
nite period l was an unknown punishment. Men were detained in
prison either to secure their appearance on some particular occasion,
or in order that they might pay a ransom for their release. The
pleas of the forest, therefore, could hardly be said to be determined
until the prisoners had been ransomed. It is probable that, with rare
exceptions, the prisoners made fine with the justices before they left
the place where the imprisonment was adjudged. The words ' being
brought out of prison,' which often preceded the words ' made fine '
in the enrolment, seem to show that the assessment of the fine was a
matter which required the prisoner to be before the justices for the
purpose. It is most unlikely 2 that a prisoner would be taken out of
his gaol in one county to make fine with the justices when they were
engaged in hearing pleas in another county. We find, moreover, no
trace in the eyre rolls of any such a course being adopted.
The system of ransoming prisoners was not carried out oppres-
sively. The mere fact that there were as many as four justices was a
protection against the extortion which might have been practised by
a single judge. There certainly seems to have been no gross inequality
in the punishments which they imposed. Heavy ransoms were, on
the whole, rare ; but, as far as it is possible to judge, they seem to
have been imposed with good reason. John Lovet, for instance, who
was ransomed for twelve marks at Northampton in 1255, no doubt
had to pay a heavier ransom than most of his fellow prisoners. But
he was a man of good family, and probably a knight. 3 Moreover,
being a verderer, it was only proper that he should suffer an exemplary
1 By article 9 of the Charter of the abiuret regnum Anglie.'
Forest a man might be imprisoned for a Trespassers in parks might be imprisoned
year and a day. The article is as follows : for a year and day. As to this see pp.
1 Nullus de cetero amittat uitam uel cxix-cxxi below,
membra pro uenacione nostra ; set si ali- 2 It is possible, however, that in some
quis captus fuerit et conuictus de capcione cases the justices left a county before
uenacionis, grauiter redimatur, si habeat assessing the ransoms, and returned for
■nde redimi possit ; et si non habeat unde that purpose a short while afterwards,
redimi possit iaceat in prisona nostra per ' He and his fellow verderers are de-
unum annum et unum diem; et si post scribed as 4 domini ' on p. 100 below. See
unum annum et unum diem plegios also p. 22, note 1, below,
inuenire possit, exeat a prisona; sin autera,
lxvi
INTRODUCTION
punishment. On the other hand, we frequently find that trespassers
were pardoned 1 because they were poor ; and the justices seem to
have taken into consideration 2 the time which a prisoner had spent
in gaol before he had been released by writ to pledges until the eyre.
We can form a good idea of the system of ransom from the follow-
ing list of sums paid as fines for trespasses in Guildford Park at the
eyre 3 in Surrey in the year 1272 : —
£ s. d.
Peter Long 6 8
John of Aldham 4 ... 13 6 8
Andrew of Fremelesworth 10
Geoffrey de Brayboef . . 2 13 4
John the son of Aubrey .068
Peter of Dodleston . . . pardoned.
£ s.
a.
Thomas de Bois . .
. . 13
4
Ralph of Slyfield .
..06
8
Alan of Slyfield . .
..06
8
John atte Hook . .
..06
8
John atte Down . .
..06
8
Robert le King . .
..06
8
Miscellaneous Matters on the Eyre Rolls.
Besides the pleas of the venison and the vert, other matters were
recorded on the eyre rolls, of which some, however, are not found on
the rolls of every eyre. There was always a regard enrolled on them,
the nature of which will be explained in another section of this Intro-
duction. Again the names of those who were essoined of death were
invariably enrolled. Where a trespasser 5 died before the coming of
the justices in eyre, his pledges would be amerced just as if he had
been alive and had failed to appear, unless his death were proved by an
essoiner. The enrolment of the essoins does not disclose the nature
of the proof which was required. It merely consists of the words
' Essonia de morte ' followed by a series of entries, such as ' I. de W.
essoniatur de morte per G. F. de W.'
1 Cases in which the justices are ex-
pressly stated to have taken the poverty of
the prisoner into consideration in settling
his ransom occur on pp. 58 bis and 60
below. Many similar cases could be cited
from other forest eyre rolls.
2 For instances in which the justices
considered the time a prisoner had already
spent in prison, in settling his ransom,
see cases in note 1 p. xli above and on pp.
29 and 30 below. At the Gloucestershire
forest eyre of 1277 a trespasser was allowed
to find two pledges only instead of six or
twelve, because he had already lain in
prison two and a half years :
1 Manucaptores Willelmi Mile in forma
predicta duo tantum, quia iacuit in prisona
per duos annos et dimidium et quia pauper.'
(For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 30, Boll 25.)
The mainperners here mentioned were
pledges that prisoner would commit no
further trespasses against the venison.
3 See pp. 54 to 61 below.
4 It is not obvious why John of Aldham
had to pay so heavy a ransom.
5 For examples of persons being essoined
of death see pp. 12, 20, 35, 41, and 56
below. The entries on the list of essoins
corresponding to the two essoins mentioned
on p. 56 below are as follows : ' Wilhelmus
de la Hegge per Andream de la Hoke de
morte. Kadulf us de la Slow per Willelmum
Haref ot de eadem.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Bee,
No. 194, Boll 1 d.)
THE FOREST EYRE lxvii
Although on the eyre rolls of the reign of Henry III. charters
and letters patent conferring rights and privileges within the forest
were seldom enrolled, the practice of enrolling them became general
in the reign of his successor, Edward I. There are more than sixty
grants of this nature on the rolls 1 of the Essex eyre of 1277, which
include a considerable number of twelfth century charters.
It was the duty of every owner of a wood within a forest to present
his woodward to the justice of the forest, in order that he might take
an oath of fealty before him concerning the king's venison. But a
presentment before this official was not sufficient, 2 for at every forest
eyre the owners were again required to present their woodwards to
the justices in eyre, before whom they were again sworn. Sometimes
a presentment was made for the first time before the warden or deputy
warden of the forest, but this was only a provisional presentment
until the owner and the woodward could come before the justice. It
would seem from entries on the eyre rolls that on the appointment of
a new justice of the forest existing woodwards were often presented 3
and sworn before him.
In most of the files of rolls of the eyre of William le Breton and
his fellows in 1255 and the two following years there are entries
relating to the presentment of the woodwards ; but in subsequent
eyres they are not to be found. The following are a few entries
from the Somerset eyre 4 of 1257.
Eotulus de Wodewardis in comitatu Sumerset'.
Boscus de Ceddre episcopi Bathoniens' unde Iohannes Syward est
wodewardus. Presentatus fuit primo per senescallum episcopi Willelmo 8 de
Plesset', senescallo foreste de feodo, et non capitali iusticiario ; ideo episcopus
in misericordia et boscus capiatur in manum domini regis. Postea uenit
senescallus dicti episcopi et replegiat boscum domini sui et presentat dictum
Iohannem wodewardum qui iurat etc. ; et remaneat donee episcopus
uenerit.
Galfridus Molkweye wodewardus eiusdem episcopi de bosco de Laewod'
presentatus fuit eodem modo quo Iohannes Seward', ideo etc. Postea uenit
d ictus senescallus ut supra et presentat dictum Galfridum, qui iurat ; et
remaneat.
Robertus de Roweberue, wodewardus abbatis sancti Augustini Bristoll',
non fuit presentatus etc. ; ideo etc. Postea abbas presentat dictum
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 12. 4 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 152.
3 See the case of Walter of Clanfield * William du Plessis was hereditary
on p. lxviii below. warden of the forests of Somerset. He
• See the case of William Curteis on was ancestor to Sabine Pecche, who was
p. lxviii below. warden in 1300. See p. xvi, note 5, above.
lxviii INTRODUCTION
Robertum wodewardum suum de bosco de Ruberg', qui iurat ; et abbas re-
plegiat boscum suum.
Abbatissa de Shaftesbur' presentat Walterum atte Pleystret' wodewardum
de bosco suo de Culmeton', qui iurat.
Willelmus de Blakemor' wodewardus Symonis de Insula de bosco de
Lokeston' presentatus fuit per literas patentes ipsius Symonis et iurat ; et
remaneat.
Willelmus de Ripariis per Willelmum [Deone] atornatum suum ad hoc
presentat Willelmum le Pottere de Wynesford wodewardum ad boscum
suum de Wyneford, qui iurat etc.
There is little variation in the form in which entries relating to
the presentment of the woodwards are enrolled ; but the following,
taken from the rolls of the Buckingham eyre of 1255, illustrate other
features of the law on the subject.
1 Iohannes Duraunt wudewardus domini Rogeri de Wotton de bosco suo de
Stocholt presentatus fuit coram domino R. Basset, 2 senescallo foreste, per
dominum suum. Et postea presentatus erat per dictum dominum suum
coram domino E. de Bosco, 3 iusticiario foreste, apud Selueston'.
Willelmus Curteis wudewardus Symonis de sancto Licio de parte bosci
sui de Westbur' presentatus erat coram H. 4 predicto senescallo foreste apud
Heiburn' per dominum suum. Et postea coram domino E., predicto iusti-
ciario foreste, per dictum dominum suum. Et dominus eius modo uenit et
presentat eum wudewardum suum qui iurat.
Walterus de Clanefeld wudewardus domini Iacobi le Sauuagede parte bosci
sui de Westbur' presentatus fuit coram W. de Norhamt', 5 senescallo foreste,
per dominum suum. Et postea coram iusticiariis dominis R. de Mohun 6 et
E. de Bosco per dictum dominum eius modo uenit et presentat eum, qui
iurat.
Finally it would seem that Roger of Clifford and his fellow justices 7
in eyre in 1269 and the two following years were directed to make certain
inquiries the answers to which are recorded upon their rolls. It is pro-
bable that before starting on their duties they received a list of interro-
gatories, which resembled the chapters 8 used when justices in eyre
were holding pleas of the crown. From the enrolment of the answers
it would be impossible to construct the questions, but they appear to
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 2. warden or steward of the forests between
2 Eobert Basset was probably deputy the bridges of Stamford and Oxford. See
warden only. p. 31, note 6, below.
3 Arnold de Bois was justice of the 6 Beynold de Moyon was justice of the
forest south of Trent. See p. 15, note 3, forest south of Trent. See p. 37, note 2.
below. 7 See p. lvii, above.
4 The person meant is Hugh of Gold- 8 Chapters on articles of the eyre used
ingham, as to whom see p. 11, note 2, and by justices in eyre for pleas of the crown
p. 108, note 4, below. varied from eyre to eyre. One set of them
* William of Northampton was deputy is printed in Statutes of the Realm, i. 233.
THE FOREST EYRE lxix
have related, for the most part, to the acts of the forest officers. There
were no recognised headings, corresponding to ' Pleas of Venison ' and
1 Pleas of the Vert ' to describe the answers, but in the forest of Kutland
they are entituled ' concerning l the extortions of Peter de Neville/
and similar words of description occur in the eyre rolls of other forests.
These, however, were informal descriptions, which were followed by
entries relating not only to extortions but to other matters, such as
the title 2 of the hereditary warden and foresters in fee to their baili-
wicks, and the number of riding and walking foresters in the forest.
One of the interrogatories seems to have asked for the metes 3 and
bounds of the forest, for on many of the eyre rolls of the counties
visited by Eoger of Clifford the boundaries are recorded.
No general inquiries of this kind were made by William le Breton
in 1255, or by Alan la Zouche in 1262, when they and their fellows
were justices in eyre ; but others of similar nature were made in the
eyres of the reign of Edward I. The inquiries 4 probably varied from
eyre to eyre. Their actual form survives in no official document, and
the answers were in general enrolled only when they led to some pecu-
niary profit to the king. In various unofficial documents, however,
there are copies of such articles of inquiry. Perhaps the best known
of them occur in the mediaeval law treatise 5 known as Fleta, which is
considered to have been written about the year 1290. They are there
styled ' Uetera capitula de forestis ' and consist of fifty-one chapters.
Of these, the first eleven constitute another series of articles called the
Chapters 6 of the Eegard, and ought not to be joined to the remaining
forty, which are interrogatories of the nature just described. These
forty chapters probably represent inquiries used by the forest justices
in eyre about the middle of the reign of Edward I.
1 See pp. 44 and 55, below. ponendos eos etc. Dicunt quod omnes
2 See pp. 45, 46, below. forestarii de feodo qui fuerunt post ultimum
3 See pp. 53 and 61 below. iter ceperunt finem pro forestariis ponendis
4 The answers to the interrogatories at et remouendis pro uoluntate sua. Quid et
the Cumberland eyre of 13 Ed. i. are quantum, nesciunt ; set non ad dampnum
arranged in nineteen paragraphs. The domini regis nee grauamen patrie. De
first words of each interrogatory are stated attachiamentis factis per garciones non
immediately before each answer, thus : iuratos nichil sciunt.' (For. Proc, Tr. of
' Ad articulum qui forestarii vel balliui Bee, No. 5, Boll 38.)
ceperint finem uel mercedem indebite pro 5 Fleta, lib. ii., cap. xli., ed. 1685, p. 88.
cheminagio. Dicunt quod nullus. Et qui 6 As to the Chapters of the Regard, see
balliui uel forestarii de feodo ceperunt see p. lxxv below,
finem uel mercedem de forestariis ad
lxx INTRODUCTION
The Relation of the Eyre Rolls to the Rolls of Special Inquisitions.
Let us now consider in detail the relation of the rolls of the eyre
to the rolls of special inquisitions. There has survived to the present
day a portion of a roll of special inquisitions relating to the venison
in the forest of Huntingdon during part of the reign of Henry III.
It has no title, but the first entry l which is enrolled upon it is an
inquisition dated the 4th March 124§ and the last 2 a memorandum
dated the 28th April 1253. Its ten entries, of which seven are the
records of special inquisitions and three 3 the memoranda of trespasses
in the forest, follow one another in chronological order. The rolls of the
Huntingdon eyre 4 of June 1255, have also survived to the present day.
These eyre rolls cover a rather wider period than the roll of special
inquisitions. The earliest 5 entry among the pleas of the venison
relates to a trespass committed in January 124f ; the latest to another 6
committed in April 1255. It is probable, therefore, that two mem-
branes, one at the top, the other at the bottom, of our roll of special
inquisitions, or perhaps two distinct rolls, have been lost.
For the purpose of considering the relation which subsists between
the two classes of records, the rolls of the Huntingdon eyre are not
satisfactory. Unlike other records of proceedings in eyre the entries
on these rolls are not in chronological order. They assist in establish-
ing the proposition that to every entry on the roll of special inquisi-
tions there is, in general, a corresponding entry on the eyre rolls.
But they do not assist us to determine whether there can be an entry
among the pleas of the venison on the eyre rolls without a corre-
sponding entry on the roll of special inquisitions.
We learn more from two rolls of inquisitions held in the years
30 to 39 Henry III. in the forest of Eockingham. Of these one 7
consists of inquisitions and memoranda relating to events which
happened during the years 30 to 34 Henry III. ; the other 8 of similar
entries relating to events which happened in the five following years.
The contents of the earlier roll may be described as follows. There
are four inquisitions and two memoranda of 30 Henry HI. ; two
inquisitions and one memorandum of 31 Henry III. ; four inquisitions
of 32 Henry III. ; three inquisitions and one memorandum of
1 See p. 74 below. eyre are printed on pp. 11 to 26 below.
2 See p. 79 below. 5 See p. 19 below.
8 The three memoranda will be found 6 See p. 15 below.
on pp. 75, 78, 79 below. 7 See pp. 79 to 93 below.
4 The pleas of the venison heard at this 8 See pp. 94 to 116 below.
THE FOREST EYRE lxxi
33 Henry III. ; and two inquisitions of 34 Henry III. All the
inquisitions and memoranda, except two, follow one another in
chronological order. After the two inquisitions of 34 Henry III.
there occurs a series of entries under the heading l « Venison taken by
the King's writ,' and this series of entries is followed by another 2
under the heading ' Venison taken without warrant.' Both series of
entries are in chronological order.
There can be little doubt that the roll was transcribed from
original inquisitions and memoranda for the use of the justices in
eyre in the year 1255. The handwriting seems to be the same
throughout. More than one ink may have been used in writing it, but
there is nothing in the appearance of the roll to suggest that it was
written entry by entry at the dates of the occurrences recorded
upon it. The fact that one 3 of the inquisitions is out of chrono-
logical order points to the carelessness of a transcriber, while the two
series of entries 4 concerning venison taken by the King's writ and
without warrant, occurring as they do at the end of the chronological
series of inquisitions and memoranda, are hardly consistent with
piecemeal enrolment.
The first two entries 5 on the Northamptonshire eyre rolls of 1255
of pleas of the venison in the forest of Eockingham relate to trespasses
which were committed in 29 Henry III. — that is to say, in the year
before the date of the first entry on the roll * of special inquisitions
which we have just been considering. The third entry relates to a
trespass which is undated. Probably a roll containing at least two
inquisitions and a memorandum, to which these first three entries
corresponded, once existed, and has since been lost. To each of the
next thirteen entries on the eyre rolls there are corresponding entries 6
on our roll of special inquisitions and they follow one another in the
same order. Even the entry 7 corresponding to the one which is out
of chronological order on the roll of inquisition is out of order on the
eyre rolls ; an error which can hardly be purely accidental in both
cases.
If the two records be carefully collated, it is hardly possible to
avoid the conclusion that thirteen consecutive entries on the eyre
rolls are based upon the thirteen corresponding entries on the roll of
special inquisitions. It is true there may have been other records
of special inquisitions which recorded the same matters as those in
1 See p. 91 below. ■ See p. 92 below. * See pp. 27, 28 below.
■ See p. 86 below. 6 See pp. 28 to 32 below.
4 See pp. 91 to 93 below. 7 See p. 30.
lxxii INTRODUCTION
the roll which we now possess, and sometimes in a slightly different
language. We have already seen that there were two records ! of the
same series of inquisitions held in the forest of Huntingdon. If, how-
ever, there were other records of special inquisitions held in the forest
of Kockingham in the years 30 to 34 Henry III. they were not used
as a basis for the eyre rolls.
There is one important point to be noticed about the Eockingham
roll of special inquisitions of 30 to 34 Henry III. We have already
described its contents and have counted the numbers of inquisitions
and memoranda recorded in each year. If these be added together,
it will be found that it contains fifteen inquisitions and four
memoranda, or nineteen entries in all; whereas there are only
thirteen consecutive entries on the eyre rolls which correspond to
these entries on the roll of special inquisitions. Thus there are six 2
entries on the roll of inquisitions to which there are no corresponding
entries on the eyre rolls. These six entries are not consecutive but
are dispersed among the other inquisitions and memoranda. On the
other hand, to every entry on the Huntingdon roll of special inquisi-
tions there is a corresponding entry on the Huntingdon eyre rolls.
The difference between the two cases is probably accidental. We
have already noticed that the eyre rolls contain no information which
does not lead to a fine or an amercement. Thus, as we have seen, 3
we are told nothing of a forest inquisition unless the townships are
amerced for not coming fully; nor are we told anything of the
imprisonment of a poacher, unless the sheriff failed to produce his
warrant for releasing him to pledges or the pledges failed to produce
him before the justices in eyre. In the same way it would be quite
unnecessary for an enrolment to be made of the proceedings in any
trespass if the justices were satisfied that the townships came fully ;
if the sheriff duly produced his warrant for the release of a prisoner to
pledges ; if all the incidental requirements of the laws had been duly
observed, and if, in addition, the trespasser had died and his death
had been duly proved. As trespassers often died before the justices
came to hold a forest eyre, the absence of any entries on the eyre rolls
corresponding to six particular entries in the Eockingham roll of
special inquisitions of 30 to 34 Henry III., can be most easily
explained by there being no amercements in the particular cases of
any person or township for defaults, and the trespassers themselves
having died before the date of the eyre.
1 See p. xli above. 82, 86, 88, 89 below. Three of them occur
2 These six entries will be found on pp. on p. 88. 3 See p. xliii above.
THE FOREST EYRE lx
Xlll
The purpose for which our second roll 1 of inquisitions was compiled
is not apparent. Although continuous in point of time with the earlier
roll, it does not seem to have been used in the same way as the basis
of a portion of the eyre rolls. There are several entries on the eyre
rolls, to which there are no corresponding entries on the roll of inqui-
sitions, and the entries which correspond with one another on the two
records are not in the same order. Moreover, there are facts stated
in the eyre rolls of which we find nothing in the roll of inquisitions.
Thus, on the eyre rolls it is stated 2 that two malefactors on 4 October
1251 took a certain Eobert of Wick, the hunter of the justice of the
forest, bound him to an oak and afterwards permitted him to depart.
In the roll of inquisitions 3 it is merely stated that two malefactors took
Eobert of Wick, when he was standing at his post, and say nothing
further about binding him to a tree or permitting him to depart. This
may be a small variation, which admits of explanation, but the same
cannot be said of the inconsistent statements in the last entry on the
eyre rolls and the last entry on the roll of inquisitions, both of which
clearly are intended to refer to the same events. It should be noticed
also that there is a difference in arrangement between this roll of in-
quisitions and the earlier roll which we have already described. In
the earlier roll, the entries 4 relating to the venison taken by the king's
writ and the venison taken without warrant come after the inquisi-
tions and memoranda ; while in the latter roll they occur among the
inquisitions and memoranda in chronological order.
It would seem, then, that some other roll of special inquisitions
extending over the years 35 to 39 Henry III., which no longer exists,
was used as a basis for part of the Northampton eyre rolls of 1255.
Nevertheless, many of the inquisitions recorded on the roll which we
possess probably differ but little in substance from those which were
recorded on the roll which was actually used.
Perhaps the most interesting feature of the roll which has survived
is an inquisition 5 which was held before Sir Arnold de Bois, the justice
of the forest, on 2 October 1253. This is not a special inquisition
such as are the others on the same roll. It is described as having
been made concerning evil doers in the forest by thirteen jurors and
five townships. Nor was it made about a particular trespass by par-
ticular evil doers. Probably it was an exceptional inquiry made in
consequence of some alleged misconduct on the part of the foresters
1 See pp. 93 to 116 below. * See pp. 91, 92 below.
2 See p. 32 below. * See p. 108 below.
3 See p. 99 below.
Ixxiv INTRODUCTION
and verderers, for all the evil doers seem to have been forest officers
or their servants, and the verderers and foresters are not mentioned as
having taken part in the proceedings. The inquisition itself is im-
perfectly recorded. After a series of statements made by the jurors,
there comes another list l of thirteen jurors, who make further state-
ments, two 2 of which are to the same effect as others already made by
the first jurors. There are no introductory or marginal words which
explain the object of the second jury, but it is possible that some words
have been carelessly omitted and that the enrolment really represents
two separate inquisitions held before Sir Arnold de Bois.
On the same roll there is another inquisition 3 which deserves notice.
It was made before the justice of the forest on 20 January 125| by
the foresters and verderers, who made four statements, the first two
relate to particular trespasses, the third amplifies the second, and
the fourth declares that two persons are evil doers to the venison.
This inquisition was of a different character from the one held on
2 October 1253. It was made by the foresters and verderers and not
by thirteen jurors ; and it was concerned with matters which would
usually form the subject of special inquisitions. It bears a close
resemblance to the general inquisitions 4 which came into use some
thirty years later.
There is an entry 5 on the Northampton eyre roll of 1255, which
seems to refer to some inquisitions similar to the one held before Sir
Arnold de Bois on 25 October 1253. It occurs among the pleas of the
venison, but its introductory words are not the usual ' it is presented
etc.,' but ' because it was found and enrolled in the roll of inquisitions
which Arnold de Bois, the justice of the forest, made in the bailiwick
of Stanion.' The facts which were there found and enrolled do not
occur in the roll of the inquisitions 34 to 39 Henry III., which we
possess ; but as they refer to offences committed by Hugh of Golding-
ham, the steward of the forest, the explanation of their absence may
be, that the roll belonged to him and he refused to enrol any matters
reflecting upon himself.
There are also entries on the eyre rolls corresponding to the
inquisition held before Arnold de Bois on 20 January 125|, but they
are ordinary presentments occurring among the pleas of the venison.
The entries which correspond to the first and last of the findings 6 of
1 See p. 110 below. 3 See p. 112 below.
2 Namely, the statements as to Simon 4 See pp. xlii to 1 above,
the son of Koger of Geddington on pp. 5 See p. 37 below.
109 and 110 ; and as to Walter Kakilberd c Namely, the entries relating to Wal-
on pp. 110 and 111. ter and Nicholas the sons of Sweyn and
THE FOREST EYRE lxxv
the verderers and foresters at this inquisition are separate present-
ments ' among the pleas relating to the forest of Kockingham, but the
entry which corresponds to the second finding, and the third, which is
supplementary to the second, should be looked for among the pleas of
the venison of the forest of Cliffe, relating as it doe3 to evil doers in
the bailiwick of Morehay, which lies in that forest. 2
V.
THE EEGARD.
Once in every three years an inspection of the woods within the
metes and bounds of the forests was or ought to have been made
by twelve knights chosen for the purpose. The inspection was called
by the author of the ' Dialogus de Scaccario ' the ' uisitatio 3 nemo-
rum,' but it was commonly, even in the twelfth century, known
as the Eegard. The duty of the twelve knights who were called
regarders 4 was to find answers to a set of interrogatories entituled
the Chapters of the Regard. Although they appear to have varied
in form from time to time during the reigns of Henry II., Richard L,
and John, they acquired a rigid form early in the reign of Henry III.,
which they retained throughout the reigns of the three kings who
succeeded him. At least three versions 5 of the Chapters have survived
Walter the son of Robert Perchead on p. Houeden, Rolls Series, iv. 65.)
112 below. 4 In the twelfth century the regarders
1 See p. 36 below. It should be noticed were sometimes called ' viewers.' Thus a
that on the eyre roll the sons of Sweyn are charter of Richard i. to the bishop of
called Walter and Nicholas ; and that Worcester granted in September 1189 is
nothing is said on it of Ralph Iuelheryng, addressed ' iusticiis, uicecomitibus et
who is mentioned in the inquisition. forestariis et omnibus ministris et balliuis
2 See also p. lxxxix below. et uisoribus forestarum.' (Charter Roll
3 4 Uisitatione nemorum, quam reguar- 130, m. 12, Entry 48.)
dam uulgo dicunt, que tertio anno fit.' Another charter granted to the canons of
(Liber i. cap. xi., Madox, History and Merton by the same king in the same month
Antiquities of the Exchequer, ed. 1679, is addressed ' omnibus iusticiis et uice-
ii. 394.) comitibus ministris et forestariis suis et
On the Pipe Rolls of 21 Hen. ii. we have : uisoribus forestarum de Sudereia.' (Chanc.
• Idem Radulfus reddit compotum de Carte Antiq., RR. or 49, Entry 10.)
ciiij li. xv s. x d. de comitatu de Lancastr', 5 There are also two manuscript ver-
ut uisus foreste poneretur in respectu usque sions of the Chapters at the Public Record
ad aliam reguardam.' (Publications of the Office, which appear to belong to the reign
Pipe Roll Society, xxii. 9.) of John. They bear a close resemblance
One of the articles of the forest assize of to the Chapters in the Chartulary of the
Bic. i., as given by Roger Howden, is as Priory of Worcester. The reference to one
follows : of them is For. Proc., Tr. of Rec, No. 250,
' Statutum eciam est quod semper in and to the other For. Proc, Tr. of Rec,
tercio anno fiat uisus foreste, id est re- No. 249, Roll 22.
gwardum foreste.' (Chronica Rogcri de
lxxvi INTRODUCTION
to our time. One occurs in an appendix l to the Chronicle of Eoger
of Howden, and apparently belongs to the closing years of the reign
of Henry II. There is another in the Chartulary 2 of the Priory of
Worcester, which, although not dated, is evidently of an earlier date
than the Charter of the Forest of November 1217, and probably
was issued at the time of the forest eyre in 10 John. The third,
which became rigid, is endorsed for the first time on the Patent Eoll 3
of 13 Henry III., and again on many of the Close Eolls of subsequent
years.
One of the articles 4 of the Charter of the Forest provides
that the regarders are to go through the forests to make the regard
just as it was wont to be made at the time of the first coronation of
King Henry II. and not otherwise. Another article 5 provides that
the inquisition or view of la wing of dogs in the forest should be made
in future when the regard ought to be made, namely from third year
to third year. We have no means of knowing whether the regards
were made with regularity 6 every third year, but the procedure, as
far as we know it, was as follows. Before the king issued a commis-
sion in eyre he sent a writ 7 to the sheriff, ordering him to cause a
regard to be made before the coming of the justices ; and in the usual
writ, which was sent to the sheriff ordering him to summon all who
ought to come before the justices in eyre, there was a direction that
he should cause the regarders to come with the regards. In the eyre
rolls all the regards since the last eyre were recorded ; but they were
not enrolled each one by itself. All the regards were incorporated
in the one, which was made pursuant to the king's writ, in such
a way that it read as if there had been one regard only since the
last eyre.
The Chapters of the Eegard 8 which appear on the back of the
Patent Eoll of 13 Henry III. are twelve in number. One of them is
1 Chronica Rogeri de Houeden, Rolls hominum et non aliter.'
Series, ii. 243. 6 A few original regards exist. Among
2 Begistrum Prioratus B. M. Wigor- the most interesting are three which were
niensis, Works of the Camden Society, presented to the justices in eyre at North -
vol. 91, p. 96, a. ampton in 1256. The reference to them is
3 Patent Roll 37, m. 9 in dorso. For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, Nos. 64, 66, 67.
4 ' Reguardores nostri eant per forestas 7 The writ to the sheriff of Rutland
ad faciendum reguardum sicut fieri con- dated 21 Feb. 1229, ordering him to sum-
sueuit tempore prime coronacionis predicti mon all the foresters and regarders of his
regis Henrici aui nostri et non aliter.' bailiwick to make a regard, is printed in
5 ' Inquisicio uel uisus de expeditacione Boyal Letters, Hen. Hi., Rolls Series,
canum existencium in foresta, decetero i. 345.
fiat, quando debet fieri reguardum, scilicet, 8 They are printed in Royal Letters,
de tercio anno in tercium annum ; et tunc Hen. Hi., Rolls Series, i. 346.
fiat per uisum et testimonium legalium
THE REGARD lxxvii
concerned with the herbage in the king's demesnes, another with eyries
of hawks and falcons in the forest, a third with forges and mines, a
fourth with harbours from which timber could be exported, and a
fifth with honey in the forest. To these five chapters there are often
no answers recorded in the regards enrolled upon the eyre rolls. In
most of the forests there were no seaports ; and in many of them
there were neither forges nor mines. If the king's demesnes were
well kept, and if his rights with respect to the eyries of hawks and
falcons and to honey in the forest had not been infringed, there would
in general be no need for any enrolment about these matters.
The chapters which were considered to be of real importance
related to assarts, purprestures and waste, offences which yielded a
considerable revenue at every eyre. Each chapter contained several
questions. The first one was as follows :
The assarts made in the forest after the beginning of the second year
of the first coronation of Henry III. are to be viewed, and to be estimated
by the number of acres. And it is to be inquired who made them, and who
now holds them ; and with what corn they have been sown. And if they
shall not now be sown it is to be inquired with what corn they were sown
after the beginning of the second year of the first coronation of the afore-
said king or after the last regard made after the aforesaid time. And the
sowing of the winter corn l is to be written by itself, and the sowing of the
spring corn by itself. And it is to be inquired of whose fee they are ; and
to what town they belong. And the assarts which were made before the
last regard made after the beginning of the second year of the coronation
of the aforesaid king are to be written by themselves ; and those which
were made afterwards by themselves.
Two series of questions relating to purprestures of different kinds,
and another relating to wastes, were chapters of the regard closely
resembling in form the chapter relating to assarts. Of the three
remaining chapters one directed a view to be made of the king's
demesne woods, and an inquiry whether the underwood and branches
in them had been impaired. Another ordered that all purprestures,
assarts and wastes in the king's demesnes should be viewed and in-
bi-eviated in the same manner as before the Charter of the Forest.
The last declared that the regarders were to inquire who had bows or
arrows, crossbows, braches or greyhounds, or anything else for doing
harm to the king's deer.
J>ut instead of enrolling tho answers of the regarders one by one
1 The words ' winter corn ' are here used ' spring corn ' to represent thr Latin ' tra-
nt the Latin ' hibernagium ' and mesium.'
lxxviii INTRODUCTION
and chapter by chapter, the clerk of the justices usually drew up an
abstract of those relating to assarts, purprestures and wastes divided
into six paragraphs which between them contained all the informa-
tion required. The paragraphs were entituled respectively, the old
assarts, the new assarts, the old purprestures, the new purprestures,
the old wastes, and the new wastes. And each paragraph contained
a series of formal entries, each of which related to a particular assart,
purpresture, or act of waste.
In the ' Dialogus de Scaccario ' essarts l are explained as follows :
Essarta uero uulgo dicuntur que apud Isidorum occationes nominantur ;
quando scilicet foreste nemora uel dumeta quelibet pascuis et latibulis
opportuna succiduntur ; quibus s decisis et radicibus auulsis, terra subuertitur
et excolitur.
The word seems always to have implied the uprooting of trees and
the reduction of the land on which they stood to cultivation. An
assart might be made either in the covert or in a wood outside the
covert but within the metes and bounds of the forest. The punish-
ment for a trespass of this nature was an amercement at the next
forest eyre ; but the person who held the assart was also obliged to
pay a further sum for the crops sown upon it, which was assessed as
follows. For every acre of land the payment was a shilling for every
crop of winter corn, and sixpence for every crop of spring corn. 2
Usually the same piece of land seems to have been sown alternately
with winter and spring corn, and to have remained fallow for a year
after a certain number of crops had been sown. The record seldom
states the nature of the corn sown in the winter ; but it occasionally
states that an assart has been sown with wheat or rye. 3 In such
cases the tenant accounted for the crop as if it had been sown in
the winter. On the other hand, the tenant is frequently stated to
have sown his assart with oats, 4 and as he is always charged with a
1 Liber i. cap. xiii., printed in Madox, it was sown at all in assarts, it was prob-
History and Antiquities of the Exchequer, ably included in tbe general word ' trame-
ed. 1769, vol. i. p. 396. sium ' or ' trameys.'
2 See p. lxxvii, note, above. In the Forest Assize of Kich. i., as
3 There are very few instances of rye stated by Koger of Howden, the following
(siligo) being expressly mentioned in the article occurs :
record of a regard. Some instances occur ' In rewardo, autem, foreste hec supra-
in the regard recorded on the Staffordshire dicta uidenda sunt. Et uidenda sunt in
eyre rolls of September 1271. (For. Proc, rewardo noua essarta et uetera inbladata
Tr. of Bee, No. 184.) Instances of wheat post ultimum rewardum et quo blado uel
being expressly mentioned frequently occur. legumine inbladata sint. Noua, autem,
4 Oats are the only crops expressly savta erunt in manu regis ; si uetera sarta
mentioned in the regards, for which the inbladata sunt de frumento uel siligine,
tenants accounted at the rate of sixpence unaqueque acra dabit regi duodecim de-
an acre. Barley is never mentioned. If narios de ilia uestitura ; et si inbladata
THE REGARD lxxix
payment of sixpence for each such crop, it may be inferred that oats
were sown in the spring.
The entry recording an assart on the eyre rolls usually specifies,
as directed by the Chapters of the Eegard, the name of the lord to
whose fee the assart belongs. By the lord of the fee is meant the
person of whom the tenant of the assart ought to hold. 1 Information
on this point would always be useful in identifying the property.
Moreover, as a lord must in general have been a consenting party to
the assarting and sowing of his tenant, it was desirable that the
justices should have his name in order that they might render him
responsible if his tenant made default. The following are entries 2
relating to the new assarts.
De nouis assartis.
Willelmus filius Warini assartauit de nouo apud Abbelynch dimidiam
acram de solo proprio et in bosco suo sine waranto. Et mortuus est. Terra
capiatur. Et fuit inbladata bis de iuernagio et semel de tremesio ; unde
Eua la Walech', que modo tenet eandem terram respondebit nomine custodis ;
et de quindecim denariis.
Willelmus Rocholf assartauit de nouo apud Scherchelench' octauam partem
unius acre de feodo Willelmi de Bello Campo sine waranto ; ideo in miseri-
cordia. Terra capiatur. Et non fuit inbladata.
Rogerus de la Holte de Stodleye assartauit unum curtilagium ad
latitudinem duarum perticarum et ad longitudinem trium perticarum ;
clausatum de fossato et bassa haya ; ideo in misericordia. Terra capiatur et
clausum prosternatur. Non inbladata.
Thomas filius Roberti assartauit de nouo duas rodas ibidem. Et fuit
imbladata semel de iuernagio et semel de trameys ; ideo in misericordia.
Terra capiatur et clausum prosternatur ; nouem denarii.
The tenant of an assart was usually allowed to retain it subject to
his accounting for the crops at each eyre of the justices of the forest.
Thus the new assarts of one eyre became old assarts at the next and
subsequent eyres. Entries of the old assarts on the eyre rolls were in
the following form : 3
fuerint de auena uel hordeo uel fabis uel factis infra metas foreste de terris suis pro-
pisis uel alio legumine unaqueque acra priis et tenementorum suorum [sic] de nouo
dabit regi sex denarios de ilia uestitura.' arentatis, unde dominus rex uendicat sibi
(Chronica Rogeri de Houeden, R0II3 Series, custodiam heredum talium et nihilominni
rol. iv. p. 65.) uendicat seruitium omne inde debitum.'
1 It seems that the king claimed that (Annates Monastic i, Burton, Rolls Series,
assarts should be held of him and not of a i. 440.)
lord. One of the articles of the * For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, 231, Roll 8.
barons' petition of 1258 was as follows : ■ Ibid. Roll 7.
' Item petunt [remedium] de assartis
e 2
lxxx INTRODUCTION
De ueteribus assartis.
Elias de Stanes tenet dimidiam acram ueteris assarti
inbladatam ter de iuernagio et ter de tremesio . ij s iij d
De Willelmo Corbet pro una acra ueteris assarti in
Scbaldesle ut prius iiij s vj d
De Isabella de Bosco pro dimidia acra ueteris assarti
ibidem eodem modo inbladata . . . ij s iij d
De Roberto le Prouost de Chadesle pro uicesima parte
unius acre ibidem eodem modo inbladata . ij d ob
De Willelmo Dobes pro inbladacione dimidie acre apud
Cutbaldesheye inbladate ut prius . . . . ij s iij d
Purprestures are thus explained by the author of ' Dialogus de
Scaccario ' 1 :
Fit interdum per negligentiam uicecomitis uel eius ministrorum, uel etiam
per continuatam in longa tempora bellicam tempestatem, ut habitantes
prope fundos qui corone annominantur aliquam eorum portionem sibi
usurpent et suis possessionibus ascribant. Cum autem perlustrantes iudices
per sacramentum legitimorum uirorum hec deprehenderint seorsum a firma
comitatus appretiantur et uicecomitibus traduntur ut de eisdem seorsum
respondeant ; et hec dicimus purpresturas uel occupata ; que quidem cum
deprehenduntur, a possessoribus sicut predictum est tolluntur et abhinc fisco
cedunt. Uerum si is a quo tollitur occupatum auctor est facti, simul etiam
nisi rex ei pepercerit, pecuniariter grauissime punietur ; quod si non auctor
sed heres auctoris fuerit, ad penam sufficit fundi eiusdem sola reuocatio. Ex
quo sane, sicut ex aliis pluribus, regis misericordia comprobatur ; dum
patris tarn enormis excessus non punitur in filio, qui usque ad factam
inquisitionem publice potestatis iactura ditabitur.
In this passage it is clear that the word purpresture meant an
encroachment on the king's demesnes by the unlawful occupation of
land ; but in the forest law it was used to signify an encroachment of
any sort upon the forest. Thus, it was a purpresture to enlarge a
curtilage in the forest, even though the land appropriated was not part
of the king's demesne ; or to erect a mill or make a fishpond within
the covert. So, too, it was a purpresture if a tenant of lands within
a forest enclosed any part of them with a hedge and ditch with-
out the king's licence. In these cases the offender was amerced
in the forest eyre, and an order was given that the enclosing hedge
and ditch should be removed. It frequently happened, however, that
the justices in eyre allowed the land to remain enclosed, on payment
1 Lib. i. cap. x. Madox, History and Antiquities of the Exchequer, vol. ii. p. 424.
THE REGARD lx
XXI
of a small sum of money in addition to the amercement. The follow-
ing are examples l of the enrolment of new purprestures on the forest
eyre rolls.
De nonis purpresturis.
Willelmus de Berdeley ampliauifc clausum suum apud Barndeleye de
decern perticatis in longitudine et decern pedibus 2 in latitudine. Et clausit
paruo fossato et bassa haya sine waranto ; ideo in misericordia. Clausa
prosternatur etc. De feodo Henrici de Sturmy. Idem dat pro misericordia
et pro clausa ut possit stare duos solidos.
Willelmus de Purshull' ampliauit cortilagium suum apud Rossehok' de
quatuor perticatis in longitudine et de sex pedibus in latitudine. Et clausit
ut prius sine waranto. Ideo etc. Clausa prosternatur. Idem dat pro
misericordia et pro clausa ut possit stare duodecim denarios.
Any enclosure of arable land by means of a hedge and a ditch,
although outside the covert of the forest, was reckoned a purpresture,
notwithstanding the fact that the Charter of the Forest permitted 3
every free man ' to make arable outside the covert in arable land.'
In all such cases the offender was amerced at the forest eyre. It
should be noticed that a man might be liable for an assart and a
purpresture with respect to the same piece of land. He might cut
down a parcel of wood, reduce it to cultivation, and then enclose it
with a hedge and a ditch. In this case there w r ould be a single entry
recording the facts on the eyre rolls, which might be found either
among the New Purprestures or the New Assarts.
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 231, example of the provision of the Charter of
Roll 7. the Forest on this subject being set up as
■ MS. pedes. a defence :
3 The text of the provision in the ' Presentatum fuit per regardatores . . .
Charter of the Forest is printed on p. lxxxii quod T. prior de W. fecerat unam purpres-
below. It is not quite clear what the turam de sex acris terre et una acra prat
clause about arable land was intended to apud W.
signify. The following is an article of the ' Qui predicti iuratores dicunt ad primam
Chapters of llegard which relates to the purpresiuram de sex acris terre et una
subject of arable land in arable land : acra prati, quod non sunt ibi nisi una acra
• Item uidende sunt omnes purpresture et dimidia terre per amensuracionem et
do terra arabili extra coopertum foreste quod est infra Akergarth et est terra arabilis
in terra arabili, facte post confeccionem in terra arabili ; et quod idem prior de eo
Oarte domini regis de libertatibus foreste, in nullo deliquit, quia bene licitum est sibi
et estimande per numerum acrarum et redigere terram arabilem in terra arabili
addendum quo blado modo iinbladate fue- infra Akergarth prout continetur in carta
lint; et si modo imbladate non fuerint, foreste de libertatibus foreste. Et ideo omnes
inquirendum quo blado imbladate fuerint regardatores . . . pro sua falsa presenta-
post tempus predictum, et quis eas tenet et cione in misericordia. Et ipse prior inde
■d quam uillum pertineant et scribantur quietus et ipsam acram et dimidiam habeat
et teneat imperpetuum.' (For, Proc, Tr.
The following entry on the rolls of the of Bcc, No. 5, Boll 30 d.)
1 rland eyre of lo Ed. i. supplies an
lxxxii INTRODUCTION
The following are some further examples of entries of New
Purprestures :
De nouis purpresturis. 1
Ricardus Carettarius fecit quandam purpresturam apud Samburne de
nouo de feodo abbatis de Euesham ; et clausit fossato et haya sine waranto.
Ideo in misericordia. Clausum prosternatur.
Robertus de Mep occupauit de nouo apud Ippele dimidiam acram de
feodo Henrici Hubaud ; et clausit fossato et haya sine waranto. Et mortuus
est. Alicia uxor eius modo tenet. Clausum prosternatur.
Ricardus de la Rudynge occupauit apud Hamme unam perticatam terre
in longitudine et tantum in latitudine de solo domini regis ; et clausit haya
sine waranto; ideo in misericordia. Terra capiatur. Clausum proster-
natur.
Nicholaus Alius Theobaldi de Pyrie occupauit unam acram apud P^rie de
feodo eiusdem Theobaldi. Et non clausit ideo quietus et teneat eodemmodo.
Symon Aleyn occupauit unam perticatam terre apud Oddyngele et clausit
fossato et haya sine waranto ; ideo in misericordia. Clausum prosternatur.
Et conceditur ei ut domus et clausum stent.
"Where there was a purpresture by unlawful cultivation, the
trespasser was usually permitted to continue cultivating his land
subject to his accounting for the crops as in the case of assarts.
Thus the old purprestures of one eyre were the new purprestures
of some previous eyre. The entries recording the old purprestures on
the eyre rolls were in the same form as those recording the* old
assarts — thus 2 :
De ueteribus purpresturis.
De Iohanne de Borstah" et Mauricio de Bynthon' pro inbladatura decern
acrarum ueteris purpresture de solo regis in Brymesgraue. Inbladatur ter
de iuernagio et ter de auena .... xlv s.
De Iohanne de Stupelleye, Willelmo de la Lynde et Iohanne de la Lynde
pro inbladacione dimidie acre ibidem inbladate ut prius . . . . ij s. iij d.
De Roberto de la Brok', Iohanne Gerueys et Iohanne Cade pro inbla-
dacione decern acrarum ibidem eodem modo inbladatarum .... xlv s.
De Willelmo filio Willelmi, Thoma de Burnesforde, Iohanne de Scherle-
ford et Nicholao filio Oseberti pro inbladacione decern acrarum ibidem
eodem modo inbladatarum .... xlv s.
An alteration in the law relating to purprestures was made by the
Charter of the Forest, the twelfth chapter of which was as follows :
Unusquisque liber homo decetero sine occasione faciat in bosco suo uel
in terra sua, quam habeat in foresta, molendinum uiuarium stagnum
For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 231, Roll 8 d. 2 Ibid. No. 231 , Boll 7.
THE REGARD lxxxiii
marleram fossatum uel terram arabilem extra cooperatum in terra arabili
ita quod non sit ad nocumentum alicuius uicini.
Thus, certain acts, such as the erection of a mill, which had
hitherto been accounted purprestures, in whatever part of the forest
they were committed, could henceforth be committed with impunity
outside the covert by the owner of a land or woods within the forest.
If, however, the owner or anyone else enclosed the land with a hedge
and ditch, he was guilty of a purpresture, notwithstanding the
Charter of the Forest.
Tenants of woods within the forest had the right of cutting wood
for fuel and the repair of their property. The precise extent of the
right and the mode in which it was exercised probably varied in
different forests. It is probable that in some forests they were
allowed to lop trees, subject to the supervision of the forest officers,
while in others they were allowed to take underwood and even fully-
grown trees other than oaks. But whatever the nature of the right
was, any abuse of it was recorded by the regarders in their rolls as
waste. In the eyre rolls the entries relating to wastes made since
the last eyre are styled ' The New Wastes,' and form one of the chief
features of the enrolment of the regard. They vary in form, but the
following are specimen entries l :
De nouis uastis boscorum.
Boscus Felicie de Radeford' de Lenche Randholf, quern ipsa tenet nomine
dotis, uastatur de ueteri, et iterum de nouo per eandem ; ideo ipsa in
misericordia. Boscus capiatur in manum domini regis. De eadem Felicia
pro misericordia et quod rehabeat boscum suum dimidia marca.
Boscus Willelmi de Bello Campo de Alencestere uastatur de ueteri, et
iterum omnino deuastatur per eundem Walterum de nouo, et per Robertum
le Loue, qui fuit seruiens eiusdem Walteri apud Alencestr', et per Rogerum
Careman et Willelmum Daybond, qui fuerunt wodewardi eiusdem bosci per
eorum uendiciones et dona ; et ipsi wodewardi dederunt unam carettatam
busce pro duabus carettatis extraendis ; ideo idem ipsi in misericordia et
bosci capiantur in manum domini regis. De predicto Waltero pro miseri-
cordia quinque marce.
Et abbas Alecestr' uenit et clamat habere estoueria sua in eodem bosco,
uidelicet, unam carettatam busce 2 uno equo. Et ostendit cartas regis Henrici
de confirmacione et dominorum feodi qui fuerunt antiquitus de donacione.
Ideo consideratum est et preccptum quod forestarii domini regis faciant ipsi
abbati liberatam in eodem booco de cetero in forma predicta.
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No. 231, Boll 8 d. ■ MS. ' bosce.'
lxxxiv INTRODUCTION
Boscus Henrici Hubaud apud Ippele uastatur de ueteri et iterum de nouo
per eundem ; ideo ipse in misericordia et boscus capiatur. Postea uenit
dictus Henricus et finiuit tarn pro misericordia quam pro bosco suo
rehabendo ; uiginti solidos ; plegii Simon Leuelaunse et Mcholaus Nel.
When the owner of a wood which he had wasted had made fine for
his amercement and for having his wood again, he was still bound to
pay half a mark at every forest eyre until the wood had grown into
its former state. These payments occur in the record of every regard
on the eyre rolls, thus l :
De uastis boscorum de ueteri.
De Willelmo de Bello Campo comite War' pro ueteri uasto bosci sui de
Abbelynch' .... dimidia marca.
De sacrista de Euesham pro ueteri uasto bosci deAttelench .... dimidia
marca.
De Waltero de Kocesey pro ueteri uasto bosci de Lench Eandolf ....
dimidia marca.
When the wood has grown to the state in which it was before it
wasted the entry on the eyre rolls is usually similar to the
following 2 :
Boscus Ricardi de Porfcesye apud Fortes' uastatur de ueteri. Postea
protestatum est per uiridarios forestarios [et] regardatores quod boscus
predictus bene reuenit ; ideo idem Ricardus dat domino regi dimidiam
marcam pro eodem bosco, ne de cetero presentetur in uetus uastum. Et
hoc regardatoribus preceptum est.
As already stated, some of the answers which were given by the
regarders were often not recorded upon the eyre rolls. Besides the
six paragraphs relating to assarts, purprestures and wastes, the only
answer which was usually recorded upon them was a list of persons
having greyhounds within the forest. A few records, however, of the
original regards presented to the justices in eyre have survived from
which we may learn the manner in which all the chapters were
answered by the regarders. The original record 3 of the three regards
made in the forests of Cliffe and Bockingham in the years 34, 37 and
39 Henry III. respectively is among the most interesting of those
which have survived. It proves that the regarders were not bound
to frame their answers in strict accordance with the words of the
chapters. The fifth chapter 4 was as follows :
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec.,No. 231, Roll 9. 4 Royal Letters, Hen. Hi., Rolls Series,
2 Ibid. No. 158, Roll 17. i. 347.
* Ibid. No. 67.
THE REGARD Ixxxv
Et uidendi sunt dominici bosci domini regis et quilibet ceppus de quercu
et de fago factus post principium secundi anni prime coronacionis predicti
regis Henrici siue post ultimum regardum, si quod postea factum fuerit, debet
diligenter nominari et per se scribi et inquirendum utrum bosci deteriorati
fuerint de subbosco uel exbrancatura et deterioratio subbosci et exbrancatura
scribatur per se.
The answer ! of the regarders to this chapter is recorded thus :
Cippi quercuum ; anno regni regis Henrici xxxiiij.
Uidendi sunt omnes dominici bosci, et quilibet ceppus etc. Numerus
cepporum inuentorum in dominicis boscis domini regis tempore W. de
Norhamp*.
In bosco de firma de Clyue inuenti fuerunt xxxvij ceppi.
In parco de Cliue inuenti fuerunt lviij ceppi.
In Morhey inuenti fuerunt xv ceppi.
In bosco de Dudigton' xj ceppi.
In parco de Bricstoke inuenti fuerunt xliij ceppi.
In Bulax et Exbawe inuenti fuerunt xix ceppi bletron'.
Item in eisdem boscis inuenti fuerunt lx ceppi.
In secundo reuardo de eeppis ; anno regni regis Henrici xxxvij.
Dicunt quod inuenti fuerunt sexies-uiginti et v ceppi per totam balliuam
de Clyue in dominicis boscis domini regis.
Item dicunt quod inuenti fuerunt in baliua de Brikestoke, scilicet in
parco et in bosco de Geytiugtun' quinquies-uiginti ceppi.
In tercio reuardo de eeppis ; anno regni Henrici xxxix.
Dicunt quod inuenti fuerunt in parco de la Clyue octies-uiginti et xij
ceppi.
In bosco de Firma de Cliue inuenti fuerunt xxxvij ceppi.
In bosco de Syuele inuenti fuerunt quinquies-uiginti et xix ceppi.
In bosco Vesthey inuenti fuerunt lx ceppi.
In bosco de Morhey lix ceppi.
In bosco de Tothou xx ceppi.
In parco de Bricstoke et in bosco de Geytintun' inuenti fuerunt ccc et
vij ceppi.
In bosco de Firma inuenti fuerunt clvj ceppi.
It will be seen that the regarders ignored a portion of the fifth
chapter and only answered the remainder of it in a very inadequate
fashion. In the second regard they do not even state how many
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, No, G7, m. 7.
lxxxvi INTRODUCTION
' ceppi ' or stumps were found in the different demesne woods of the
forest ; they merely record the total number found in the two baili-
wicks in which the demesne woods were situate. The record of the
regards continues briefly as follows :
Item uidende sunt dominice haye domini regis. . Dicunt quod nichil
sciunt ; sed bene custodiuntur.
Item dicunt quod de purpresturis nee assartis factis in dominicis domini
regis nichil sciunt.
Item uidende sunt omnes aerie austurcorum speruariorum et falconum
etc. Dicunt quod nichil sciunt. 1
Item uidendi sunt portus quibus applicant naues etc. Dicunt quod nichil
sciunt.
Item uidendum est mel etc. Dicunt quod I. de H. in Stanerne exarsit
in altitudine septem pedum unam quercum in dominico bosco domini regis
pro melle inuento.
Item milites debent attente inquirere etc. Dicunt quod H. de E. habet
leporarios 2 brachettos ad leporem wlpem et catum capiendum.
Item dicunt quod W. de B. habet leporarios 2 brachettos ad idem.
Nine entries similar to the last of the above conclude the original
record of this regard. Although it contains answers to several
chapters which, as a rule, are not recorded upon the forest eyre rolls,
it contains no answer to the chapter which was concerned with forges
and mines. Moreover, to three of the chapters the regarders merely
answer that they know nothing. This was no doubt the answer which
was usually given to most of the chapters other than those which
asked for information about assarts, purprestures and wastes, and
greyhounds kept within the metes of the forest. "When all the in-
formation which the regarders could give was that they knew nothing,
there was obviously no need for an entry on the forest eyre rolls, for
no profit to the king could arise from such an answer.
In the thirteenth century the regarders appear to have had no
duties to perform except to make the regard ; but by the ' Ordinacio 3
Foreste' of 1301, they were required to attend the general inquisi-
tions or swanimotes together with the foresters, verderers and agisters.
They were chosen by the sheriff on receipt of the writ which directed
a regard to be made shortly before the forest eyre. In the intervals
between the eyres, there were no elections of regarders, but at the
forest inquisitions held after the ' Ordinacio 3 Foreste,' any deficiency
1 It is not improbable that the answers to recorded upon the eyre rolls,
this chapter were sometimes incorporated a It is probable that the word ' et ' is
in the paragraphs ' De Nouis Purpresturis ' omitted here,
and ' De Ueteribus Purpresturis ' which are 3 Statutes of tlie Realm, i. 147.
THE REGAED lxxxvii
in their number was supplied by persons who were appointed regarders
for a day only.
No salary attached to the office of a regarder, but it is probable
that the expenses of the regard fell upon the inhabitants of the forest.
In an inquisition held at Farnham in 42 Edward III. 1 the jurors
make the following declaration :
Item dicunt quod abbas de Wauerle a tempore sine memoria tenetur
inuenire apud Dakkenfeld' forestariis et regardatoribus domini regis in
regardo faciendo unum repastum, herbergagium 2 per unam noctem, fenum
et auenas pro equis eorum.
VI.
THE CLEEGY
There was a special procedure for clerks 3 accused of felonies in
the King's court differing from that which obtained in the case of
laymen similarly accused. So, too, there was a special procedure for
clerks accused of trespasses in the forests. Henry II., it is true,
evidently desired to have a uniform procedure for poachers whether
clerks or laymen ; although in this respect his policy was ultimately
unsuccessful. As early as the year 1176 we find him writing 4 to the
pope, Alexander III., declaring that he had made certain concessions
to the papal legate. The first of these was as follows :
Uidelicet quod clericus de cetero non trahatur ante iudicem secularem in
persona sua de aliquo criminali, neque de aliquo forisfacto, excepto forisfacto
foreste mee, et excepto laico feodo unde michi vel alii domino seculari laicum
debetur seruitium.
Again, the assize of Woodstock, which, according to Dr. Stubbs, was
issued in 1184, contained this provision : 5
Item rex defendit quod nullus clericus ei forisfaciat de uenacione sua nee de
forestis suis ; precepit bene forestariis suis quod si inuenerint eos forisfacientes,
non dubitent in eos manum ponere, ad eos retinendum et attachiandum ; et
ipse eos bene warantizabit.
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Rec. t 310, Skin 18. vol. i. pp. 439-457.
* MS. • herbigagium.' 4 Badulji de Diceto Opera HisUmca,
* For the status of the clergy in the Rolls Series, i. 410.
thirteenth century see Pollock and Mait- * The text of this provision is taken from
land, History of English Law, ed. 18U8, Gesta Hcnrici, llolls Series, vol. ii. p. clxiii.
lxxxviii INTRODUCTION
Thus it is clear that he wished clerks to be impleaded in his own
courts for offences against the forest law, although he was willing that
they should not be impleaded there for other offences. He wished,
also, that the privileges of the clergy should not prevent the foresters
from attaching and arresting them for trespasses against the
venison.
We shall probably never have sufficient material to enable us to
learn in detail what was the procedure in the case of poaching clerks
in the reigns of Henry II., and his sons Eichard I. and John. 1 In the
reign of Henry III., however, we can learn the greater part of the
procedure from the rolls of the forest eyre. If a clerk and a layman,
both accused of trespass, failed to make an appearance at the forest
eyre, the justices would direct the sheriff to cause the layman and the
bishop to cause the clerk to come respectively. This is evident from
the following 2 and many other examples.
Presentatum est et conuictum per eosdem quod Galfridus filius Roberti
de Sutorp, magister Willelmus persona de Bernak', Gilebertus de Dunstal,
Robertus persona de Pokebroc, Gilebertus de Bernak', Iohannes Faunel et
Iohannes Syrey sunt malefactores uenacionis. Et Gilebertus de Bernak'
uenit et detentus est in prisona. Et Galfridus filius Roberti, persona de
Bernak' et Gilebertus de Dunstal, persona de Pokebroc', Iohannes Faunel et
Iohannes Syry non ueniunt ; ideo preceptum est uicecomiti etc. quod etc.
dictos laicos Et mandatum est episcopo Line' quod venire faciat Robertum
personam de Pokebroc' et Willelmum personam de Bernak etc.
If, however, the bishop returned no answer to the mandate of the
justices, they would direct that the defaulting clerk should be exacted
in the county court. Thus :
Presentatum est per eosdem et conuictum quod dominica proxima post
festum sancti Iohannis Baptiste anno tricesimo quinto magister Iohannes
de Brudeport transiens per forestam uersus Lacok' inuenit quandam bestiam
captam per quendam leporarium album, cuius bestie medietatem secum
asportauit sine waranto ; et modo non uenit nee fuit attachiatus ; ideo
mandatum est episcopo Sarr' quod faciat eum uenire etc. a die sancte
Trinitatis in quindecim dies. Ad diem non uenit nee episcopus aliquid
retornat ; ideo dictus Iohannes exigatur et utlagetur. 3
1 The following letters patent of 7 June custodia habeatis, uel quos uos pro aliquo
1200 should be noticed : forisfacto quodcunque sit contigerit habere.
' Iohannes dei gracia etc. iusticiariis uice- Et prohibemus ne quis aliquem clericum
comitibus etc. Sciatis nos concessisse uene- pro quocunque forisfacto detinere presumat
rabili patri nostro H. Cant' archiepiscopo postquam prefatus archiepiscopus ipsum
custodiam omnium clericorum captiuorum requisierit. Testibus Willelmo Maresc'
pro quocunque forisfacto f uerint capti uel comite de Penbroc etc. apud Argent' septimo
detenti. Undeuobishrmiterprecipimusquod die Iunii.' {Botuli Chartarum, p. 68.)
eidem archiepiscopo reddatis omnes clericos * For. Proc.,Tr. of Bee, No. 68, Boll 2.
quos in custodia uestra habetis, si quos in 3 Ibid. No. 198, Boll 6.
THE CLERGY lxxxix
If on the other hand the clerk duly appeared in court the justices
would proceed with his case just as if he were a layman ; and would
sentence him to prison. But if the bishop then claimed him as a
clerk, the justices would surrender him as one convicted of an offence
against the forest laws. Thus, at the Northampton forest eyre of
1256, two clerks, John the son of John Caperun and William the son
of the parson of Thornhaugh were committed to prison. The record l
of the case continues thus :
Et super hoc uenerunt magistri Walterus decanus Norhamt' et Willelmus
de Lindes' atornati episcopi Lyric' ad recipiendos clericos a prisona coram
iusticiariis, et pecierunt dictum Iohannem filiura Iohannis Caperun ; et
liberatur eisdem tanquam clericus. Et quia uxoratus est et habet laicum
feodum, preceptum est uicecomiti quod capiat terram etc. ; ita quod manum
etc. Et postea uenit Iohannes Caperun et finiuit per quadraginta solidos.
Postea uenerunt magistri Walterus decanus Norhamt' et Willelmus de
Lyndes' et pecierunt Willelmum filium persone de Tornhawe, eo quod
clericus est ; et liberatur eisdem tanquam conuictus et apertus malefactor de
uenacione, quia dicti magistri fuerunt atornati episcopi Lync' per litteras
patentes ad petendum clericos inprisonatos coram iusticiariis. ... Et
postea uenit Willelmus films persone de Tornhawe, et finiuit per unam
marcam.
The actual form of the letters patent which the bishops used on
these occasions is recorded on one of the rolls 2 of the Wiltshire eyre
of 1257:
Nouerint uniuersi presentes literas inspecturi quod nos E. dei paciencia
Sar' ecclesie minister humilis dilecto filio decano de Wylton' committimus
uices nostras quociens nosmetipsos uel officialem nostrum generalem abesse
contigerit. Et in huius rei fidem et testimonium presentibus sigillum nostrum
duximus apponi. Date apud Brombal' quindecimo die Iunii anno gracie
mcclvij.
But although a clerk might be delivered to the bishop as one con-
victed of a trespass in the forest, he did not escape punishment. He
had to make fine just as if he were a layman. This is evident from
the case of William the son of the parson of Thornhaugh, who,
although delivered to the attorneys of the bishop of Lincoln, subse-
quently made fine by a mark. Indeed it frequently happens that the
record merely states that the clerk made fine without stating that he
had been delivered to the bishop. In such cases either the clerk
made fine without waiting to be delivered, or the record is silent
about the delivery, because as the fact led to no profit to the king, there
• For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. G8, Roll 2. ■ Ibid. No. 198, Roll 10.
XC INTRODUCTION
was no need for its enrolment. The case of Bobert the parson of
Polebrook and William the parson of Barnack, part of which is
printed above, supplies an instance of clerks making fine without it
being stated on the rolls that they were delivered to the bishop. The
enrolment of this case proceeds :
Postea uenit Gilebertus de Bernak' et finem fecit per quadraginta solidos
per pleuinam Mauricii de Andeli et Thome de Welham capellani. Postea
Willelmus persona de Bernak' taxatur ad uiginti solidos. Et Kobertus
persona de Pokebroc taxatur ad decern marcas. Et Iohannes Faunel pauper
et perdonatur.
In this case it will be observed that the clerks are described as
being taxed, and not as making fine. The use of the expression can-
not be easily explained. It seems to have been used generally when
the clergy had been convicted of a trespass against the venison. But
in some cases clerks made fine and in others laymen were taxed.
The forest procedure was evidently considered as very unsatis-
factory by the clergy, for in the year 1257, they, having granted to
the king a sum of fifty thousand marks, drew up a long list ! of
grievances which contained the two following articles 2 :
Item, cum contingit clericum pro delicto foreste defamari, per inquisicionem
uiridariorum et forestariorum super capcione uenacionis uocatur coram
iusticiariis ; et licet ab ordinariis repetatur, nisi prius carceri laicali manci-
petur, suo ordinario nullatenus liberatur ; et post liberacionem factam
episcopo, per inquisicionem factam per laicos pena pecuniara condempnatur.
Item similiter condempnanturabsenteset ignorantes ad simplicem uocem
uiridariorum et forestariorum cum ad inquisicionem per laicos factam non
debeant condempnari clerici uel aliqualiter iudicari, et tarn isti quam illi
compelhmtur soluere merciamenta per possessiones laicales si quas habent.
Sin autem, distringuntur episcopi per baronias suas, ut dictos clericos com-
pellant de suis beneficiis soluere condempnacionem.
The meaning of the clause ' nisi prius carceri laicali mancipetur '
in the first of these articles is not quite clear, but it seems that the
justices refused to deliver an accused clerk to the ordinary unless he
had previously been imprisoned by way of process to secure his
appearance at the forest eyre. If he had been so imprisoned, the
1 Math. Paris. Chronica Maiora, Kolls iniuriam passo, per eundem ordinarium
Series, vi. 356, 357. satisfacere compellatur ; et alias arbitrio
2 These articles should be compared with ordinarii sui canonica pena puniatur.'
the Merton articles of the year 1258, which (Annates Monastici, Burton, Eolls Series,
include the following : p. 417.)
' Clericus tamen super transgressione The Merton articles are also printed in
foreste coram suo ordinario canonice con- Wat's editions of Mathew Paris, ed. 1610,
uictus, domino regi uel alio damnum et p. 201, and ed. 1684, p. 1123.
THE CLERGY Xci
justices would deliver him to the ordinary as a clerk convicted of a
trespass against the forest laws. It also appears that the justices
refused to allow the pecuniary penalty to be assessed by the bishops
in their courts. The punishment of a poaching clerk was considered
to be as much a matter for the king as his trial.
The clergy also enjoyed an immunity from the necessity of finding
pledges for their appearance at the forest eyre when accused of
offences against the venison. Sometimes it is stated in the record
that a man was not attached because he was a clerk. Of this we have
an example l from the Northampton eyre of 1253.
Presentatum est per forestarios et uiridarios quod die 2 Martis proxima
post festum sancti Gregorii anno tricesimo octauo quod Willelmus Belayys
homo Waited de Eudham persone de Treng' occidit quendam ceruum in
bosco de Blysewurth' quern ceruum idem Walterus habuit. . . . Et Walterus
de Rudham non uenit nee fuit attachiatus quia clericus ; ideo mandatum est
episcopo Line' quod faciat eum uenire etc.
On the other hand, it seems clear that the clergy were, in fact,
liable to arrest, when found in the act of trespassing in the
forest, although they did not admit liability. Thus in the year 1251
the foresters of Weybridge arrested 3 a servant of John of Crakehall,
who was found trespassing in the forest by night. The vicar of
Huntingdon and a servant of the bishop of Lincoln demanded that he
should be delivered from prison and restored to Holy Church. They
threatened to excommunicate the foresters and then went to the
prison and dragged out the offending clerk. At the eyre the vicar
was ordered to appear before the justices and was delivered as one
convicted of these facts to the archdeacon of Huntingdon, who was
probably attending the court as the attorney of the bishop for the pur-
pose of receiving clerks. The servant of John of Crakehall was also
delivered to the archdeacon as one convicted of manifest evil doing to
the venison, while John himself, who a few years later was Treasurer
of England, was amerced ten marks for harbouring him after his
evil deeds.
Again, in January 125 J a clerk 4 was found trespassing by night in
the forest of Eockingham. The foresters demanded gage and pledge
of him, but according to the record he could not find pledges to them.
This was only another way of recording that he claimed his clerical
privilege. Nevertheless the foresters arrested him, but he managed
<-;ipe from their custody. The record is unfortunately damaged,
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 70, Roll 3. ■ See pp. 12, 13, 77, 78 below.
2 10 March 125|. * See pp. 33, ( J4 below.
xcii INTRODUCTION
and it cannot be ascertained whether he escaped by his own efforts or
with the assistance of some of his fellow clerks.
When a clerk had once been arrested and imprisoned, the sheriff
was not entitled to release him without a proper warrant. The fol-
lowing entry, 1 however, shows that the delivery would be made to the
bishop and not to pledges, as was the practice in the case of laymen.
Presentatum est per eosdem quod Bate de Lyueden et Gilebertus l de
Donestan' capti fuerunt apud Ouerton' et liberati Iohanni le Moyne tunc
uicecomiti Huntind' ad inprisonandum ; ideo mandatum est uicecomiti qui
nunc est quod faciat uenire ipsum Iohannem le Myne et quod distringat
ipsum quod ueniret die Sabbati post octabas apostolorum Petri et Pauli.
Ad diem uenit uicecomes et produxit Gilebertum de Dunston' qui detentus
est in prisona. Et de Bate de Lyueden' dicunt quod clericus fuit et
tempore uacacionis 3 episcopatus Line' deliberatus fuit archiepiscopo
Cantuar ' ; set nullum inde profert warrantum ; ideo dictus Iohannes, tunc
uicecomes inde responsurus est etc. Et testatum est per uiridarios quod
dictus Gilebertus non fuit malefactor nisi solummodo quod fuit cum Roberto
de Longueuill' et non consenciens malefactis suis. Et iacuit in prisona de
Cantebr' per duos annos ; ideo inde quietus. Postea taxatur Robertus de
Longueuile ad quadraginta solidos. 4
Robert de Longeville, mentioned in this entry was himself a
clerk, being the parson of Orton or Overton in the county of
Huntingdon, whom the foresters and verderers had already presented
as an evil doer in the forest. It should be noticed that, like the
parsons of Barnack and Polebrook, he does not make fine for his
offence but is taxed.
On the rolls B of the Nottingham eyre of 1334 there are no traces of
a special procedure for clerks. But this may be partly explained by a
change in procedure which applied to both clerks and laymen. In the
thirteenth century when a layman failed to appear at the forest eyre,
the sheriff was ordered to cause him to come on a given day, and when
a clerk failed to appear, a similar order was sent to the bishop. If
either clerk or layman again failed on the given day, he was exacted
' For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 68, Roll 2d. prisonam de Norhamt'. Et Eobertus Fynch
2 MS. ' Gilebertum.' fuit deliberatus per breue domini regis. . . .
3 The vacancy was after the death of Et Petrus de Nohers liberatusfuit magistro
Robert Grossetete on 9 October 1253. Willelmo de Lyndesy atornato episcopi
4 Another example occurs in the rolls of Line' adclericos capiendos eo quod clericus
the Northampton eyre of 1255 : fuit ; ideo preceptum est uicecomiti quod
' Presentatum est et conuictum per fores- uenire faciat magistrum et decanum etc.
tarios et uiridarios quod die sancti Thome Postea uenit Petrus de Nohers et finem
apostoli anno tricesimo primo Petrus de fecit per duas marcas.' (For. Proc, Tr. of
Nohers et [Robertus] Fynch de Clyue Bee, No. 68, Boll 1.)
capti fuerunt cum arcubus et sagittis in 5 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 132.
Firma de Nassincton' ; et missi fuerunt ad
THE CLERGY xciii
in the county court ; and if he did not then come he was outlawed.
But in the fourteenth century, if either clerk or layman failed to
appear at the eyre on the first day, he was forthwith exacted in the
county court without any second day being given to him. It is for
this reason that we find no entries of mandates being sent to the
bishop on the eyre rolls of the reign of Edward III.
Again the mere absence of entries on the eyre rolls recording the
delivery of clerks to the attorneys of the bishop is not proof that such
delivery no longer took place. In many of the eyre rolls of the reign
of Henry III., there are no such entries ; yet we know that the bishops
used to appoint attorneys, whose business it was to attend the eyre
and demand the delivery of clerks convicted of trespasses against the
forest laws. There was, in general, no special object for enrolling
the delivery, and in spite of the silence of the rolls, the practice may
have continued.
VII.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS.
On 6 November 1217, the infant king Henry III. was made to
issue the Charter l of the Forest, which contained the following two
chapters respecting the boundaries of the forests :
Inprimis omnes foreste quas Henricus rex auus noster afforestauit
uideantur per bonos et legales homines ; et si boscum aliquem alium quam
suum dominicum afforestauerit ad dampnum illius cuius boscus fuerit,
deafforestentur. Et si boscum suum proprium afforestauerit, remaneat
foresta, salua communa de herbagkret aliis in eadem foresta illis qui earn
prius habere consueuerunt.
Omnes autem bosci qui fuerunt afforestati per regem Ricardum auun-
culum nostrum, uel per regem Iohannem patrem nostrum usque ad primam
coronationem nostram, statim deafforestentur nisi fuerit dominicus boscus
noster.
The language of the Charter is notable. A forest was a district
which might include both woods and open country ; yet it was only
woods which were to be disafforested. Perhaps in some cases the
kings had afforested woods in the neighbourhood of their forests but
bad allowed the open country which surrounded them to remain
exempt or partially 2 exempt from the forest laws. It is probable, how-
1 A facsimile of the charter will be found 2 It should be noticed that the justices
in Statutes of the Realm, i. p. 20. who were appointed to inquire into the
f
xciv INTRODUCTION
ever, that the word ' boscus ' was not intended to be construed literally,
but was used loosely of districts which were assumed to be for the
most pa,rt wooded. Again, the woods which Henry II. had afforested
were only to be disafforested when they had been afforested to the
damage of their owners. A qualification so vague as this was open
to very different interpretations by the king and the owners of the
woods. But more significant than the language of the Charter were
the actual conditions under which the disafforestments were to be
made. The woods which king Henry II. had afforested were to be
viewed by good and loyal men, and there was to be no disafforest-
ment until they had been viewed ; but the woods which king Kichard
or king John had afforested were to be forthwith disafforested and
no view of them was necessary.
Pursuant to the Charter letters patent 1 were issued on 24 July
1218, directing perambulations of the forest to be made by twelve
knights, elected for the purpose, by view of John Marshall, who was
then justice of the forest. A few of the perambulations still exist,
the following 2 being one of them :
Hec est perambulacio 3 foreste facta in comitatu Rotelandie die 4 sancti
Iacobi apostoli anno regni regis Henrici tercii secundo coram Iohanne
Marresscall', tunc iusticiario 5 foreste, Willelmo de Auben', Hugone de Nevill'
et aliis fidelibus domini regis per Alanum Basset, Mattheum filium Thome,
Robertum Luuet, Radulfum Tailbard, Andream de Keten', Ricardum
Alebast', Bartholomeum de Piltun, Simonem Lesquier, Hugonem filium
Simonis, Ricardum filium Reginaldi, Robertum de Colestun', Ricardum
filium Rogeri, scilicet, qui predicti iurati dicunt quod Henricus rex auus
domini regis Henrici tercii post primam coronacionem suam afforestauit
quasdam partes de Roteland' uersus Stanfort inter Weland' et aquam que
currit inter Burle et Egiltun' et descendit per medium parcum de Bernardish*
usque ad pontem de Magna Caterstun', scilicet, a quodam chimino qui diri-
gitur per metas et bundas subscriptas, scilicet, a quodam uado de Litilhe sub
Kaldechot per medium Kaldechot ; et deinde per medium Lidingtun' ....
boundaries of the forests in December 1219 2 For. Proc, Anc. Chanc, No. 8.
were directed to inquire what woods had " This perambulation should be corn-
been put within the regard by king John, pared with the one made in 9 Hen. iii.
and what woods had been put in defense printed in Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 208, and
by him. (See Rot. Litt. Claus. i. 434.) with the one made on 7 December 1299,
This direction points to the king having printed on p. 116 below. The boundaries
partially afforested certain districts. By of the forest of Eutland as they were at the
putting woods within the regard, he pro- end of the reign of Hen. iii. are printed on
nibited wastes and essarts. By putting p. 53 below,
them in defense, he prohibited hunting in 4 Wednesday, 25 April 1218.
them. The expression ' to put in defense ' * John Marshall was appointed justice
seems, however, sometimes to have denoted of the forest by letters patent dated
merely the exclusion of sheep and cattle 8 November 1217. (See Patent Boll,
from pasture. See pp. 47, 48 below. 17 m. 9.) At this time there was only
1 Patent Boll 18, m. 2. They are printed one justice of the forest for all England,
in Rymeri Foedera, vol. i. part i. p. 151.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS XCV
extendit se contra collem de Bidisbroc usque ad quandam antlquam fossatam
inter Bidisbroc et Uppinha' et descendit in occidente de Childeslund' usque
in uallem inter Prestun' et Wenge ; et ab illo ualle usque ad uiridem
keminum inter Martinestorp' et Manetun' usque ad pontem sub Manetun ' ;
et deinde per uallem sub Gunetorp' usque per 1 unum caput de Egiltun'
nersus australem ; et deinde usque ad quendam uadum in predicta aqua
currente inter Burle et Egoluestun', qui uadus appellatur Thuiford. Et in
liuius rei ueritate predicti milites sigilla sua apposuerunt in testimonium.
The Charter of the Forest had been issued in the name of the
king, but with the seals of Gualo the papal legate and William
Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, the king himself having had no seal
during the first two years of his reign. At the beginning of his third
regnal year, however, a seal was made for him with which all
letters patent and close, though attested by William Marshall 2 or
Hubert of Burgh, and not by the king, were sealed. At the same
time the council issued an ordinance, 3 declaring that no grants in
perpetuity should be made by the king until he was of full age. In
spite of this ordinance 4 the Charter of the Forest, which was a grant
in perpetuity, was not revoked. There can be no doubt on this
point, for on 22 April 1219 letters patent 5 were issued to Peter de
Maullay directing him to make a perambulation between the parts of
the counties of Somerset and Dorset which ought to be disafforested
and the parts which ought to remain forest. Similar letters patent 6
were issued on 1 May of the same year with respect to perambula-
tions in the counties of Nottingham and Derby ; and again 7 on 20
July, with respect to the county of Huntingdon. 8 In all these letters
patent there is a clause directing the perambulation to be sent to the
1 This and the following word are written ' Homines de comitatu Huntind' debent
as ' per vnura ' in the MS., the letters in quadraginta marcas pro deafforestandis
italics representing contractions. ' Unum' forestis que deafTorestari debent et separari
b to be the correct reading for vnum, ab hiis que permanebunt foreste secundum
but the letter u might be read as an n or tenorem carte de libertatibus foreste.' (Pipe
even as a y. Eolls 63, Eoll 6.) ' Homines de Dorset et
2 After the death of the Earl Marshal Sumerset .... centum libras pro per-
in May 1219, letters patent and close were ambulacione facienda inter partes illas in
usually attested by Hubert of Burgh. comitatibus de Dorset' et Sumerset' que
3 It is printed in Rymeri Foedera, vol. i. deaforestande sunt et illas que remanebunt
part i. p. 152. secundum tenorem carte regis de libertatibus
4 The ordinance against grants in per- foreste et pro metis et terminis ponendis
petuity was strictly observed. In a few cases inter utrasque partes illas et pro deaffores-
markets and fairs were granted, but the tatione parcium illarum que deafforestande
grants were only to remain in force until sunt sicut predictum est secundum metas
the king attained his majority. (Rot. Litt. et terminos predictos.' (Pipe Itolls 63,
Clam. i. 4(13.) 4 Patent Iloll 19, m. 4. Iloll 14 d.)
'• [bid. in. '.'>. 7 Ibid. There is a blank space on the roll after
1 The following entries appear upon the the fifth word, namely, ' Sumerset,' in the
Roll of the Pipe of the year 3 above passage.
Hi h. iii. :
f 2
XCvi INTRODUCTION
king, ' in order that afterwards thereof might be enacted that which
it might seem fitting to our council to do.'
It is a matter of doubt whether perambulations were made in the
years 1218 and 1219 in all those counties in which there were forests.
But if they were made, they seem to have been considered unsatis-
factory. For in December 1219 seven sets of justices were appointed ]
to inquire in seven groups of counties respectively what forests ought
to be disafforested. The letters sent to the justices were compre-
hensive, and differed in form and substance from those by which
justices were appointed in subsequent perambulations. They began
as follows :
Rex Sarr' episcopo sahitem. Sciatis quod constituimu3 uos una cum
uenerabili patre I. Baton' episcopo et dilectis et fidelibus nostris comite
Sarr' uel illo quern idem comes loco suo ad hoc posuerit et Willelmo Briwer'
et Willelmo de Neuill' ad inquisicionem faciendam in comitibus Dors' et
Sumers' et Wiltesir' que foreste afforestate fuerunt per dominum I. regem
patrem nostrum et qui bosci positi fuerunt per eundem imfra regard um et
prius fuerunt extra regardum et similiter qui bosci positi fuerunt per eundem
in defensum ; et quas forestas uicecomites et castellani et alii bailliui nostri
tenent preter forestas quas forestarii de feodo tenent ; et que foreste
afforestate fuerunt per Henricum regem auum nostrum tempore Alani de
Neuill' uel tempore aliorum forestariorum suorum de uoluntate ipsius regis
uel de uoluntate aliorum forestariorum suorum.
The letters then directed the justices to disafforest forthwith the
forests which they should find to have been afforested by King John ;
to put out of the regard the woods which had formerly been out of the
regard ; and to put out of defense the woods which had formerly been
out of defense ; to seize all the forests which the sheriffs, castellans
and other bailiffs held (but not the forests held by foresters in fee),
and deliver the forests so seized in each county to two knights and a
clerk of the county, to hold until further orders, and to report their
finding about the forests which had been afforested by Henry II. or
his foresters to Hubert of Burgh and the king's council, in order that
the forests might be disafforested if the report were satisfactory. It is
probable that the justices disafforested certain districts which had
been afforested by king John, and that the council was dissatisfied
1 The letters close, which were dated Leicester; (5) York, Cumberland and
13 December 1219, were enrolled on the Northumberland ; (6) Salop, Stafford,
close roll. (See Rot. Litt. Claus. i. 434 b.) Worcester and Hereford ; (7) Gloucester.
The seven groups of counties were: (1) Dorset, It will be observed that no justices were
Somerset and Wiltshire; (2) Hampshire, appointed for the county of Essex, in which
Surrey and Berkshire ; (3) Oxford and there was a forest. In most of the other
Buckingham ; (4) Nottingham and Derby, counties for which no justices were ap-
Northampton Huntingdon, Rutland and pointed here were no forests.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS XCVU
with the report concerning the forests which had been afforested by
Henry II. or his foresters. There is certainly no entry on the Patent
or Close Eolls directing a disafforestment in consequence of the report
of the justices. But the absence of such a direction is not conclusive
evidence that no disafforestment took place.
On 10 December 1223, the attestation of letters patent and
close by Hubert of Burgh ceased and henceforth they are attested
by the king himself. But the ordinance in restraint of grants in
perpetuity remained in force, the king being still an infant.
On 30 October 1224, Hugh de Neville, the justice l of the forest,
was directed 2 to cause the forest to be kept and the regards to be made
as in the reign of king John before the war between him and his
barons. This direction is recorded on the patent rolls without any
introductory or explanatory statement; but it certainly does not
amount to a revocation of the Charter of the Forest, as it only affects
two of its chapters. On 11 February, in the following year the
Charter was again issued without any alteration in its provisions ;
but it is expressed to be made ' spontanea et bona uoluntate nostra,'
and concludes with a statement that it was granted in return for a
fifteenth of all movables, and that neither the king nor his heirs would
purchase anything by which the liberties contained in the charter
should be infringed, and that if he should purchase any such thing it
should be reckoned as null.
On 16 February 1225, being five days only after the second issue
of the Charter, justices 3 were appointed 4 to make perambulations in
accordance with its provisions ; and on the same day the sheriff of
York was directed to cause its observance in his bailiwick. Woods,
however, were not to be felled or venison taken on account of the
perambulation until it had been made and presented to the king
and he had given such orders as should seem good to him and
his council. Similar directions were sent on the same day to the
1 Hugh de Neville was appointed justice more knights were associated to the justices,
of the forest by letters patent dated 29 April On the same day three other justices were
1224. (See Patent Roll 31, m. 8.) appointed to make perambulations in the
2 Patent Roll 32, m. 9 ; Rot. Litt. Claus. counties of Worcester, Stafford, Salop and
ii. 1. Warwick ; and also two justices in each of
" Hugh de Neville, Brian de l'lsle and the following counties : Lancaster, Surrey
Henry of Cerne were appointed by letters and Huntingdon. The appointment of the
patent dated 16 February 1224 justices to justices in Surrey was afterwards revoked
make perambulations in the following and Hugh de Neville, Brian de l'lsle and
counties: Somerset, Dorset, Northampton, Henry of Cerne were appointed for Essex,
Leicester, Rutland, Nottingham and Derby, Surrey and Sussex. (See Patent Roll 32
York, Oxford, Northumberland, Cumber- a, mm. 6, 5 in dorso.)
bad, Buckingham, Hampshire, Wiltshire * Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 70.
and Berkshire. In each county two or
XCviii INTRODUCTION
sheriff of Northumberland, and on 1 May 1225 to the sheriff of Kut-
land. 1 It is probable that they were also sent at different dates to
the sheriffs of other counties in which there were forests. On 8 May
in the same year the justices were directed 2 to cause the Charter of
the Forest to be observed in the different counties according to the
perambulations which they had already made. In the counties in
which perambulations 3 had not yet been made, it was to be observed
according to the perambulations as soon as they were made. In the
case of Eutland a special mandate 4 was sent to the j astice of the forest
on 5 August ordering him to observe the perambulation just as it had
been made, but to retain in the king's hands his demesne woods of
Oakham and Eidlington.
Although the Charter was made in the name and under the seal
of the king, he was still an infant, and the ordinance in restraint
of perpetuity had not been revoked. Early in January 1227 the
king declared 5 that he was of full age. 6 On the 22nd of that month
he made 7 his first grant in perpetuity, having on the previous
day proclaimed by letters addressed to the sheriffs, that he would
cause charters and confirmations to be made under his seal, and
ordered that all who had or claimed to have lands, tenements or
liberties by the gift or grant and confirmation of his antecessors
should come forthwith to show by what warrant they claimed them.
He also proclaimed in the same letters that all who wished to pur-
chase charters or confirmations of lands, tenements, markets,
liberties or anything whatever should come to him for that purpose.
For some months the clerks in the chancery were exceptionally busy.
New charters were granted, and old ones were confirmed. Every
grant raised a question of expediency, and every confirmation one of
validity. It was a time of inquiry into the king's rights and property.
It is not surprising that the young king on attaining his political
majority, challenged 8 some of the disafforestments which had been
1 Ibid, p. 72. 2 Ibid, p, 73. 7 Charter Eoll 18, m. 36.
3 A few of the perambulations are re- 8 It is clear, however, that even before
corded upon the Close Eolls : namely, the king had declared his majority it had
Surrey (Rot. Litt. Glaus, ii. 56), Sussex been decided that there should be a re-
(ibid. 80), Leicestershire (ibid. 207), Notting- vision of the perambulations. On 27 Sep-
hamshire and Eutland (ibid. 208), Hun- tember 1226 the abbot of Abingdon and
tingdon (ibid. 209). seven other persons were ordered to bring
4 Ibid. p. 80. before the king the charters of the king's
5 Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 207. predecessors under which they claimed
6 The attestations of letters patent and liberties in the forest and the disafforested
close show that the king was at Oxford on districts. On 26 October the perambula-
8, 9, 10 January 122f. According to the tions of certain forests were temporarily
Annals of Worcester, he declared that the revoked. (Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 156. See
was of full age on 9 January. (Annates also the letters close of 22 June 1226,
Monastici, Eolls Series, vol. iv. p. 419.) ibid. 153.)
THE EXTENT OF THE FOHESTS XC1X
made, pursuant to the Charter, during his infancy. Vast tracts of
land had been put out of the forest at a time when he had no power
to grant a market, a fair, or even an acre of land to a man and his
heirs. Disafforestment, resulting as it necessarily did in the loss of
fines, amercements and other profits, was from its very nature an act
of disinheritance. In many cases there was good reason for believing
that portions of the forest had been wrongly disafforested. But
instead of revoking ! the Charter, the king took a more sagacious step,
which showed considerable political ability.
The king had declared that he was of full age when he was at
Oxford on 9 January 1227. On the day following, before he had
issued a single charter or proclaimed his majority to the sheriffs, he
directed 2 the sheriff of Shropshire to summon all the foresters in fee
in his bailiwick to come before the king, to show by what warrant they
held their offices. He also sent a similar direction concerning all per-
sons who before the making of the Charter had enjoyed any exemption
or liberty in the forest in his bailiwick. Finally he directed him to
cause the persons who had made the perambulation to come before
him to show why they had disafforested certain parts of the forest
which had been afforested before the coronation of Henry II. , and
why they had disafforested certain of his demesne lands and woods.
Similar directions were sent on the same day to the sheriffs of
Eutland, Nottingham and Leicester, and on 8 February to the
sheriffs of Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxford and Huntingdon. No doubt
he expected that the foresters in fee and other persons summoned
would produce charters granted by the predecessors of Henry II.
capable of throwing light on the boundaries of the forest before the
coronation of that king. By their aid places might be shown to have
lain within the forest which had been put out of it by the disafforest-
ment of 1225.
On 9 February 3 the knights who had made the perambulations in
the counties of Leicester, Eutland and Huntingdon came before the
king and acknowledged that they had wrongly disafforested portions
of the forest which, owing to the civil war, had ceased to be forest
1 There has been some misunderstand- Maiora, Rolls Series, vol. iii. p. 122) states
ing as to what the king did at this time. that the king quashed, were the perambu-.
He dealt with the perambulations as stated lations which had been ratified by the
above, and he granted confirmations of king's seal during his minority. He had
charters granted by his predecessors, in made no charters during his minority,
return for which he, no doubt, received a except the Great Charter and the Forest
large sum of money. It was the usual Charter. There is no evidence that he
practice for the kings to grant confirma- quashed either of tin in.
tions of charters on accession. The ' char- ■ Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 20G.
ters ' which Mathew Taris (Chronica * Ibid. ii. 169.
C INTRODUCTION
during the reign of Stephen, and had been reafforested by Henry II.
after his coronation. Accordingly he directed that the forests in
these three counties, should be kept as they were before the perambu-
lations had been made. About the same time the knights who had
made the perambulation in Nottinghamshire acknowledged that they
had wrongly disafforested two places and obtained leave to certify
themselves of their true boundaries. The king then directed that no
person having woods in those places should fell, sell or essart them,
until it had been determined what were the boundaries. 1
On 13 August the king sent 2 letters close to seventeen of his sheriffs
consisting of an order relating to Magna Carta and directions relating
to the forest, similar in form to those which he had sent on 10 January
to the sheriff of Shropshire. On the same day he sent the order
relating to Magna Carta to the sheriff of Northumberland, and also to
the sheriffs of Nottingham and Derby, Warwick and Leicester, Rutland,
Cambridge and Huntingdon, Berkshire, Bedford and Buckingham.
After the enrolment of the names of these counties on the Close Roll,
it is stated that although they are in the forest 3 they had not the long
form (meaning the letters close sent to the first seventeen sheriffs) ,
because they were quit, but they had the short form (meaning the
order relating to Magna Carta), together with the underwritten sheriffs,
namely those of Sussex, 4 Kent, Middlesex, Norfolk and Suffolk.
Thus the short form was sent to the sheriffs of the counties in
which there were no forests, and also to the sheriffs of the counties
which contained forests about the boundaries of which the king was
already satisfied. He had pardoned ft the knights who had made the
perambulations in Rutland, Leicester, Huntingdon and Nottingham
by letters patent dated 9 February then last past. He had dis-
afforested 6 by a charter dated 10 May a portion of the county of
Berkshire, and the boundaries of the forest in that county were no
longer in question. It is not recorded that he had pardoned the
knights who had made the perambulations in the counties of Derby, 7
1 On 20 April 1228 the knights who a sheriff in common with Huntingdonshire,
had made perambulations in the following and Bedfordshire had one in common with
counties were pardoned by the king for Buckinghamshire.
their errors ; namely, Lancaster, Stafford, 4 Northumberland is mentioned on the
Salop, Worcester, Surrey and Northamp- roll together with these five counties, but
ton. (Patent Boll 36, m. 5.) The knights evidently by mistake. The order relating
who made the perambulation in Yorkshire to Magna Carta was sent to its sheriff, as
were pardoned on 31 October 1228. (Patent stated in the roll, who was quit. The forest
Boll 37, m. 12.) in Northumberland was disafforested in
2 Rot. Lift. Claus. ii. 212. the reign of Ed. i. See p. cviii below.
* It should not be inferred from this 5 Patent Boll 34, m. 8.
that there were forests in Cambridgeshire 6 Charter Boll 18, m. 5.
and Btdfordshire. The former county had 7 But see p. cviii, note 4, below.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS Cl
Buckingham and Warwick, but the explanation may well be that he
was not dissatisfied with their work.
In the course of the next two years the perambulations which had
been made in the remaining counties were examined. Where districts
had been wrongly disafforested they were reafforested. But the
king neither repudiated the Charter of the Forest nor annulled the
perambulations which had been made in his infancy. He merely
corrected l them, after due inquiry. Where Henry II. had afforested
a district for the first time it was no longer allowed to remain in the
forest, but where he had reafforested what had been forest before the
civil wars of the reign of Stephen the perambulations were to that
extent set aside.
But although the revision of the perambulations was neither
unjust nor unreasonable, it was, as might be expected, unpopular.
People who had enjoyed complete immunity from the forest laws would
resent their reimposition, whether it was just or unjust. Among
the articles which formed the barons' petition in the year 1260 was
one which gave expression to the feeling of dissatisfaction. 2
Item petunt remedium quod bosci et terre infra metas foreste non
existentes, qui per ambulacionem proborum hominum, et per quindecimam
partem omnium bonorum hominum Anglie domino regi datam deafforestati
fuerunt, per uoluntatem suam reafforestauit.
Nevertheless the barons did not succeed in obtaining redress for
this particular grievance. On several occasions during the reign of
Henry III. the Charter was confirmed, but the confirmations were
never followed by fresh perambulations and the boundaries of the
forest remained the same after the battle of Evesham as they were
before it. Nor was Edward I. willing that the boundaries of the
forest as settled by his father should be disturbed. It was only at the
end of his reign, under strong political pressure, that he consented
to the disafforestment of any portions of his forests. In March 1277
he had directed 3 Walter Scamel, and Mathew de Colombieres to cause
a perambulation to be made of the forests south of the Trent.
1 Thus the concluding words of the dictus Henricus rex auus noster affores-
writ to the sheriff of Hampshire concerning tauit ; et firraiter prohiberi facias quod
the revision of the perambulations in that nullus in eadem foresta de uiridi uel uena-
county are as follows : cione forisfaciat contra assisam foreste
* Et ideo tibi precipimus quod sine dila- nostre, et quod arcus et sagitte brachetti et
cione clamari facias per totam balliuam leporarii inde penitus amoueantur.' (Close
tuam quod foresta custodiatur per eosdem Boll 38, m. 9 d.)
terminos et easdem metas per quas cus- 2 Annates Monastici, Burton, Rolls
fcodita fuit tempore I. regis patris nostri Series, p. 440.
ante gwerram motam inter ipsum etbarones 3 For. Proc. } Anc. Chanc, No. 101.
buos Anglie exceptis partibus predictis quas
cii INTRODUCTION
Edwardus dei gracia rex Anglie dominus Hibernie et dux Aquitanie
dilectis et fidelibus suis magistro W. Scamel, decano Sarr', et M. de
Columbar' salutem. Quia uolumus quod carta nostra de foresta in omnibus
et singulis articulis suis inuiolabiliter obseruetur secundum quod nuper in
consilio nostro apud Westmonasterium puplicari fecimus, assignauimus uos
ad eligendum duodecim de discrecioribus et legalioribus tarn militibus quam
aliis probis hominibus de singulis comitatibus subscriptis, scilicet, de
comitatu Eoteland', Northampton, Salop, Stafford, Berk', Oxon', Wygorn',
Herford', Gloucester, Wilt', Dors', Som', Sutht', Surr', Sussex, Huntyndon',
Buk', et Essex ut conuocatis militibus et probis hominibus predictis necnon
forestariis et uiridariis forestarum eorundem comitatuum per uisum illorum
duodecim fiat perambulacio recta ilia scilicet que facta fuit tempore domini
Henrici regis patris nostri que nondum calumpniata fuit et ut alii articuli in
eadem carta contenti compleantur. Et ideo uobis mandamus quod ad dies et
loca, que ad hoc prouideritis, et uicecomitibus nostris comitatuum predictorum
scire feceritis, premissa faciatis in forma predicta. Mandauimus eciam eisdem
uicecomitibus nostris quod ad eosdem dies et loca uenire faciant coram
uobis omnes milites comitatuum predictorum et quosdam alios probos et
legales homines de eisdem comitatibus ad hoc sumcientes. Et ipsi uicecomites
ibidem uobis occurrant ad premissa, sicut predictum est perficienda ita quod
perambulacio ilia fiat et alii articuli in eadem carta contenti perficiantur
iuxta tenorem carte supradicte et secundum quod uos eisdem uicecomitibus
scire facietis ex parte nostra ita tamen quod nichil demandetur execucioni
donee de ipso distincte et aperte et absque calumpnia facta et nobis sub
sigillis uestris et sigillis dictorum militum presentata, preceperimus fieri
quod de consilio nostro prouiderimus faciendum. In cuius rei testimonium
has literas nostras fieri fecimus patentes. Teste me ipso apud Dunstapl'
primo die Marcii anno regni nostri quinto.
Pursuant to these letters patent perambulations were made and
complaints presented against the violation of the charter by the forest
officers. A few returns have survived which show that the people
suffered from unlawful exactions and hoped for a curtailment of the
districts over which they could be practised. But it should not be
assumed that the findings of the jurors were in all cases historically
correct. More than fifty years had elapsed since the second issue of
the charter ; more than a century since the first coronation of
Henry II. Intervals such as these were sufficiently long for tradition
to develop according to the wishes and the interests of the people.
The Somerset jurors recorded the boundaries of their forests, and
then added x that, with those exceptions, all Somerset was and ought
1 ' Exceptis supradictis forestis tota per regem Iohannem, quando afforestauit
Somerseta est extra forestam et debet esse, totam Angliam. Et postea deafforestata
set aliquo tempore fuit afforestata, scilicet, fuit per regem Henricum filium suum.'
post primam coronacionem Henrici regis (For. Proc, Anc. Chanc, No. 101.)
aui domini regis Henrici filii regis Iohannis
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS ciii
to be outside the forest ; but it was sometime afforested, to wit, after
the first coronation of king Henry the grandfather of king Henry
the son of king John, by king John when he afforested all England ;
and it was afterwards disafforested by king Henry his son. King
John certainly prohibited l fowling throughout England ; he may
also have prohibited hunting in some counties; but there is no
evidence that he ever afforested his whole kingdom.
In the autumn of the year 1297 Edward I. confirmed 2 the Charter
of the Forest. On 16 October in the same year, six justices
were sent 3 to make perambulations of the forests both north and
south of the Trent ; two being assigned to each of three groups of
counties. The letters patent, by which they were appointed, closely
resembled those by which Walter Scamel and Mathew de Colombieres
had been appointed in 1277, the word ' perambulacio ' being again
qualified by * scilicet, que facta tempore domini Henrici regis patris
nostri que nondum calumpniata fuit.' In the next month, however,
these letters patent were revoked 4 and others issued, by which eight
justices were appointed to make perambulations, two being assigned
to each of four 5 groups of counties. In the new letters patent the
word * perambulacio ' was not qualified as it had been before. Peram-
bulations seem to have been made by the justices shortly afterwards,
though perhaps not in all counties. An official record of the peram-
bulations 6 made in Hampshire is preserved at the Public Eecord
Office and the perambulations 7 which were made in Somerset are
recorded in a register of Wells Cathedral. Others may yet be found
in monastic and private chartularies.
As the boundaries of the forests had been settled with great care
in the early years of the reign of Henry III., there was no reason why
they should again be changed. In spite, therefore, of the confirma-
tion of the charter and the resulting perambulations, the forests were
not reduced in size. But in the autumn of the year 1298 the king
1 ' Anno domini MCCIX rex Anglorum (3) Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Salop,
Iohannes ad natale Domini fuit apud Bris- Stafford, Somerset and Dorset ; (4) Not-
tollum et ibi capturam auium per totam tingham, Derby, York, Lancaster, West-
Anglie interdixit.' (Chronica Bogeri de moreland, and Cumberland. The appoint-
Wendover, Rolls Series, ii. 49.) ment of justices in the second of these
2 By letters patent (inspecting the char- groups was afterwards revoked, and two
ter) dated 12 October 1297. See Statutes other justices were appointed in their place
of the Realm, i. 120. by letters patent dated 8 February 1298.
■ Patent Roll 116, m. 3. Patent Roll 117, m. 27 ; Parliamentary
1 Patent Roll 117, m. 32 ; Parliamentary Writs, i. p. 397.
Writs, i. 396. a Duchy of Lancaster, For. Proc, Bundle
4 The four groups were : (1) Essex, 1, No. 8.
Huntingdon, Northampton, Rutland, * They are printed in Collinson's History
Surrey and Sussex ; (2) Oxford, Berkshire, of Somerset, iii. 56.
Puckingham, Hampshire and Wiltshire ;
civ INTRODUCTION
appointed commissioners l to go through all the counties of England to
inquire into the misdeeds of the forest officers and of those who were
in arrear in making the perambulations. From this it seems that
the forest charter was to be enforced as far as it related to the
oppression of the inhabitants, and that the king intended the
boundaries, such as they were, to be respected by the foresters.
In April 1299 a new statute, 2 the ' Statutum de Finibus Leuatis,'
was enacted which incorporated all the Charter of the Forest, except
the first five articles. Although the articles in the Charter which
relate to disafforestment were omitted from the statute, there is a
clause in it which declares that the king was willing that a perambu-
lation should be made ' saving always his oath, the right of his crown,
and his exceptions and challenges, and those of other persons ' but
1 so that such perambulation be reported to him before any execution
or anything else be done thereupon.' Five justices, 3 all of whom were
judges of great experience, were directed, 4 by letters patent dated
23 September, to make perambulations of the forests north and south
of the Trent. Perambulations 5 were made by these justices in five
counties, namely, Northampton, Huntingdon, Eutland, Oxford and
Surrey. It is probable, however, that they performed their work too
slowly to satisfy anybody ; for on 1 April 1300 the king again directed 6
perambulations to be made, this time by six sets of justices each in a
particular group 7 of counties. The letters patent by which they were
appointed contained reservations similar to those in the Statute of
Fines, concerning the king's rights and the execution of the peram-
bulations. In most of the forests the jurors paid no attention to the
settlement of the boundaries made at the beginning of the reign of
Henry III. They put out of the forest vast tracts of land which had
been forest for a century and a half, alleging that they had been
1 They were appointed by letters patent and Derby; (2) Essex, Buckingham, Oxford;
dated 18 November 1298. (See Patent Roll (3) Somerset, Dorset, and Devon; (4) Hamp-
117, m. 1.) The writ of summons for the shire and Wiltshire ; (5) Nottingham, York
inquiry is printed in Parliamentary Writs, and Cumberland ; (6) Gloucester, Hereford,
i. 397. Worcester and Warwick. It will be ob-
2 Statutes of the Realm, i. 126. served that, with the exception of Oxford,
3 They were Roger Brabancon, John of none of the five counties in which peram-
Berwick, Ralph of Hingham, William Inge bulations are known to have been made
and John of Croxley. pursuant to the letters patent of 23 Sep-
4 Patent Roll 118, m. 9. tember 1299 are included in the above six
5 The perambulation in Rutland is groups. It is probable that no perambula-
printed on p. 116 below ; that in Surrey on tion was made in Oxfordshire pursuant to
p. 117 below ; those" in Northampton, the letters patent of 1 April 1300, as the
Huntingdon and Oxford are recorded on disafforestment of 14 Feb. 1301 was based
For. Proc, Arte. Chanc, No. 102. upon a perambulation made on the 22
6 Patent Roll 119, m. 19 ; Parliamentary February l|pg pursuant to the letters patent
Writs, i. 397. of 23 September 1299. (See For. Proc,
1 The six groups were : (1) Salop, Stafford Anc. Chanc, No. 102.)
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS CV
afforested by Henry II. or his sons "Richard and John, and disregard-
ing the distinction between districts which had been afforested for the
first time and those which had been reafforested as ancient forest by
Henry II. When they were asked what were their means of know-
ledge, they declared ! that they knew from the tales of their ancestors
and the common talk of the country.
On 25 September 1300 the king directed 2 the justices before
whom the recent perambulations had been made to attend a parlia-
ment which was to be held at Lincoln on 25 January of the following
year with a view to considering what they had done ; and a day later
the sheriffs were ordered to cause all who had lands and tenements
within the forest and who wished to challenge anything in the
perambulations to come to the parliament and show their reasons.
The justices of the forest north and south of the Trent were also
ordered to cause the attendance of the foresters in fee, no doubt for
the same reason as that for which they had been summoned in the
reign of Henry III. On 14 February the king confirmed the Charter
of the Forest and issued letters patent 3 disafforesting all districts
which lay outside the boundaries found in the recent perambulations.
The disafforestments made at the Parliament of Lincoln were not
final. They had been extorted from the king under political pressure ;
there is good reason for supposing that they infringed his rights. It
is not surprising, therefore, that he applied to his lord the pope for
relief. On 29 December 1305 Clement V. revoked, 4 annulled, and
quashed the grants which the king had made, and shortly after-
wards the king 5 himself revoked and annulled his own grants and dis-
afforestments.
1 See p. 121 below. Parliament of Lincoln. The fifth chapter
2 Close Koll 122, m. 2 in dorso ; Par- of the Statute of the year 1306, known
Momentary Writs, i. 88. as ' Ordinatio Foreste,' begins as follows :
3 The letters patent of disafforestment ' Quoad illos uero, qui tempore quo foresta
incorporate the perambulations upon which deafforestata fuit, transgressiones de uiridi
they are based. They are recorded upon aut venacione in foresta fecerunt, quia
the roll For. Proc, Anc. Chanc, No. 102, at deafforestacionem eandem et ut sentencia
the Record Office. The letters patent dis- excommunicacionis in contrauenientes ful-
afforesting portions of Huntingdon, North- minaretur quamquam de nostra bona
ampton, Rutland and Oxford recite per- uoluntateminimeprocessisset,concessimus,
ambulations made pursuant to the letters quam quidem sentenciam dominus summus
patent of 23 September 1299. Those dis- pontifex postmodum reuocauit, et quas
afforesting portions of the forest in other concessionem et deafforestacionem ex certis
counties recite the perambulations made causis reuocamus .et eciam adnullamus,
pursuant to the letters patent of 1 April uolumus quod transgressiones huiusmodi
1 BOO. perdonentur, transgressionibus illis exceptis,
4 The bull is printed in Foedera Ryyncri, que in ea parte que foresta remansit com-
vol. i. part i. p. 978. misse fuerunt.' (Statutes of the Realm,
4 It is clear that the king revoked the i. 149.)
disafforestments which he granted at the
Cvi INTRODUCTION
But the boundaries which had been settled in the Parliament of Lin-
coln were not easily set aside in this way. Edward II. was compelled to
consent to the disafforestments which his father Edward I. had allowed
but afterwards revoked. His son Edward HI. was made l to grant that
the Charter of the Forest should be kept in every article ; that the
perambulations which were ridden in the time of king Edward his
grandfather should be kept in the form in which they were then ridden
and bounded ; that thereupon a charter should be made to every shire
where it was ridden ; and that in such places where it was not ridden, it
should be ridden by good men and lawful, and a charter thereupon made
as is above stated. The case of Surrey was exceptional. There had been
no disafforestment in this county, because the jurors of the perambula-
tion made on 5 March 1300 in pursuance of the letters patent of 27
September 1299 had found 2 that no part of the forest ought to be
disafforested, and therefore no perambulation was made pursuant to
the letters patent of 1 April 1300. Accordingly the men of Surrey,
alleging that there had been no perambulation in the time of Edward I.
demanded that one should be made pursuant to the grant of Edward
III. Letters patent were issued ; a perambulation was made ; and the
whole county of Surrey was found to lie outside the forest. The king
formally disafforested 3 the county on 26 December 1327. Six years
later he ordered 4 that the forest should be kept by the same boundaries
as in the time of the late king, notwithstanding the grant which he
had made in the first year of his reign, as he understood from divers
inquisitions taken in the time of his progenitors and from other
memoranda in the exchequer that divers woods and open spaces in
the county of Surrey ought to be afforested.
The perambulations made at the end of the reign of Edward I. are
of great value in so far as they show what the boundaries of the forest
were during the fourteenth and subsequent centuries. But except in
a few cases they do not assist in determining the boundaries of the
thirteenth century. In order to obtain information on this point, the
metes and bounds which are occasionally recorded on the eyre rolls 5
of the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I. must be consulted. But on
the rolls of some forests they are not recorded, and in such cases the
1 By statute ii. of 1 Ed. iii. See Statutes rolls of the year 1269 (see p. 53 below) ;
of the Realm, i. 255. those of Surrey on the eyre rolls of the
2 See pp. 117, 118 below. year 1270 (see p. 61 below). It is probable
3 Patent Eoll 168, m. 3. that the metes and bounds recorded on the
4 On 4 August 1333. See Close Roll 160, eyre rolls were merely the presentments of
m. 3. the forest officers and not the record of a
5 Thus the metes and bounds of the perambulation specially made at the time
forest of Rutland are set out on the eyre of the eyre.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS Cvii
boundaries can only be ascertained by collecting the names of all
places mentioned in the rolls as lying within the forest.
Until the boundaries of the different forests have been carefully
ascertained it will be impossible to state even approximately how
much of the kingdom was forest in the thirteenth century. In some
counties there were no forests. Among the writs by which the
Parliament of Lincoln of 1300 was summoned was one l which was
addressed to the sheriffs of the counties in which there were forests.
It is followed on the roll of letters close by a writ 2 to the sheriff
of Lincoln and a statement that in the same manner an order was
sent to the sheriffs of the counties in which there were no forests —
namely, Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, Bedford, Kent, Sussex, Middle-
sex, Leicester, Northumberland, Cornwall, Lancaster, and Hertford.
In some of these counties there had been forests which in the year
1300 were forests no longer. By a charter dated 3 May 1204 king
John disafforested 3 the marsh appurtenant to four towns in Lin-
colnshire — namely, Surfleet, Gosberchurch, Quadring and Doning-
ton — so that it is evident that there was a forest in that county
at the beginning of the thirteenth century. 4 The same king, by a
charter dated 22 March in the same year disafforested 5 all the
county of Cornwall, except two moors and two groves, which he
disafforested later in his reign. He also disafforested by a charter 6
dated 18 May 1204 all the county of Devon, except Dartmoor and
Exmoor. On 10 October 1239 Henry III. granted 7 the forest of
Dartmoor to his brother Bichard earl of Cornwall. A portion of the
forest of Exmoor 8 still remained in the county of Devon ; but with
this exception there was no forest in Devonshire after the year 1239.
A considerable portion of the county of Leicester was forest until
20 February 123f , when it was disafforested 9 by king Henry III. in
accordance with the first chapter of the Charter of the Forest. In
1 Close Roll 122, m. 2 in dorso ; Parlia- ' R. A. et W. T. ceperunt et occiderunt
mentary Writs, i. 90 b. unum bouiculum cerui infra hundredum
2 Parliamentary Writs, i. 91 a. de Wytherugge infra regardum foreste pre-
3 Rot. Chart, p. 128. dicte de Exemor', quod quidem regardum
* A letter in the usual form concerning unum est et se extendit tam infra comi-
a regard was sent to the sheriff of Lincoln tatum Somers' quam Deuon', die Lune
in February 1229. See Royal Letters, proxima post festum Omnium Sanctorum
Hen. Hi. Rolls Series, i. 346. anno predicto. . . . Et dicunt quod omnes
5 Rotuli Chartarwn, pp. 122, 206. ministri foreste predicte de comitatu
H Rotuli Chartarwn, p. 132. Somers' omnino, licet dictum regardum pro
1 Charter Roll 33, m. 1. parte est in comitatu Deuon', se intro-
8 The forest of Exmoor seems to have mittunt.' (For. Proc, Tr. of Rec, 309,
extended into Devonshire in the reign of Skin 10.)
Ed. iii. At an inquisition held at Wells 9 Charter Roll 29, m. 15.
on 2 July 1306 it was found as follows :
Cviii INTRODUCTION
Northumberland there was an extensive forest until the year 1280,
when Edward I. disafforested l it in return for an annual rent of forty
pounds. In Lancashire there was no royal forest in the reign of
Edward L, because the king had granted the honour of Lancaster to
his brother Edmund Crouchback, who was allowed to enforce the
forest laws over the forests which it contained. It is also evident that
there was a forest in Sussex at the beginning of the thirteenth century,
for a perambulation 2 of it is recorded on the roll of letters close of
9 Henry III.
On the other hand, it is almost certain that none of the kings
of England possessed any forests in the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk
and Kent. There are no appointments of wardens and no grants
of privileges which suggest the existence of any such forest ; there
are no records of a forest eyre, and no letters patent appointing
justices for an eyre in any of these counties ; nor are there any
corresponding entries of fines and amercements for offences against
the forest law on the Great Eolls of the Exchequer. For similar
reasons it may be considered as probable that there were either
no forests in Cambridgeshire, Bedfordshire, and Hertfordshire, or
forests of a small extent only. But there is more occasion for doubt
about these three counties than about Norfolk, Suffolk and Kent.
Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire had a common sheriff, and
they are treated as a single county on the Great Eolls of the
Exchequer. It is therefore possible that some of the fines and
amercements there recorded for forest trespasses relate to Cambridge-
shire, and not to Huntingdonshire, in which there was undoubtedly
a forest. The same difficulty occurs with respect to Bedfordshire,
which had a sheriff in common with Buckinghamshire, and with
respect to Hertfordshire, which had one in common with Essex. In
Middlesex there was at one time a warren at Staines, which was
also subject to the forest laws. This is evident from a charter of
18 August 1227, by which Henry III. disafforested 3 the warren and
declared it free from all that pertained to forest and forester. With
this exception there was certainly no forest in Middlesex in the
thirteenth, and probably none in the twelfth century.
In all the other counties 4 there were forests varying considerably
in size. Those which were most frequented by the kings were
1 Charter Roll 74, m. 10, entry 76. Londoniensis, Rolls Series, vol. ii. pt. i. p. 44.
2 Rot. Litt. Claus. ii. 80 b. * The history of the forest in Derby-
3 Charter Roll 19, m. 5. The charter shire deserves special study. It cannot
is printed in full in Munimenta Gildlialle be adequately treated in this volume.
THE EXTENT OF THE FORESTS cix
probably the best stocked with venison and the most suited for
hunting. King John, when in England, spent much of his time in
visiting the forests of Sherwood, Rockingham, Essex and Clarendon ;
and it was from these that Henry III. usually made presents of deer
to his friends.
VIII.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN.
Chases.
There were certain districts, such as the chases of Dartmoor,
Malvern and Cranbourne, in which the beasts of the forests were
preserved, but which were nevertheless not subject to the whole body
of the forest laws. Some of them, such as Dartmoor, had once been
the property of the Crown, and had then been forests in every sense
of the word. When, however, they passed by royal grant into the
hands of subjects, they were considered to have lost many of the
incidents of a forest. Others, again, such as Cranbourne chase, seem
to have acquired such incidents of a forest as they possessed by title
of prescription. From the early years of the reign of Edward I.
these districts were usually described ' in official documents as ' chases '
to distinguish them from the royal forests over which the whole body
of the forest law was enforced. The distinction was not rigidly
observed, and to this day we speak of various districts as forests,
although they passed out of the hands of the Crown long before the
accession of Edward I.
It is impossible to describe with any accuracy the laws which
obtained in the chases or private forests of the thirteenth century.
As there is no series of records which is concerned with their
administration, all that can be learnt about the subject must be
derived from entries on the rolls of the courts of common law,
instruments recorded upon the rolls of the Chancery, inquisitions on
the deaths of tenants who happened to hold chases of the king in
chief, and a few sources of a similar nature.
When once the king had granted a forest to a subject, the juris-
diction of the justices of the forest ceased. Verderers were no longer
appointed by the king's writ, and there were no more sessions of
1 In some letters patent of 1 September osa que uocatur foresta sancti Leonnrdi.'
1395 the following words occur : (Patent Roll 113, m. 10 d.)
'Liber am chaciam Willelmi de Brew-
ex INTRODUCTION
justices in eyre for pleas of the forest. Some of the king's rights
with respect to the preservation of the beasts of the forest and the
timber became vested in the new proprietor. The mere grant of the
forest effected no such disafforestment as to enable its inhabitants to
hunt and cut their timber at pleasure. In general, the restrictions
under which they had lived continued, and it was only the machinery
by which they were enforced that was altered.
The lord of a chase seems to have had the right of arresting
through his foresters all persons found trespassing against the venison,
and detaining them in prison until they made satisfaction; provided
that they were taken in the act, or, in legal language, provided that
they were taken ' with the mainour.' This at least was stated in a
case in one of the principal courts of common law in the reign of
Edward I. The enrolment of the proceedings is printed by Coke in
the fourth part of his ' Institutes of the Laws of England,' ! but
unfortunately owing to a wrong reference the original cannot be found.
Ricardus de Cornubia et nouern alii attachiati fuerunt ad respondendum
Iohanni de Sallaye quare ipsum ceperunt et in prisona detinuerunt per
decern septimanas apud castrum de Knaresburgh' etc.
Ricardus et alii dicunt quod castrum et honor de Knaresburgh cum
foresta de Bestagne fuit aliquando in seisina domini Henrici regis patris
domini regis nunc et eo tempore fuit talis consuetudo in foresta predicta
quod si quis indictatus fuerit per forestarios coram seneschallo eiusdem
honoris de transgressione de uerjacione facta in eadem foresta idem senes-
challus tales transgressores ubicunque fuerint inuenti infra eandem liber-
tatem predicti honoris licite potest arrestare et imprisonare et eos in prisona
detinere quousque satisfecerint de transgressione etc. Qui rex Henricus
dedit predictum honorem cum foresta etc. Ricardo fratri suo comiti
Cornubie patri Edmundi comitis Cornubie qui toto tempore suo usus est
tali libertate arrestandi etc.
Iohannes e contra dicit nullam talem fuisse consuetudinem arrestandi
malefactores nisi quando capti fuerunt cum manuopere et hoc ab antiquiore
tempore quia idem comes non habet ibidem forestam sed chaceam tantum.
Et quod tempore Willelmi de Stoteuill' domini dicte chacee qui dedit regi
Iohanni dictam chaceam et tempore dicti regis Iohannis et tempore regis
Henrici patris dum dicta chacea fuit in manu sua nunquam arrestauerunt
aliquos de transgressione in chacea ilia nisi illos qui capti fuerunt cum
manuopere et hoc offert uerificare per patriam etc.
Ideo preceptum est uicecomiti quod summoneat predictum comitem etc.
Again, a similar right seems to have been exercised by the lord of
the free chase of Malvern, for in a memorandum, 2 which is printed in
1 Coke's Institutes, fourth part (ed. 1797), * Nash's History of Worcestershire, vol.!
P- 314. p. lxxiiii.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXI
Nash's ' History of Worcestershire,' of the ' ancient liberties, royalty
and customs belonging to the lordship and franches of Handley and
unto the chase of Malvern ' the following article occurs :
Item, if any of the foresters find any person or persons hunting
within the said chase or bounds thereof or standing suspiciously, viz.
stable standing, with hounds drawing or bloody hands, the same forester
shall attach him or them, and bring them unto the castle of Handley, there
to remain prisoners in a place called Bandbury chamber, until they have
found sureties sufficient of their good harbouring against the game by
obligation in c. shillings to the lord's use, to be levied upon the forfeiture of
them or their surety.
Thus there was a considerable difference in procedure in royal
forests and private chases. In forests the trespassers were arrested
and detained in prison until they found pledges to appear at the
forest eyre, when they were again imprisoned until they paid ransom.
In chases, trespassers were merely detained in prison until they
satisfied the lord with respect to their offences ; and they could only
be detained when they were taken with the mainour. It is probable
that the measure of satisfaction to which the lord was entitled varied
in different chases, but it may be regarded as certain that he could
nowhere act arbitrarily. Any fine which he might exact would be
either limited in amount or subject to assessment in his court.
But there is at least one case in which the whole body of forest
laws was enforced over a private forest. On 28 June 1266,
Henry III. granted 1 the castles, lands and tenements which had been
forfeited by Robert, earl of Derby, to his own second son, Edmund,
commonly called Crouchback. On 30 June 1267, he granted 2 him
the honour, county, castle and town of Lancaster and all the king's
demesnes in the county of Lancaster, with the vaccaries and forests
of Wiresdale and Lonsdale, and the manor, castle and forest of
Pickering in Yorkshire. These two grants seem to have included
all the forests in the county of Lancaster, which had hitherto been
treated as forests in the strict sense of the word. Henceforth,
however, they were intended to be held by Edmund, not as forests,
but as free chases. Accordingly when in 15 Edward I. a forest
eyre was held at Lancaster by three justices who had recently been
appointed to hold pleas 3 of the forest in the counties north of the
Trent, those offences only were punished which had been committed
1 Charter Roll 78, m. 4, Entry 22. ■ Diichy of TjCincaster Forest Proceedings,
1 Charter Roll 61, m. 4, and Charter Roll Bundle 1, No. 7.
78, in. 4, Entry 23.
g2
cxii INTRODUCTION
since the last eyre and before the grants of 1266 and 1267. The
justices were not concerned with anything that happened in these
forests after they had passed out of the king's hands. This state of
things, however, did not continue long. On 25 May 1285, Edward I.
granted a privilege to his brother Edmund, which was not allowed to
other lords of chases. He permitted him to have justices to hold
pleas of the forest according to the assize of the forest in the forests
which he had by the grant of Henry III., as often as justices should
be sent to hold pleas in the king's forests. The words of the letters
patent 1 are as follows :
Pro Edmundo fratre regis.
Eex omnibus ad quos etc., salutem. Sciatis quod concessimus pro nobis
et heredibus nostris Edmundo fratri nostro karissimo quod ipse et heredes
sui imperpetuum habeant ad requisicionem suam in cancellaria nostra et
heredum nostrorum regum Anglie certos iusticiarios per literas nostras et
heredum nostrorum predictorum ad placita forestarum, quas idem frater noster
habet ex dono domini Henrici regis patris nostri, secundum assisam foreste
tenenda quociens nos et heredes iusticiarios nostros ad huiusmodi placita in
forestis nostris tenenda iuxta consuetudinem regni nostri mittere contingat ;
et quod imperpetuum habeant certos iusticiarios per litteras nostras et heredum
nostrorum, quociens opus fuerit ad transgressiones sibi factas in chaceis uel
parcis suis audiendas et terminandas secundum legem et consuetudinem
regni nostri ; ita quod idem frater noster et heredes sui habeant redempciones
fines amerciamenta et omnia alia de predictis placitis et transgressionibus
proueniencia eodem modo quo nos et heredes nostri predicti ea haberemus si
foreste chacee et parci predicti essent in manu nostra. In cuius etc. Teste
rege apud Westm' uicesimo quinto die 2 Maii.
After the date of these letters patent the forests of Pickering
and Lancashire were subject to all the laws which prevailed in the
royal forests. The records of the eyres held by the justices of the
earls are of the same form and deal with precisely the same matters
as those which were held before the justices of the king. But although
the privilege of having justices so granted to the earl of Lancaster
was in the time of Edward I. unique, something very like it had been
sought and perhaps obtained earlier in the century. Eobert earl
of Derby, whose earldom and honour, as we have seen, was granted
to Edmund Crouchback in 1266, had himself applied 3 for leave to
hold pleas of the forest in his forest between the rivers Ribble and
Mersey. The substance of the king's answer seems to have been a
direction for an inquiry as to what had been done in the matter on
previous occasions.
1 Patent Roll 103, m. 12. * 25 May 1295. s Close Roll 65, m. 7 in dorso.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARUEN CXlii
Mandatum est G. de Langel' iusticiario foreste quod rex permitteret
dictum G. tenere placita foreste comitis Derb' ad peticionem ipsius comitis
inter Ribbell' et Mers' ; et quia nescitur utrum comes habeat talem liber -
tatem quod debeat huiusmodi placita tenere uel quod homines illius foreste
debeant sequi placita foreste apud Lancastr' ; et mandatum est eidem G.
quod diligenter inquirat ueritatem in hac parte, et si constiterit quod dictus
comes habeat libertatem huiusmodi placita tenere et quod predicti homines
non debeant sequi placita foreste apud Lancastr' uel alibi, concessit rex quod
dictus G. teneat placita foreste predicti comitis quatenus facere potest sine
preiudicio regis. Teste rege.
Again, there is an entry l on the Close Eoll of 35 Hen. III. which
perhaps refers to an eyre then intended to be held by Geoffrey of
Langley, the justice of the forest in the forest of Dartmoor, which was
at that time the property of Bichard, earl of Cornwall.
Rex concessit R. comiti Cornubie quod post iter G. de Langel' in comitatu
Kotingh' ad placita foreste eat in forestam de Dertemor' ad negocia sua
predicti comitis expedienda. Et mandatum est eidem G. quod post iter
suum completum diuertat se ad forestam predictam pro negociis memoratis.
Teste rege apud Wind' uicesimo primo die lanuarii.
Some of the lesser incidents of a forest are often found as incidents
of chases. Thus chiminage 2 was taken in the reign of Edward I.
in the chase of Cranbourne, and in the same chase there was also a
fence 3 month beginning a fortnight before Midsummer day in every
year for the protection of the lord's deer. 4 In Malvern chase dogs
were lawed 5 at regular intervals, according to a customary rule, which,
however, differed a little from that which prevailed in the forests. 6 The
la wing was called ' hombling,' and took place twice in seven years.
All dogs which were found that could not or would not be drawn
through a strap of eighteen inches and a barleycorn in length and
breadth were hombled. The further joints of the two middle claws
were cut clean away, and the master or owner of the dog was amerced
1 Clo6e Roll 65, m. 20 in dorso. postea per compulsionem illorum ueniunt
2 liotuli Hundredorum, ii. 245, 248, 253. ad scotalla sua. Et postea colligunt gal-
• Ibid. p. 255. linas contra Natale Dei, agnos et pelles
4 It also appears that the foresters of the agnorum ad maximum grauamen tocius
chase of Cranbourne committed acts of ex- patrie predicte.' (Rotuli Hundredorum,
lortion in the reign of Edward i. The ii. 249.)
following presentment was made in Ed. i. : 4 Nash's History of Worcestershire, i.
' Item idem forestarii ad uoluntatem p. lxxiiii.
suarn colligunt garbas per autumnum infra • The sixth chapter of the Charter of the
mf-tas et bundas predictas in comitatu Forest prescribed the manner of lawing in
Wiltes' ; et nichilominus post autumnum the king's forests :
similiter metu extorquent communiter a ' Talis, autem, sit expeditacio per assisam
F>o},uloiuxt;t illamchaciammanentibladum communiter quod tres ortilli abscidantur
trituratum ad bracianda scotalla sua, et sine pelota de pede anteriori.'
cxiv INTRODUCTION
in three shillings and a penny. Again in some chases the lords held
courts which were called swainmotes. There is a case in the Year
Book of 21 and 22 Ed. I. concerning a right of pasture in a wood
within the free chase of Whaddon in the county of Buckingham.
Counsel, addressing the court on behalf of the lord of the chase, stated
that it had been given to an ancestor of the lord by Henry III. to hold
as a chase in the same manner as it had been held by the king when
it was forest, and that the lord had three swanimotes yearly for
searching and inquiring whether anyone put more beasts therein than
he ought to put. The actual words 1 of the report are as follows :
Sire, nanyl, me le roy Henry nus le granta e dona a tenyr cum chace
aussy cum yl la teint qant ele fut foreyt le roy ; e nus avum treis swayne-
motes par an pur encercher e enquere sy nuly mette plusurs avers ke metre
ne deit.
The lord of a private forest or chase seems also to have been at
liberty to appoint verderers to protect his rights. By a charter 2 of
the early years of Henry III. John de Vezpont granted to the lords of
the manors of Warcop, Sandford, Burton and Hitton, all in the county
of Westmoreland, freedom from forester's puture, and from all things
that he, his ancestors or heirs or his foresters might or could take or
demand at any time by occasion of the said puture by the testimony
of the verderers or hunters. It is clear from this charter that the
verderers mentioned in it were the officials of the lord of a private
forest. Again, the memorandum 3 to which we have already referred
shows that there were officers called verderers in the free chase of
Malvern, although their duties undoubtedly differed from those of
verderers in the king's forests. It is possible, however, that at an
earlier date verderers in this chase were engaged in work similar to
that of verderers in a forest.
Manwood in his * Forest Laws ' described 4 the buck, the doe, the fox,
the marten and the roe as beasts of the chase. But his description
is not well founded in law. When the king granted a forest to a
subject his rights over the venison or beasts of the forest passed to his
grantee. No legal significance was attached to the words ' beasts of the
chase.' When they were used they were intended to denote the venison
of a chase and not a class of beasts distinct from the beasts of the forest.
But although there was no distinction in law between beasts of the
1 Tear Book, Bolls Series, 21 and 22 Cumberland, i. 231.
Ed. i. p. 627. • See p. ex above.
* The charter is printed in Nicholson * Forest Lawes, ed. 1615, cap. 4, p. 39 T*.
and Burns, History of Westmoreland and
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXV
forest and beasts of the chase, the various beasts which were hunted
were divided into two principal classes by sportsmen. A hunter who
lived in the reign of Edward II. and at a later date became known as
Twici, 1 wrote a little tract 2 in French on the art of hunting. In it
he states that the hart, the wolf, the boar and the hare are hunted
in one way, and the buck, the doe, the fox and all other vermin in
another. Manwood's classification of beasts of the forest and beasts
of the chase was based upon Twici' s tract and not upon any con-
sideration of the laws affecting them. The material words of the
tract on this subject are as follows :
Le lefre . . . . ; il est enchase, e le cerf ausi est enchace e le lou e le
sengler. Et vous, sire veneour, dites moy quantes des bestes sunt aquilliz.
Le deym e la deyme e le gopil e la gopille e tote autre vermine. Ore vodroi
ioe savoir quantez des bestes sunt meuz de lymer e quanz de bestes sunt
trouez de brachez. Sire, touz ceaus qe sunt enchaces, sunt meuz de lymer.
E touz ceaus enquillez sunt trovez de brachez.
It is probable, however, that the methods of hunting which were
adopted in Twici's day were modified at a later date ; and that in the
time of Manwood there was no good reason for his classification, even
for purposes of sport.
The word ' chase ' was sometimes used in other senses than that
of a private forest. Thus in some letters 3 close of 10 January,
122f the sheriff is directed to summon those who have enjoyed
chase : that is to say, an acquittance or some liberty belonging to
forest. At other times it seems to have denoted a portion of the
forest in which the inhabitants had no customary right of common..
In the Chapters of the Kegard of 1229, for instance, regarders 4 are-
directed to view the king's demesne enclosures and chases where no*
man has common.
Parks.
The word ■ park ' was applied to a district of land enclosed with a
paling. There is no reason for supposing that it was used exclusively
of enclosures made for the purpose of preserving beasts ferae naturae,
1 His real name seems to have been joyed. (Close Roll 154, m. 34 d.)
Twiti. On 21 July 1322 the king sent 2 The tract was printed in 1840 at the
William Twyti into the forests of Thomas, Middle Hill Press. It was reprinted in
late Earl of Lancaster, to take venison. 1843 with a preface, translation, and notes
(Close Roll 147, m. 32.) On 13 March 1328 by Sir Henry Dryden.
the king sent a certain person to the abbot 8 Rot. Lit. Claus. ii. 206.
of Reading to receive such maintenance in * Royal Letters, Hen. Hi., Rolls Series,
the abbey as William Twiti formerly en- i. 348.
CXV1
INTRODUCTION
At the present day it is often found as a field name 1 in the west of
England, and it is not improbable that a similar usage prevailed in
the Middle Ages.
Authority may be cited to prove that the king's licence was
necessary before a subject could make a park ; but whatever may
have been the case in Tudor and Stuart times, no such licence was
required in the reigns of the Plantagenet kings, provided that their
rights of forest were not infringed. Sometimes, it is true, they
granted licences to make parks by letters patent or charter, but it
will be found that the royal grants were required because the parks
in question were situate either within a forest or in the immediate
neighbourhood of one. 2 There are innumerable cases of trespasses in
parks lying outside the king's forest mentioned on the Patent Rolls
of the reign of Edward I. It would be impossible for licences to have
been granted by the king for the enclosure of all these parks without
the enrolment of the licences appearing on the Patent Rolls, Charter
Rolls, or other records. 3
1 So too the word ' imparoare ' means to
impound or to put in an enclosure. As a
general rule, however, ' a park ' was used of
an enclosure expressly made for deer. In
4 Ed. iii. a respondent answered to a writ
of Quo Waranto at Derby as follows :
' Et quod ad alium parcum quern clamat
dicit quod ille non est parcus, set est
quedam clausura que uocatur Estinker in
qua clausula continentur fere etc' (Placita
de Quo Waranto, p. 151.)
Notwithstanding the answer of the re-
spondent to the writ concerning this park
he was amerced for his false claim :
' Et quoad predictam clausturam que
uocatur Estinker quam clamat ut parcum
etc., idem Eobertus in misericordia pro
falso clamio etc'
A somewhat similar answer was given at
York early in the reign of Ed. i. :
1 Et Eobertus uenit et dicit quod non
clamat habere parcum ibidem ; set dicit
quod antecessors sui et ipse a tempore con-
questus Anglie semper tenuerunt boscum
euum inclusum in suo seperali.' {Placita
de Quo Waranto, p. 195.)
2 Thus by letters patent dated 23
February 1335 the king granted Kalph de
Neville licence to impark his woods of
Middleham and Sheriff Hutton and to
make a deer leap in the park of Sheriff
Hutton notwithstanding that it was near
the forest of Galtres. (Patent Eoll 185, m.
34.)
No claims to parks were made before the
king's justices in Kent in 6 Ed. ii. This
county contained no forests (p. cviii above),
but it must have contained many parks.
(Placita de Quo Waranto, pp. 310 to 368.)
There was also no forest in Norfolk, and no
claims to parks in that county were made be-
fore the king's justices in 14 Ed. i. (Ibid. pp.
481-498.) It should also be noticed that in the
charter of 18 May 1204, which disafforested
all the county of Devon except Dartmoor
and Exmoor, the king declared that the
men of Devon might make parks outside
the metes of the excepted forests. The
language of the charter suggests that the
king was only granting them a privilege
which was enjoyed everywhere outside
the royal forests (Botuli Chartarum,
132.)
8 On the other hand, there certainly are
cases in which the owners of parks were
called upon to show by what warrant they
held them, even when the parks were not
situate in or near forests. This happened
in 4 Ed. iii. with respect to Wrast (now
Wrest) park in Bedfordshire, which is at a
considerable distance from a forest. (Placita
de Quo Waranto, p. 45.) It may be that in
these cases the king's advisers set up a
claim which could not be justified by
precedent. Sometimes, however, a park
seems to have been considered as an
encroachment upon rights of common.
Thus:
' Hugo de Swyllington summonitus fuit
ad respondendum domino regi de placito
quo waranto appropriauit sibi parcum in
le Eodes in loco qui uocatur Indansal' et
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXvii
The effect of the forest laws was to give the king a certain right of
property in the beasts of the forest, which, as we have seen, were
described as the king's venison. When he partially disafforested a
wood or a piece of land, he frequently reserved his venison by such
words as ' salua nobis uenacione nostra.' At other times he would
entirely disafforest a district and grant by express words that its
owner should be at liberty to make a park of it. In such cases the
beasts of the forest, as soon as they entered the park, became beasts
Jerae naturae unprotected by the forest law, and the owner of the
park might lawfully kill them for his own use. Every grant of
liberty to impark carried with it the obligation of keeping the park
properly enclosed, so that the king might not lose his beasts in
consequence of his grant.
Outside the forests the owners of neighbouring lands were in the
habit of imparking them and making certain contrivances called
* deer leaps ' or saltatoria, which were of such a nature as to enable
the beasts of the forest to enter the park and to prevent them from
coming out again. If, however, the deer leap was within a short
distance of the forest, it would be presented to the justices in eyre as
a nuisance to the forest, and they would then order it to be removed.
The precise distance within which a deer leap was considered a
nuisance to a forest is a matter of doubt. 1 At the Cumberland
forest eyre of 1285, a presentment 2 was made that Isabel of Clifford
held a park in which there were two deer leaps, nuisances to the
forest, one being a league and the other a league and a half dis-
tant from it.
Isabella de Clifford, que est una heredum Roberti de Ueteri ponte
defuncti tenet parcum de Qwynnefeld in comitatu Westmerl' ubi sunt duo
saltoria 3 ad nocumentum foreste de eo quod unum non distat a foresta
domini regis de Inglewod' per unam leucam et aliud distat fere per unam
leucam et dimidiam, quorum Iohannes de Ueteri ponte pater Roberti de
Ueteri ponte fecit unum et Robertus predictus fecit aliud ; et aliud elongauit
ad nocumentum foreste domini regis predicte. Et testatum fuit quod
alibi in terris suis in comitatu isto sine 21 February 136£ the forest officers and
licencia et uoluntate domini regis et prede- jurors made the following statement :
cessorum regum Anglie. ' Quod in parco de Cormalet sunt duo
' Et Hugo per attornatum suum uenit et saltatoria, qui quidem parcus non distat a
dicit quod ipse habet quoddam [sic] clausum dicta foresta tres leucas ; et male includitur
boscum quod continet quadraginta acras ad nocumentum ferarum domini regis et
iuxta curiam suam ubi nullus comunicare contra assisam foreste.' (For. Proc., Tr.
debet nec comunicauit a tempore quo of Bee., No. 309, Skin 13.)
non extat memoria. Ideo inquiratur de 2 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee., No. 5, Boll
seysina.' (Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 196. 37 d.
See also ibid. p. 339.) 3 The use of the word ' saltoria ' instead
1 At an inquisition held at Soraerton on of ' saltatoria ' is exceptional.
cxvili INTRODUCTION
tempore predicti Roberti solebant fere domini regis fugari in parcum
predictum per saltoria predicta ad magnam destruccionem ferarum domini
regis ; set post obitum predicti Roberti nullus heredum suorum se de huius-
modi fuga se intromisit.
By an inquisition 1 held at Kinver in March 1.33§, concerning the
state of the forest of Kinver, it was found that the prior of
Worcester held a park more than two leagues distant from the covert
of the forest, in which there was a deer leap to the king's damage.
Et quod prior sancte Marie Wygorn' tenet quemdam parcum, qui uocatur
Eymor, qui distat a cooperto foreste predicte per duas leucas et amplius
super quo est unum saltatorium per quod fere domini regis in eodem intrare
possunt ad dampnum domini regis.
Even if a park which was close to a forest had no deer leap, it
would seem that it might be considered a nuisance. In the reign
of Edward I. there was a park about a quarter of a league outside
the free chase of Malvern. The lord of the chase proceeded against
the owner of the park in the court of the king's bench, with the
result that the justices, besides ordering the deer leaps in the park
to be removed, also ordered the park to be made open. 2 If a park
close to a free chase might be considered a nuisance to the chase,
a park similarly situate with respect to a royal forest must un-
doubtedly have been considered a nuisance to the forest. 3 Thus the
presentment already mentioned concerning the park of Isabel of
Clifford at Whinfell contains a statement that her ancestor had en-
larged it to the nuisance of the forest. Probably the objection to a
park in the neighbourhood of a forest was that, even if it contained
no deer leap, the beasts of the forest might easily find their way
into it at points where the paling was out of repair, and might
have difficulty in finding their way out again. There would always
be a temptation to the owner to entice the king's deer into his park
for his own use. 4
In the early years of the reign of Henry III. deer stealing in parks
was not an offence reckoned among the Pleas of the Crown, nor
1 For. Proc, Tr. of Bee., No. 258. * In the Essex eyre rolls of 5 Ed. i. the
* Coram Eege Eolls, No. 124, Roll 50 d. following entry occurs :
8 At an inquisition held at Gillingham ' Presentatum est etc. quod parcusepiscopi
on 29 June 1366 the following verdict was Eliens' qui uocatur Rokhey ita male
given : includitur circumquaque quod pro defectu
1 Quod parous principis Wallie de Mere, clausture fere domini regis eumingrediuntur,
qui non distat a foresta tres leucas, ita et ibidem capiuntur ad magnum damnum
male includitur per quod fere domini regis domini regis. Et non est ibi uenacio nisi
intrant ad nocumentum foreste.' (For. que ingreditur a foresta. Parous capiatur.'
Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 298). (For. Proc, Tr. of Bee, No. 12, Boll 6.)
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN cxix
was it at any time one which concerned the laws of the forest. It
is possible that lords of manors enjoyed lawfully or assumed unlaw-
fully a jurisdiction in this respect. But whether they did so or
not, they certainly had no power of punishing trespassers in their
parks by imprisonment. At the parliament held on January 23,
123|, when the Provisions of Merton were enacted, the magnates
of England are said to have demanded power to imprison male-
factors taken in their parks and stews, and the king is said to have
refused their demand. 1
De malefactoribus in parcis et uiuariis non est discussum quia magnates
pecierunt propriam prisonam suam de illis, quos ceperant in parcis et
uiuariis suis ; quod quidem dominus rex contradixit ; et ideo differtur.
Ten years later a new law was enacted with respect to trespasses
in parks and stews. There is no enrolment of it on the Patent or
Close Kolls, but it is recorded in the ' Additamenta ' to the * Chronica
Maiora ' of Matthew Paris. When an earl, a baron, or a knight
complained to the king of deer having been taken in his park, an
inquisition was to be held pursuant to a writ from the king, and
if anyone was found guilty he was to lie in prison for a year and
a day. At the end of that term he was to be ransomed for a sum
equal to three years' value of his lands, and he was to find twelve
pledges that he would not trespass again in parks, stews, or forests.
Two parts of the ransom were to belong to the king, and the remain-
ing third to the owner of the park. When the trespasser was taken
suddenly, which no doubt means when he was arrested in the act of
trespassing, the punishment was the same, but there appears to have
been no need for an inquisition. In this case the king was to have
one half the ransom only, and the owner of the park the other half.
The law is thus stated by Matthew Paris : 2
Quomodo puniuntur inuenti malefactores de parcis et uiuariis. Si fugit
et occidatur malefactor, non optinebit ius nee appellum ; si uero comes, baro,
uel miles domino regi conquestus fuerit de bestiis captis in parco suo ita
quod per breue domini regis facta fuerit inquisitio, tunc inditatus per
inquisitionem et conuictus iacebit in prisona domini regis per unum annum
et unum diem et postea redimatur ad pretium ualoris terrarum suarum per
tres annos, ita tamen quod interea de suo paupere sustentetur. Et tunc
dominus rex habebit duas partes redemptionis, et ille cui transgressus fuerit
tertiam. Ec post illam redemptionem inueniet duodecim plegios qui ipsum
manucapient quod deinceps non malefaciet in parcis uiuariis uel forestis, nee
1 Statutes of the Realm, vol. i. p. 4.
7 Chronica Maiora, RoIIb Series, vol. vi. p. 117.
CXX INTRODUCTION
in aliquo contra pacem domini regis. Et si contingat ipsum in aliquo
predictorum malefacere, plegii sui respondebunt de corpore eius et de trans-
gressions Si uero aliquis subito captus fuerit in parco uel uiuario sine
inquisitione facienda per breue domini regis habebit prisonam domini regis
ut predictum est, et postea debet redimi modo predicto ; et ex ilia redeinp-
tione habebit dominus rex medietatem et lesus aliam ; et postea inueniet
duodecim plegios, modo predicto.
This is not the full text of the new law. It contains none of the
introductory words which are always found in royal diplomas, and it
appears to be rather the description of the law than the material part
of its text. Indeed it is at least open to doubt whether the new law
ever came into operation. Neither on the plea rolls nor elsewhere is
there evidence that recourse was frequently had to its provisions. It
is, however, significant that Matthew Paris speaks of it as a law ' cum
rigoris incremento,' i from which it may be inferred that there had
previously been some punishment for the offences against which it
was directed. As in all actions for trespass in the king's bench the
defendant might, if judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff, be
imprisoned, an explanation of the words ' cum rigoris . incremento '
may be that the second part of the new law was intended to specify
a particular degree of punishment in a particular kind of trespass.
The enforcement of a law imposing a punishment of this nature would
in the thirteenth century in a large measure depend upon the will of
the king's justices. In the same w T ay the operation of that part of the
new law which related to inquisitions upon trespasses in parks could
easily have been defeated by the clerks in Chancery, from whom the
writs for holding such inquisitions would be obtained.
Among the Chapters of the Eyre of the latter half of the reign of
Henry III. there is an article 2 concerning malefactors in parks and
stews. This may have had its origin in the new law of the year 1246,
but it is improbable that the king or his advisers intended its enforce-
ment in this way. The language in which the law is described
requires either a special inquisition or a procedure by way of action
at the suit of the person injured. The Chapters of the Eyre, on the
other hand, formed the basis of a procedure by way of presentment.
The next important alteration in the law relating to trespasses
in parks and stews was made by the Statutes of Westminster of
the year 1275. 3 A plaintiff at whose suit a trespasser was at-
tainted was to be awarded substantial amends, and the trespasser
1 Chronica Maiora, vol. iv. p. 518. vol. i. p. 234.)
5 De malefactoribus in parcis et uiuariis, 3 Statutes of the Realm, vol. i. p. 32.
et qui illi fuerunt.' (Statutes of the Realm,
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN cxxi
was to be imprisoned for three years, but he might be ransomed at
the will of the king if he had wherewith to be ransomed and could find
surety that he would not trespass again. If he had not wherewith to
be ransomed, he was to stay in prison for three years and then find
surety ; but if he could not find surety he was to abjure the realm. Fugi-
tives accused of trespass and having no lands by which they might be
brought to justice were, after the facts bad been found by inquest, to
be put in exigent and outlawed. If no one sued within a year and a
day after a trespass had been committed, the king was to have the
suit. Those who took tame beasts in parks were to be treated as
robbers and punished according to the common law. By these statutes
the punishment for trespa*- ssing in parks was more severe than for
similar offences in the forests. 1
The following is the text of the sections of the statutes which
relate to parks :
Purueu est de mefesurs de parkes & de viuers ke, si mil soit ateint par seute
le pleintif, soient agardes bones & hautes amendes soulum la manere del
trespas, & emt la prison de iij anz & deilokes soiewt reinz a la voluntele rev,
sil ad dount estre issient reint ; & trouesse bone seurete ke mes ne les face;
e sil ne ad dount estre reint apres la prison de iij anz trouesse meme la
seurete ; e sil ne puise trouer la seurete, forsiurge le reaume ; & si nul, de
ceo rette, soit futif & nen eit terre ne tenement sufnsand par quei il puise
estre iustice, si tost com le roy auera ceo troue par bone enqueste soit
demande de cunte en cunte ; & sil ne vient soit vtlage.
E purueu & acorde est ensemewt ke si nul ne en seut dedenz le an e le iur
puis le trespas fet le roy auera la seute & ceus kil trouera rettez de ceo par
bone enqueste serrunt puniz par meme la manere en tuz poinz sicom desus
est dit. E si nul tel mefesur soit ateint kil eit pris en ceo parks bestes
damache ou autre chose en manere de roberie en venand ou en demurrand
ou returnand soit fet de luy communne ley ke affiert a cely ki est ateint
de aperte roberie & larcin ausi bien a la seute le roy com de autre.
A year later there was a change in procedure. By the law which
is known as the * Statute concerning justices being assigned called
Bageman,' 2 it was provided that justices should go throughout the
land to inquire, hear, and determine all complaints and suits for
trespasses committed within the twenty-five years past, as well by
the king's bailiffs and officers as by other bailiffs, and by all other
persons whomsoever. They were to inquire, hear, and determine the
plaints of those who wished to complain of breaches of the king's
1 No official enrolment of these statutes of the earliest versions of the statutes,
exists. The above text is printed from the The text in the Statutes of the Realm
Harlean MS. 74 (at fo. 94 r°) at the British (vol. i. p. 32) is from a later manuscript.
MuBeum. This manuscript supplies one " Statutes of the Realm, vol. i. p. 44.
CXXli INTRODUCTION
statutes, as well concerning the king and the people. In trespasses
for which amercement was the penalty, the plea was to be finally
determined, and amends were to be made to the plaintiff. In those
in which ransom or imprisonment was the penalty, amends were to
be forthwith adjudged to the plaintiff, and the trespassers were to be
put by good mainprise to be before the king at the parliament next
ensuing ; if not, they were to abide in prison, and the justices were to
inquire of their lands and goods and of the manner of the trespass,
and certify the king thereof at the parliament, that he might punish
them according to their deserts.
After the date of this statute large numbers of complaints of
trespasses were heard and determined by justices specially appointed
for the purpose. As the letters patent by which they were appointed
were endorsed upon the Patent Eolls, we can obtain a considerable
amount of information about the operation of the statute. It was the
practice to appoint at least two justices for each case, but the number
was sometimes increased to three or even four. They were usually
selected from the justices of the two benches and a group of other
persons, who were constantly employed at this work but held no
permanent judicial office. Among the cases of trespass which they
heard a large number related to trespasses in parks and stews.
Owners of chases also availed themselves of the provisions of the
statute, and commissions to justices to hear and determine complaints
of trespasses in chases were constantly issued. It is probable that
the jurisdiction of the courts of the chase in trespasses against the
venison fell into disuse as these commissions became common.
Although a park was a district enclosed with a paling, while a
chase was usually not enclosed at all, the chief distinction between
chases and parks is to be found in the laws which were applicable to
them. In the chase certain beasts were the property of the lord and
were preserved as such by the laws of the forest. These laws were
enforced in different degrees in different chases, but nowhere were
they part of the ordinary law of the land. The park, on the other
hand, was not subject to the forest law. No beasts can be described
in law as beasts of the park. The deer which parks contained and
for which parks were made, were preserved, not by reason of their
being the property of the owner of a park, but because it was a
trespass to enter a park for the purpose of taking or hunting beasts
ferae naturae.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXxiii
Warren.
It may here be observed that the public had a right of hunting
beasts ferae naturae in all unenclosed lands, unless the lands were
subject to the forest laws or to some restriction upon hunting
arising out of a royal grant. Probably the only limit to the
right was that it could not be exercised in such a way as to injure
property. A direct statement to this effect is not to be found in
any of our mediaeval treatises on law. But the object of charters of
warren and the laws relating to them would be inexplicable if the
public had not the right of hunting on unenclosed lands outside
forests, chases and warrens. 1
The word ' Warren ' was used to denote either the exclusive right
of hunting and taking certain beasts ferae naturae in a particular piece
of land or the land over which such right extended. William the
Conqueror granted 2 that the abbot and monks of Battle should have
warren in all places belonging to their monastery. In the twelfth
century the kings of England made many grants of warren both to
religious bodies and private individuals. Their successors of the
thirteenth century, John, Henry III. and Edward I., made lavish grants
of the same nature, and by the middle of the fourteenth century it is
probable that the majority of lords of manors enjoyed this right in
virtue of grants to them or their ancestors.
Throughout the middle ages there was little change in the form of
the operative part of a charter of warren. It consisted of three prin-
cipal clauses. The first was a formal grant of free warren in the
demesne lands of the person to whom the charter was granted. The
second declared that the grant was subject to a proviso that the lands
were not within the metes of the king's forest ; and the third pre-
scribed the mode in which the grant was to be enjoyed : namely, in
such a way that no person might enter the land to hunt on it or to
take anything which belonged to warren without the licence and will
of the grantee or his heirs under pain of a forfeiture of ten pounds.
The following is an example of a charter 3 of warren of the 21st Sep-
tember 1267.
1 In 21 Ed. i. certain persons made ipsi fuganerunt in predicto bosco sicut
answer before the king's justices at New- bene licuit omnibus de patria etc. ; et quod
castle as follows : ita sit ponunt se super patriam.' (Placita
' Quod predictus R. habet ibi quendam de Quo Waranto, p. 601.)
boscum non inclusum set apertum et in * See Charter Roll, No. 106, m. 25, Entry
quo nulla fera existit nisi tantum wulpes 56.
et lepores etc. Et bene cognoscunt quod ■ The text is from the original charter
CXxiv INTRODUCTION
Henricus dei gracia rex AngF dominus Hibern' et dux Aquit' archi-
episcopis, episcopis, abbatibus, prioribus, comitibus, baronibus, iusticiariis,
uicecomitibus, prepositis et omnibus balliuis et fidelibus suis, salutem.
Sciatis nos concessisse et hac carta nostra confirmasse dilecto et fideli nostro
Roberto de Halyeton' quod ipse et heredes sui habeant imperpetuum liberam
warennam in omnibus dominicis terris suis de Haleuthton', Alureston',
Offileg', Schebbedon', Hulle, Tunstalle, et le Lee in comitatu Stafford' et in
omnibus dominicis terris suis in Withinton', Longenhore, et Cleybur' in
comitatu Sallopp', dum tamen terre ille non sint infra metas forreste nostre,
ita tamen quod nullus intret terras illas ad fugandum in eis uel ad aliquid
capiendum quod ad warennam pertineat sine licencia et uoluntate ipsius
Roberti uel heredum suorum super forisfacturam nostram decern librarum.
Quare uolumus et firmiter precipimus pro nobis et heredibus nostris quod
predictus Robertus et heredes sui habeant imperpetuum liberam warrennam
in omnibus dominicis terris suis predictis dum tamen terre ille non sint infra
metas forreste nostre ita quod nullus intret terras illas ad fugandum in eis
uel ad aliquid capiendum quod ad warennam pertineat sine licencia et
uoluntate ipsius Roberti uel heredum suorum super forisfacturam nostram
decern librarum sicut predictum est. Hiis testibus Henrico filio Ricardi
regis Alem', nepote nostro, Rogero de Clyfford', Rogero de Somery, Willelmo
de sancto Omero, Roberto Aguylun, Iohanne de la Lynde, Willelmo de Aete,
Radulfo de Bakepuz et aliis. Data per manum nostram apud Sallopp'
uicesimo tercio die Septembris anno regni nostri quinquagesimo primo.
The right of warren was not considered to be appurtenant to land.
If anyone who had received a grant of warren in his demesne lands
assigned the lands to another, the assignee acquired the lands without
the warren, because the grant, if in the usual form, had been made to
the assignor and his heirs, not to the assignor, his heirs and assigns.
Upon Buch an assignment taking place the lands were liable to be
diswarrened. Thus in November 1292 John of Seton was summoned L
before Hugh of Cressingham and his fellows, justices in eyre at Carlisle,
to answer to the king by what warrant he claimed to have free warren
in Lamonby. John came and said that King Henry III. had granted
to a certain Robert of Haunton, whose assign he was, free warren in
all dis demesne lands in Lamonby, and produced a charter in witness
thereof. In reply the king's attorney said that as John was not the
heir nor of the blood of Robert, he could not claim warren by any
charter made to Robert, on the ground that he showed no special deed
to him or his ancestors; and he demanded judgment. It was
adjudged that John's land in Lamonby should be diswarrened. 2
at the British Museum, to which the refer- 2 It seems, however, that early in the
ence is Add. Ch. 15773. The charter is reign of Ed. i. the king conceded that when
also enrolled on Charter Koll 61, m. 3. he or his ancestors had made a grant of
1 Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 118. warren the liberty so granted should pass
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXXV
It was the usual practice for the king to restrict his grants of
warren to the demesne lands of his subjects. If anyone appropriated
a right of warren over the lands of his free tenants or neighbours he
was considered to have abused his franchise and was liable to lose it
and be amerced in the king's courts. When landowners were sum-
moned to show by what warrant they claimed free warren in their
demesne lands and were able to show a good title, the king's attorneys
often raised the further objection that the franchise had been enlarged
in this way, and the question was then submitted to a jury. 1 Nor was
enlargement the only way in which the right of warren might be
abused. It seems that the owner of a warren was obliged to keep a
warrener or warden to prevent people hunting in it without his licence ;
for like other franchises a warren might be forfeited by non-user.
Jollan de Neville was summoned 2 before justices in eyre at Nottingham
in November 1329 to show by what warrant he claimed free warren in
his demesne lands of Rolleston. He produced a charter of Edward I.
granting him the right. Thereupon the king's attorney said that
he had abused his right. A jury found that he had not guarded his
warren and, without even his licence being sought and obtained, had
permitted anyone who would to hunt there at his own pleasure. It
was then adjudged that Jollan should lose his warren. 3
The forfeiture of ten pounds to which persons who hunted in
warrens without the licence of their owners were liable belonged to
the king. In many cases suits were brought in the king's courts by
landowners against trespassers in their warrens. When judgment
was in favour of the plaintiff, it declared that he should recover his
damages against the defendant, and that the king should have his ten
pounds of forfeiture. Thus, the finding of the jury and the judgment
in a case of trespass in a warren is recorded on the rolls 4 of the King's
Bench for Trinity term 1305 as follows :
with the soil of the warren to an assignee. p. 395. See also ibid. pp. 441, 397.)
(Rolls of Parliament, p. 98.) 2 Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 618.
1 At an eyre in Lincolnshire in 9 Ed. i. s At the same eyre other lords lost their
it waB proved that the lord had enlarged warrens through non-user. Thus we have:
his warren, and he was thereupon amerced : ' Et quoad warennam in dominicis terria
1 Et quoad elargacionem warenne dicunt suis in W. dicit quod idem H. non posuit
quod ipse [Willelmus] tenet in warennam custodem ibi pro ilia warenna custodienda
omnes terras libere tenendum suorum infra set quemlibet pro uoluntate sua permisit in
dictum manerium. Ideo consideratum est eademfugare licencia ipsiusH. non optenta.
quod decetero non capiat aliquas emendas Ideo predicta libertas warenne habende in
pro predictis transgressionibus ; et quod dominicis terris suis de W. capiatur in
terre predictorum libere tenencium suorum manum domini regis.' (Ibid. p. 646. See
infra predictum manerium suum sint de also ibid. p. 639.)
cetero extra warennam. Et Willelmus in * Coram Rege Rolls, 181, Rot. 25 d.
misericordia.' [Placita de Quo Waranto
cxxvi INTRODUCTION
Iuratores dicunt super sacramentum suum quod predictus Ricardug
predictis die et anno semel tantum intrauit warennam predictam et in eadem
fugauit et duos lepores ibidem cepit et asportauit contra uoluntatem ipsius
abbatis et contra pacem etc. ad dampnum ipsius abbatis sex denariorum.
Ideo consideratum est quod predictus abbas recuperet dampna sua predicta
sex denariorum uersus predictum Ricardum ; et idem.Ricardus capiatur ; et
dominus rex habeat decern libras de forisfactura etc. secundum statutum etc.
It is not to be understood that whenever it was proved that a
trespass had been committed, there was a forfeiture of ten pounds or
of any part of that sum. When the suit was brought in the king's
court no doubt a forfeiture was incurred. Unless, however, the
trespass was serious, it was not tried in the king's court, but in the
court of the lord of the warren, or if there were none, perhaps in the
hundred or county court. If a trespass were brought before the lord
of the warren in the lord's court and the offence was proved, there
seems to have been no procedure by way of forfeiture. The king or
his officers would have no notice either of the trespass or of its trial.
Moreover, trespasses in warrens must have been common offences. If
there were forfeitures on conviction in the courts of lords of warrens,
some trace of them would be found on the records of the exchequer.
On the other hand if the lord had no court, and the proceedings took
place in the hundred or county court, it is possible that the for-
feiture may have been enforced in them on the king's behalf. If it
were enforced, there would not necessarily be any trace of it on the
records of the exchequer. The hundred courts in many parts of the
country had, at an early date, been granted to subjects who would
claim forfeitures for breach of warren as their own property. Hundred
courts, when not in the hands of subjects, and county courts were
farmed by the sheriffs at a fixed annual sum, and they, too, would
make a similar claim. Thus there would be no account rendered at
the exchequer of forfeitures for breach of warren, in a suit for trespass
in either of these courts.
Another remedy to which the lord of a warren might have
recourse for a breach of his franchise was the impounding of the
greyhounds, nets or snares of the persons trespassing, and the deten-
tion of them until satisfaction had been made for the trespass. It
would appear that this method of procedure was a common one, as
numerous examples of it are to be found in the Plea Rolls of the royal
courts. Thus in 7 Ed. I. the king's attorney alleged 1 that Richard
fitz John, who had free warren in his demesne lands of Shere, had
1 Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 740.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXXvii
enwarrened the lands of his free tenants and kept them in defense so
that no one could hunt in them without his hounds being taken and
detained until he made satisfaction to the same Eichard. 1 In all cases
where the lord protected his interests in this way there would, in
general, be no forfeiture to the king. If a suit to replevy the property
taken by the lord were brought in the king's court, the king's officers
exacted a forfeiture when due.
It appears that the lord of a warren usually had a court of his
own, in which cases of trespass could be determined. Charters of
warren seem to have been for the most part granted to lords of
manors. It may, indeed, be doubted whether cases of trespass in
warrens were ever heard in the courts of the hundred and the county.
If the lord had a court of his own, he naturally would not sue in any
other court without some good reason. If he had no such court, he
would often be the tenant of some other lord who had a court in
which he could proceed against trespassers in his warren. Un-
fortunately, the records of courts of hundreds and counties are rare,
and the mere absence of cases relating to warrens in those records of
them which we have is not a sufficient basis for a confident state-
ment that the hundred and county courts had no jurisdiction in
such cases.
In a few charters of warren it was expressly declared that no
person might enter the lands of the grantee to hunt or take the hare
and the fox or anything which to warren belonged. But in charters
made in the ordinary form no particular kinds of beasts were men-
tioned. It is abundantly clear, however, that a grant of warren did
not enable the grantee to prevent other people entering his warren in
pursuit of deer. There was a judicial decision 2 with regard to the
buck in Hilary term 128 J. Philip of Willoughby brought an action
of trespass in the King's Bench against Thomas the warrener of the
abbot of St. Albans. He alleged that Thomas had assaulted his men
and seized his hounds and other goods. The defendant answered
that the plaintiff's men were hunting in the abbot's warren and that
1 In 9 Ed. i. the prior of Kavensdale was 'Dicit quod qualiterque warennam ibidem
summoned to answer why he claimed ad presens deaduocet in predictis terns,
warren in his lands at Ravensdale. The idem prior et predecessores sui hactenus in
prior came and said that he claimed warren predictis terris suis warennam clamauerunt
neither there nor elsewhere in the county et hiis que ad warennam pertinent usi sunt
of Lincoln. Thereupon the king's attorney scilicet capiendo leporarios uicinorum
alleged that the prior had claimed warren suorum in eisdem terris fugancium.' {Pla-
and made use of those things which per- cita de Quo Waranto, p. 391. See also
tain. (I to warren, namely the taking of the ibid. p. 441.)
greyhounds of his neighbours hunting in • Coram ltege Rolls, 108, ltot. 35 d.
the lands :
h2
cxxviii INTRODUCTION
he took the hounds ' as in the warren of his lord.' The plaintiff
replied that his men were in pursuit of a buck in their common
chase, where they and all the country could hunt the buck, and
demanded that the defendant's lord should come and claim his
warren. Afterwards a monk of the abbot came and produced a
charter which granted the abbey of St. Albans warren in all its
demesne lands in England. Nevertheless, the court declared that
the defendant should be in mercy, on the ground that the buck was
not a beast of the warren.
Et quia predictus Thomas cognouit predictam capcionem canum et canes
predicti Philippi non currerunt ad aliquam bestiam de warenna, immo ad
quemdam daraum qui non est bestia de warenna, ideo predictus Thomas sit
in misericordia.
Again, in the year 1293 William de Colleville, on being summoned l
before Hugh of Cressingham and his fellows, justices in eyre at York,
to answer by what warrant he claimed to have free warren in his
demesne lands, produced a charter from Henry III. granting free
warren therein to a certain Eobert Ingram, ancestor to William.
Thereupon Eoger of Higham, on behalf of the king, sought that it
should be inquired if William was the heir of Eobert. He further
objected on behalf of the king that William, under the authority of
the charter to Eobert Ingram, kept large beasts such as harts and
hinds, bucks and does, and such like in defense, in the towns in
which warren was claimed, and sought that an inquiry should be
made as to this and other matters. To other charters of warren
produced at the same eyre, he raised a similar objection. From the
year 1338, however, the roe was, as explained on an earlier page,
considered to be a beast of the warren. 2
There can be little doubt that the hare was the principal beast of
the warren. Not only is it sometimes expressly mentioned in charters
of warren, but it forms the subject of by far the greater number of
1 Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 203. et tenet in defenso in eadem ceruos et
* Before the decision of the king's bench bissas et cheuerellos cuiusmodi bestie ad
mentioned on p. xi above, the roe was un- warennam non pertinent.' (Placita de Quo
doubtedly not considered a beast of the war- Waranto, p. 787. See also ibid. p. 789.)
ren. In a case before the king's justices at But even before the decision the
Appleby in 20 Ed. i. a respondent stated might be made a beast of the warren in a
that he did not claim free chase in certain particular place by royal charter. Thus in
lands but only free warren. The king's 12 Hen. iii. the king granted Peter fitz
attorney thereupon replied that the respon- Herbert warren in certain lands for the fox,
dent kept in defense harts, hinds and roes the hare and the roe. (Charter Roll 20,
which did not belong to warren : m. 7. See also p. xiv above, notes 3
* Et W. I. dicit pro domino rege quod and 4.)
predictus P. usus est predicta libera chacia
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXxix
cases of trespass which are recorded upon the plea rolls. Like the
hare, the fox is sometimes mentioned in charters of warren. 1 But
although foxes do not appear to have given rise to cases of trespass,
they were undoubtedly beasts of warren. On the other hand,
although the coney is not mentioned in charters of warren, there are
cases of trespasses in warrens which show that the coney 2 was con-
sidered to be in the same class as the hare and the fox.
Besides beasts there were also fowls of warren. In the Year
Book 3 of 21 and 22 Ed. I. the following statement occurs :
Sire aver chase est proprement a deyms e deymes ; e aver gareyne coe
est proprement de levers e conyges e perdryz.
This must not, however, be taken as an exhaustive list either
of the beasts of the chase or of the beasts and fowls of the
warren. For example, the red deer ought to be included in
the former and the fox in the latter class. Again, the pheasant
was undoubtedly a fowl of the warren, although not mentioned
in the list. A special commission of oyer and terminer was
appointed 4 in April 1300 concerning a trespass committed by certain
persons who entered the free warren of Burgate, hunted in it
and carried away hares, coneys and pheasants. Other similar com-
missions 5 were appointed from time to time to hear and determine
trespasses in particular warrens committed by persons carrying away
the same beasts and fowls. There is also evidence of other birds
being treated as fowls of the warren. 6 It is recorded on a roll of pleas
of the warren of Cambridge that divers persons were wont to enter the
warren with nets and to take plovers and ' such like wild fowl.' Even
more remarkable is the fact that the lark was treated as a fowl of the
warren in the manor of Kemerton in Gloucestershire. The case 7
from which this information is derived is sufficiently interesting to
be printed in full. It occurs in an eyre of the year 15 Ed. I. :
• The mere fact that the fox is some- See also the case of trespass in Burgate
times mentioned in charters of warren is warren mentioned on this page,
not of itself proof that it was considered a 8 Year Book, 21 and 22 Ed. i., Rolls
beast of warren except in the lands to Series, p. 529.
which the charters relate. The passage 4 Patent Roll 119, m. 22 d.
printed in note 2, p. cxxxii below shows that • Thus on 20 July 1314 a commission
the king's attorney in the reign of Ed. i. was appointed concerning the persons who
considered it to be a beast of the warren. entered the warrens of Queen Margaret
3 Thus on 28 December 1292 justices and took away hares, coneys, pheasants
were appointed concerning a trespass com- and partridges. (Patent Roll 141, m. 30 d.)
mitted in Benhall warren by persons who ' See p. 131 below.
look and carried away hares, coneys and 7 Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 249.
partridges. (Patent Roll 111, m. 22 d.)
CXXX INTRODUCTION
Nicholaus de Mittone queritur de Willelmo de Bello Campo, comite
Warwik, de eo quod die Lune proxima post exaltacionem sancte crucis anno
regni regis Edwardi nunc quartodecimo, ubi idem Nicholaus possuisset
quoddam ingenium quod uocatur tonel in Kenemerton ad alaudas l et
perdricia capienda predictus comes cepit et capere fecit predictum ingenium
iniuste, unde dicit quod deterioratus est et dampnum habet ad ualenciam
dimidie marce. Et inde profert sectam etc.
Et comes uenit et dicit quod tenet omnes terras in Kenemerton*
warennatas et quod non uidetur ei quod debet inde sine breui domini regis
respondere. Dicit insuper quod bene aduocat predictam capcionem ut in
terris suis warennatis etc.
Et Nicholaus dicit quod predicte terre de Kenemerton' non sunt
warennate ; set dicit quod ipse et feoffatores sui semper consueuerunt
currere et fugare ibidem ut in terris communibus et non warennatis etc. Et
hoc petit quod inquiratur per patriam. Et comes similiter. Ideo fiat inde
iurata etc.
Et quia conuictum est per quamdam inquisicionem captam inter dominum
regem et predictum comitem quod predicte terre de Kenemerton' sunt
warennate et sic extiterunt a tempore quo non extat memoria ; ideo
predictus comes inde sine die. Et predictus Nicholaus in misericordia. Et
ad iudicium de predicto Nicholao de decern libris de forisfactura etc.
It will be remembered that the roe was declared to be a beast of
the warren on the ground that it drove away the other deer. The
reason for the decision and the circumstances in which it was given
suggest that the beasts of the warren were noxious animals which,
although objects of the chase, ought not to be preserved. There was a
marked distinction between the beasts of the forest and the beasts of
the w 7 arren. The former were strictly preserved by the forest laws,
while the latter were in no sense protected by the charters of warren,
which merely reserved the right of hunting in them to particular
individuals. The beasts of the forest were the king's venison ; they
were treated as his property, and described as his property. On the
other hand, the beasts of the warren were not the lord's beasts, nor
were they described as such. 2 We read in the plea rolls of trespassers
1 In the reign of Eichard ii. both the culis cum furettis et alio modo, necnon
lark and the quail were reckoned as fowls capiendi uel interficiendi meliori modo quo
of the warren. On 16 February 1384 the sciuerit de phasianis perdicibus pluueris
king granted a sporting licence to one of quailis alaudis et omnimodis aliis auibus
his clerks in the following words : de warenna in forestis chaceis parcis boscis
' Sciatis quod ob affeccionem quam ad et warennis nostris ; ac eciam . . .' (Patent
dilectum clericum nostrum N. S. gerimus Koll 318, m. 6.)
. . . concessimus ei ad totam uitam suam 2 In a case of trespass in a warren re-
licenciam tarn f ugandi et interficiendi cum corded by Mathew Paris the plaintiff refers
leporariis et aliis canibus ac cum artillariis to the hares which were taken by the
per se et suos in presencia sua de ceruis defendants as ' his hares ' : thus, ' et cepe
bissis damis leporibus et de omni alia fera runt lepores suos in warenna sua.' The
cum canibus et arcubus fugabili ac de cuni- instance, however, is exceptional. (Chronica
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXXxi
entering a warren and hunting in it without the lord's leave ; of their
taking hares in it ; and of the damage which the lord suffered by the
trespass. But we do not find the hares described as the property of
the lord. The following is a typical example of the record l of a case
of trespass in a warren.
Idem Iohannes et alii attachiati fuerunt ad respondendum Iohanni de
Sutton' de placito quare ui et armis liberam warennam ipsius Iohannis de
Sutton' apud Sutton' in Holdernesse intrauerunt et in ea sine licencia et
uoluntate eiusdem Iohannis de Sutton' fugauerunt et lepores ceperunt et
asportauerunt et alia enormia etc. ad graue dampnum ipsius Iohannis uiginti
librarum et unde queritur quod die Sabbati proxima ante festum Annuncia-
cionis beate Marie anno regni regis nunc tricesimo secundo ui et armis
liberam warennam ipsius Iohannis apud Sutton' intrauerunt et in ea sine
licencia fugauerunt et quinque lepores ceperunt et asportauerunt ; unde
dicit quod deterioratus est et dampnum habet ad ualenciam centum librarum
et inde sectam producit etc.
Et predicti Iohannes de Gray et alii ueniunt et defendunt uim et iniuriam
quando etc. Et Iohannes de Gray dicit quod in nullo est culpabilis de
transgressione predicta, et de hoc ponit se super patriam.
Et predictus Robertus le Seriaunt et omnes alii dicunt quod ipsi simul
cum uxore predicti Iohannis de Gray iuerunt in campis predictis in dominicis
terris suis causa ludendi cum leporarhs suis. Tandem saltauit unus lepus in
dominicis suis predictis ; et leporarii sui cucurrerunt ad leporem et secuti
fuerunt etc. usque in terrain predicti Iohannis de Sutton'. Et super hoc
uenit warennarius ipsius Iohannis de Sutton et ipsos deuadiauit et uadium
adhuc tenet sine aliqua transgressione eidem Iohanni de Sutton' facienda.
Et de hoc ponunt se super patriam.
Et predictus Iohannes de Sutton' dicit quod predictus Iohannes de Gray
et alii ui et armis warennam suam apud Sutton' intrauerunt et in ea sine
licencia etc. fugauerunt et quinque lepores ceperunt et asportauerunt sicut
superius queritur. Et hoc petit quod inquiratur. Ideo ueniat inde iurata
coram rege in crastino Purificacionis beate Marie ubicunque etc. quia
tarn etc.
The view that the beasts of the warren were noxious beasts, which
were hunted, but not preserved, is corroborated by another fact.
During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the kings of England
frequently granted to individuals the liberty to hunt certain animals
in districts in which there were forests. In nearly all cases the king's
warrens and the warrens of other individuals were expressly excepted
from the districts over which the liberty was to be exercised. Thus,
Haiora, Rolls Series, vol. iv. p. 51.) See ' The case was heard in MichaHmaa
also the Year Book of 3 Hen. vi. (edition term 1304. The reference to its enrolment
lCTD), Trinity Term, fo. 55, case 34. is ' Coram Rege Rolls 178, Rot, 60 d.'
CXXX11 INTRODUCTION
by letters patent l dated 4 April 1252, Henry III. granted William
Gernun licence to hunt the hare, the fox, and the cat throughout the
forest of Essex, except in the king's demesne warrens and the warrens
of other persons. As no law prevented people from entering warrens
in pursuit of beasts which were not beasts of the warren, it may fairly
be assumed that the exceptions of the king's warren and the warrens
of other persons were made because the animals for which the
licence to hunt was given were beasts of the warren. We cannot
suppose that the king would derogate from his own grant by
conferring an exclusive right of hunting certain beasts in a particular
district upon one individual and afterwards granting liberty to
another individual to hunt the same beasts in the same district.
These licences to hunt usually referred to the fox, the hare, and the
cat, 2 but occasionally other animals were mentioned. Thus, on the
25th October 1252 the king granted 3 Walter Baskerville licence to
hunt the hare, the fox, the cat and the badger in the forests
of Herefordshire, Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire and Essex. There
are also instances in which the wolf 4 and even the squirrel 5 were
included in such licences.
The fowls of the warren, on the other hand, were certainly not
noxious birds. There seems, however, to be no reason for supposing
that they consisted of a few easily enumerated species. We have
already noticed cases in which the plover and the lark were treated
as fowls of the warren. It is not improbable that all birds which
were taken by snares, hounds or hawks were considered to belong to
the same class.
The creation of every new warren lessened the opportunity which
the inhabitants of adjoining lands had enjoyed of hunting at their
pleasure. It is therefore not surprising that the large number
of charters of warren granted by Henry III. gave rise to a complaint
at the parliament of Oxford in 1258. One of the articles 6 of the
1 Patent Roll 61, m. 10. canibus suis ibidem et canes illos capit.'
* There is other authority for the cat being (Placita de Quo Waranto, p. 804.)
a beast of warren. In 9 Ed. i. the bishop By a charter dated 28 April 1228, the
of Salisbury was summoned before the king granted to Roger of Clifford warren in
king's justices at Marlborough to show certain lands for the fox, the hare and the
why he claimed warren in Ramsbury. In cat. (Charter Roll 20, m. 6.)
his reply the king's attorney expressly 3 Patent Roll 61, m. 1.
stated that the fox. the hare and the cat 4 See p. xiii above.
belonged to warren : 5 By letters patent dated 15 January
1 Et W. dicit quod predictus episcopus 125| the king granted to John of Lexington
impediuit homines patrie currere in terra licence to hunt the fox, the hare, the badger
SuaapudRemmesberyadleporem uulpemet and the squirrel in the forest of Essex,
murilegum et alia que pertinent ad waren- (Patent Roll 62, m. 19.)
nam et deuadiat homines currentes cum " Annates Monastics, Rolls Series, i. 440.
THE CHASE, THE PARK AND THE WARREN CXXXlii
barons' petition at that parliament is thus set out in the annals
of Burton :
Item petunt remedium quod foreste deafforestate per cartam regis et per
fidem eidem per communitatem totius regni factam, ita quod quisque ubique
possit fugare, dominus rex de uoluntate sua pluribus dedit de predicta
libertate warennas, que sunt ad nocumentum predicte libertatis concesse.
A few additional words are required to make the text of the
article grammatical. If these be supplied and no further emenda-
tions made it shows that the barons complained that the king had
granted warrens in the districts which had been put out of the forest
at the beginning of the reign. The barons seem to have considered
that the disafforestment of a district implied a pledge that the public
should be at liberty to hunt in it at pleasure. But it is not easy to
see why the disafforested districts should be in any better position
with respect to warrens than lands which had never been afforested.
There was certainly no legislation on the subject in consequence
of the petition, but it is possible that the king remembered the
barons' complaint when applications were made to him for new
charters of warren.
The justices of the forest were not concerned with the king's
warrens unless they happened to lie within the boundaries of a royal
forest. Nevertheless the justices in eyre for pleas of the forest, when
sitting at Huntingdon in 13 Edward L, heard pleas * of the warren
of Cambridge, which was not subject to the forest laws. This,
however, was an exceptional case, and no pleas relating to other
warrens lying outside the forests are to be found on the forest eyre
rolls of the thirteenth century. Evidently the king's rights in such
of his warrens as were not parcel of his forests were enforced in the
ordinary courts of law. But it is a question whether all the king's
demesnes were treated as warrens or not. That he could enwarren
his own property at pleasure hardly admits of doubt, seeing that he
could create a warren in the demesne lands of any of his subjects.
But he may in some cases have refrained from exercising his right ;
and it is not improbable that the right of hunting beasts of the
warren was only reserved by the king in those demesnes where some
profit or pleasure was to be obtained by his so doing.
The Year Book of 20 and 21 Edward I. contains a note 2 in
1 See pp. 129-31, below.
3 Year Book, 20 and 21 Edw. i., Rolls Series, p. 137.
CXXX1V INTRODUCTION
which the procedure to be adopted in cases of trespass in warrens
is set out in detail. Trespassers found doing damage in warren with
bows, or found with the mainour (that is to say, in possession
of hares, coneys, or partridges), or hunting, were to be attached to
come before the justices in eyre. The latter words no doubt refer to
the justices in eyre for pleas of the crown, and not to justices in eyre
for pleas of the forest. The words of the note are as follows :
Nota ke le Roy avera le forfeture de garreine, a ky ke la garreine seit,
e nent le seinur de la garreine : e sy le seinur amercye nul home pur coe
ke yl est trove en sa garreyne damage fesant, e coe seit presente par la
deseine en eyre des Justices, yl serra en la mercye le Roy ; mes sy yl trove
nul home damage fesant od son arc &c. en sa garreine, yl le fra atacher e
trover plegge de venyr devant Justice en eyre a respundre au Roy de le
forfet. E si presente seit ke serteyne persone feseient traspas en la garreine,
e ke le seynur ne les vodreit pas atacher e prendre plegge de eus, yl sera
amercye, e nent les autres ke feseient le tort. E nota ke yl ne put atacher
le cors sy yl ne seit trove od meineure coe est saver od leverere, ou conis,
partreiz, &c. ou en querant, &c. Sed quaere sy yl porra prendre ses leverres
sy eus seient en sa garreyne erranz saunz coe ke yl eient ren pris. Si pount,
e prendre plegges a respundre en Eyre des Justices.
But this note, written as it is in the leaves of a Year Book, and not
found elsewhere, must be read with suspicion. If it represent the law
of the land, and not merely the law as a reporter or advocate thought
it ought to be, then the law cannot have been enforced rigorously.
There is abundant evidence x that lords used to impound the grey-
hounds of those who trespassed in their warrens. They had recourse
to a remedy which was inconsistent with the law as stated in the
Year Book, and apparently without any protest or interference on
the part of the king or his ministers.
1 See pp. cxxvi and cxxvii, above.
THE CHARTER OF THE FOREST OF NOVEMBER 1217 CXXXV
APPENDIX I.
THE CHARTER OF THE FOREST OF NOVEMBER 1217.
Heneicus Dei gratia rex Anglie, dominus Hibernie, dux Normannie,
Aquitanie et comes Andegauie, archiepiscopis, episcopis, abbatibus, prioribus,
comitibus, baronibus, iusticiariis, forestariis, uicecomitibus, prepositis,
ministris, et omnibus balliuis et fidelibus suis, salutem. Sciatis quod,
intuitu Dei et pro salute anime nostre et animarum antecessorum et
successorum nostrorum, ad exaltacionem sancte Ecclesie et emendacionem
regni nostri, concessimus et hac presenti carta confirmauimus pro nobis et
heredibus nostris inperpetuum, de consilio uenerabilis patris nostri domini
Gualonis tituli sancti Martini presbiteri cardinalis et apostolice sedis legati,
domini Walteri Eboracensis archiepiscopi, Willelmi Londoniensis episcopi,
et aliorum episcoporum Anglie, et Willelmi Marescalli comitis Penbrocie,
rectoris nostri et regni nostri, et aliorum fidelium comitum et baronum
nostrorum Anglie, has libertates subscriptas tenendas in regno nostro
Anglie, in perpetuum :
1. Inprimis omnes foreste, quas Henricus rex auus noster afforestauit,
uideantur per bonos et legales homines ; et si boscum aliquem alium quam
suum dominicum afforestauerit ad dampnum illius cuius boscus fuerit,
deafforestentur. Et si boscum suum proprium afforestauerit, remaneat
foresta, salua communa de herbagio et aliis in eadem foresta illis qui earn
prius habere consueuerunt.
2. Homines qui manent extra forestam non ueniant decetero coram
iusticiariis nostris de foresta per communes summoniciones, nisi sint in
placito, uel plegii alicuius uel aliquorum qui attachiati sunt propter forestam.
3. Omnes autem bosci qui fuerunt afforestati per regem Ricardum
auunculum nostrum, uel per regem Iohannem patrem nostrum usque ad
primam coronacionem nostram, statim deafforestentur, nisi fuerit dominicus
boscus noster.
4. Archiepiscopi, episcopi, abbates, priores, comites et barones et milites
et libere tenentes, qui boscos suos habent in forestis, habeant boscos suos
sicut eos habuerunt tempore prime coronacionis predicti regis Henrici aui
nostri, ita quod quieti sint inperpetuum de omnibus purpresturis, uastis et
assartis factis in illis boscis, post illud fcempus usque ad principium secundi
anni coronacionis nostre. Et qui de cetero uastum, purpresturam, uel
assartum sine licencia nostra in illis fecerint, de uastis et assartis
respondeant.
CXXXvi INTRODUCTION— APPENDIX I.
5. Reguardores nostri eant per forestas ad faciendum reguardum sicut
fieri consueuit tempore prime coronacionis predicti regis Henrici aui nostri,
et non aliter.
6. Inquisicio, uel uisus de expeditacione canum existencium in foresta,
decetero fiat quando debet fieri reguardum, scilicet de tercio anno in tercium
annum ; et tunc fiat per uisum et testimonium legalium hominum et non
aliter. Et ille, cuius canis inuentus fuerit tunc non expeditatus, det pro
misericordia tres solidos ; et de cetero nullus bos capiatur pro expeditacione.
Talis autem sit expeditacio per assisam communiter quod tres ortilli
abscidantur sine pelota de pede anteriori ; nee expeditentur canes de cetero,
nisi in locis ubi consueuerunt expeditari tempore prime coronacionis regis
Henrici aui nostri.
7. Nullus forestarius uel bedellus de cetero faciat scotale, uel colligat
garbas, uel auenam, uel bladum aliud, uel agnos, uel porcellos, nee aliquam
collectam faciant ; et per uisum et sacramentum duodecim reguardorum
quando facient reguardum, tot forestarii ponantur ad forestas custodiendas,
quod ad illas custodiendas racionabiliter uiderint sufficere.
8. Nullum suanimotum de cetero teneatur in regno nostro nisi ter in
anno ; uidelicet in principio quindecim dierum ante festum sancti Michaelis,
quando agistatores conneniunt ad agistandum dominicos boscos nostros ; et
circa festum sancti Martini quando agistatores nostri debent recipere
pannagium nostrum ; et ad ista duo suanimota conueniant forestarii,
uiridarii, et agistatores et nullus alius per districcionem ; et tercium suani-
motum teneatur in inicio quindecim dierum ante festum sancti Iohannis
Baptiste, pro feonacione bestiarum nostrarum ; et ad istud suanimotum
tenendum conueniant forestarii et uiridarii et nulli alii per districcionem.
Et preterea singulis quadraginta diebus per to turn annum conueniant
uiridarii et forestarii ad uidendum attachiamenta de foresta, tarn de uiridi,
quam de uenacione, per presentacionem ipsorum forestariorum, et coram
ipsis attachiatis. Predicta autem suanimota non teneantur nisi in comitatibus
in quibus teneri consueuerunt.
9. Unusquisque liber homo agistet boscum suum in foresta pro uoluntate
sua et habeat pannagium suum. Concedimus eciam quod unusquisque liber
homo possit ducere porcos suos per dominicum boscum nostrum, libere et
sine inpedimento, ad agistandum eos in boscis suis propriis, uel alibi ubi
uoluerit. Et si porci alicuius liberi hominis una nocte pernoctauerint in
foresta nostra, non inde occasionetur ita quod aliquid de suo perdat.
10. Nullus de cetero amittat uitam uel menbra pro uenacione
nostra ; set, si aliquis captus fuerit et convictus de capcione uenacionis,
grauiter redimatur, si habeat unde redimi possit ; et si non habeat unde
redimi possit, iaceat in prisona nostra per unum annum et unum diem ;
et, si post unum annum et unum diem plegios inuenire possit, exeat a
prisona ; sin autem, abiuret regnum Anglie.
11. Quicunque archiepiscopus, episcopus, comes uel baro transient per
forestam nostram, liceat ei capere unam uel duas bestias per uisum forestarii,
si presens fuerit ; sin autem, faciat cornari, ne uideatur furtiue hoc facere.
THE CHARTER OF THE FOREST OF NOVEMBER 1217 CXXXVli
12. Unusquisque liber homo decetero sine occasione faciat in bosco suo,
uel in terra sua quam habeat in foresta, molendinum, uiuarium, stagnum,
marleram, fossaturu, uel terram arabilem extra cooperatum in terra arabili,
ita quod non sit ad nocumentum alicuius uicini.
13. Unusquisque liber homo habeat in boscis suis aereas anciptum et
speruariorum et falconum, aquilarum, et de heyrinis, et habeat similiter mel
quod inuentum fuerit in boscis suis.
14. Nullus forestarius de cetero, qui non sit forestarius de feudo reddens
nobis firmam pro balliua sua, capiat chiminagium aliquod in balliua sua ;
forestarius autem de feudo firmam nobis reddens pro balliua sua capiat
chiminagium, uidelicet, pro careta per dimidium annum duos denarios, et per
alium dimidium annum duos denarios, et pro equo qui portat sumagium per
dimidium annum unum obolum, et per alium dimidium annum obolum, et
non nisi de illis qui de extra balliuam suam, tanquam mercatores, ueniunt
per licenciam suam in balliuam suam ad buscam, meremum, corticem uel
carbonem emendum, et alias ducendum ad uendendum ubi uoluerint ; et de
nulla alia careta uel sumagio aliquod chiminagium capiatur ; et non capiatur
chiminagium nisi in locis illis ubi antiquitus capi solebat et debuit. Illi
autem qui portant super dorsum suum buscam, corticem, uel carbonem, ad
uendendum, quamuis inde uiuant, nullum de cetero dent chiminagium.
De boscis autem aliorum nullum detur chiminagium foristariis nostris,
preterquam de dominicis boscis nostris.
15. Omnes utlagati pro foresta tantum a tempore regis Henrici aui nostri
usque ad primam coronacionem nostram ueniant ad pacem nostram sine
inpedimento et saluos plegios inueniant quod de cetero non forisfaciant nobis
de foresta nostra.
16. Nullus castellanus uel alius teneat placita de foresta siue de uiridi
siue de uenacione, sed quilibet forestarius de feudo attachiet placita de
foresta tarn de uiridi quam de uenacione, et ea presentet uiridariis
prouinciarum ; et, cum irrotulata fuerint et sub sigillis uiridariorum inclusa,
presententur capitali forestario cum in partes illas uenerit ad tenendum
placita foreste et coram eo terminentur.
17. Has autem libertates de forestis concessimus omnibus, saluis,
archiepiscopis, episcopis, abbatibus, prioribus, comitibus, baronibus, militibus
et aliis tarn personis ecclesiasticis quam secularibus, Templariis et Hospita-
lariis, libertatibus et liberis consuetudinibus in forestis et 6xtra, in warenniis
et aliis, quas prius habuerunt. Omnes autem istas consuetudines predictas
et libertates, quas concessimus in regno nostro tenendas quantum ad nos
pertinet erga nostros, omnes de regno nostro tarn clerici quam laici obseruent
quantum ad se pertinet erga suos. Quia uero sigillum nondum habuimus,
presentem cartam sigillis uenerabilis patris nostri domini Gualonis tituli
Sancti Martini presbiteri cardinalis, apostolice sedis legati, et Willelmi
Marescalli comitis Penbrok, rectoris nostri et regni nostri, fecimus sigillari.
Testibus prenominatis et aliis multis. Data per manus predictorum domini
legati et Willelmi Marescalli apud Sanctum Paulum Londonie, sexto die
Novembris, anno regni nostri secundo.
CXXXviii INTRODUCTION— APPENDIX II.
APPENDIX II.
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
The Forests* — In the reign of John, the chief barons of the realm
were considered to have a certain interest in the royal forests. This
is apparent from the following entry l on the roll of letters close of the
eighth year of his reign :
Eex Brieno de Insula etc. Sciatis quod bene uolumus quod capitales
barones nostri, unde nobis mandasti, transeuntes per balliuam uestram feras
capiant, set ita quod sciatis qui illi fuerint et quid capiant et quantum, quia
non habemus forestas et bestias nostras ad opus nostrum tantum, set eciam
ad opus ndelium nostrorum, set bene illas custodire faciatis propter latrones
quia bestie magis expauent per latrones quam per predictos barones. . . .
Teste me ipso apud Wudestok' undecimo die lunii.
The right of the barons to take deer on passing through the forests
was admitted by the Charter of Forest of 1217.
The Assize of the Forest. — It seems probable that the words * assize
of the forest ' meant merely the well-established custom of the forest.
In a writ 2 dated 31 December 1222 the king stated that according to
the assize of the forest verderers ought not to be put in assizes, juries
or recognitions. In another writ, 3 dated 2 October 1224, he stated
that according to the law and custom of the forest verderers ought not
to be put therein.
The Justices of the Forest. — In the reign of Edward II. the justices
of the forest became known as chief wardens. The change is explained
by the following words in the New Ordinances 4 of the year 1311 :
Et desormes soit escrit a eux com as chiefs gardeins de la forest, pwr ce qe
Iustices ne deiuent il estre, ne record auoir forsqwe en Eyre.
The Foresters. — Where the working foresters were not paid by the
wardens they were said to live upon the country. In 7 Edward I.
the following statement was made at an inquisition 5 concerning
Gillingham forest :
Et sciendum est quod in predicta foresta consueuerunt esse forestarii,
scilicet, unus de feodo propriis sumptibus suis, et adhuc est; et unus
1 Botuli Litterarum Clausarum, i. 85. * Statutes of the Realm, i. 161.
3 Ibid. 527 6. * FoVm Proc AnCt C hanc, No. 101,
» Ibid. 648. Boll 5.
ADDITIONAL NOTES CXXxix
forestarius eques et duo forestarii pedes sumptibus domini regis usque ad
ultimam itineracionem Iohannis Byset, iusticiarii domini Henrici regis patris
doniini Edwardi qui nunc est de foresta. Et post dictam itineracionem
uixerunt et adhuc uiuunt super patriam, et colligunt blada et garbas et alia ;
et faciunt tabernas contra cartam de libertatibus foreste.
It is clear that it was to the advantage of the inhabitants of a
forest to have foresters in fee among them. For they usually received
certain rights and profits with their bailiwicks, and so had means of
living upon the king instead of upon the country. In the first year
of John the knights of Staffordshire gave the king forty marks and a
palfrey for having their liberties of the forest as they had them in the
time of Henry II., so that other foresters might not be put there,
unless they were enfeoffed of their bailiwicks. 1
Eyre Rolls. — There are no eyre rolls at the Public Record Office
of an earlier date than 39 Hen. III., except a few fragments of rolls
of the year 10 John, most of which are printed in this volume. It
will be noticed that the nature and style of the rolls of the reign of
John are different from those of the reign of Henry III.
Park. — In the tract known as ' La Court de Baron,' there is a
precedent 2 of a case of chasing beasts in the lord's park. In his
* count ' the parker alleged that the trespass was made in a franchise
which the lord had from the king, to wit, of having the park for his
own proper warren as was contained in the charter which he had
from the king, whereby it was forbidden on pain of forfeiture of 101.
that any should enter to chase or take beasts unless by the lord's
leave. These words suggest that it was usual for the king to grant
charters of imparkment with a penal clause similar to the one
invariably inserted in charters of warren. The Charter Rolls show
that this was not the case, and it is therefore probable that the words
which are the subject of this note, if they are part of the tract as
originally written, are erroneous.
Warren. — In an unprinted Year Book, which will be published in
due course by the Selden Society, there is a case which seems to
show that in the reign of Edward II., the lord might amerce tres-
passers in his warren, provided that the amount of the amercement
did not exceed the value of the beast taken by the trespasser. The
case is one which was heard in the Kent eyre for pleas of the crown
and common pleas in 6 Ed. II.
1 Rotuli de Oblatis, p. 65.
2 Publications of the Selden Society, vol. iv. p. 33.
SELECT PLEAS OF THE FOREST
L"
PLACITA FOEESTE PLACITATA A^PUD NOKHAMTON' DIE 2
VENEBIS PEOXIMA ANTE FESTUM SANCTI MATHIE
APOSTOLI ANNO EEGNI EEGIS IOHANNIS DECIMO.
eras, miseri-
cordia.
eras, misen-
cordia.
v s. miseri-
cordia."
misen-
cordia.
iij s. vj d.
miseri-
cordia.
miseri-
cordia.
Ttlag'.
Coram rege.
Eobertus de Acle in misericordia quia non habuit Godwinum
forestariam suum quern plegiauit ; et habeat eum die crastina.
Elia de Karleton' [et Aluredus de Dinger 3 ] in misericordia quia
non habuerunt capud cerui eis 4 commissum ; et habeat die crastina.
Eobertus de Eiston' et tethinga Eicardi fratris sui in misericordia
pro fuga predicti Eicardi. Catalla ipsius Eicardi quinque solidi, vnde
Eogerus de NeunT debet respondere.
Thethinga Henrici Trenchenote de Eiston' in misericordia pro
fuga ipsius Henrici ; precium catallorum tres solidi sex denarii, vnde
idem Eogerus debet respondere. Idem Henricus est interrogandus.
Thethinga Wioti [et Eicardi Sprang hominis Eicardi fratris
Eoberti de Eiston] 5 in misericordia pro fuga ipsius Wioti. Non habuit
catalla ; et est interrogandus.
Francoplegii Willelmi Warin' hominis Iohannis Basset in miseri-
cordia pro fuga ipsius Willelmi.
Vicecomes debet respondere die crastina de predictis Eicardo,
Henrico, Eicardo Sprang et Wiot si fuerint vtlagati. Et vicecomes
dicit 6 quod vtlagati sunt. 7
Eogerus Grim messarius abbatis de Burgo captus fuit sequendo
1 Forest Proceedings, Treasury of Re-
ceipt, No. 62. There is also at the Public
Eecord Office an official transcript of this
roll which was made towards the close of
the thirteenth century. The reference to
it is Forest Proceedings, Treasury of Re-
ceipt, No. 249, Rot. 16. 2 20 February 120§.
3 The words in brackets are cancelled
in the original roll and omitted in the tran-
script.
4 The last letter of this word has been
erased in the original roll. It is omitted
in the transcript.
5 The words in brackets are interlined
in the original roll and omitted in the
transcript.
6 This word is repeated in the original roll.
7 The following entry is here written
in the original roll and cancelled. It is
omitted entirely in the transcript. ' Eogerus
Grim messarius abbatis de Burgo traditus
fuit in custodia Gaufridi Gilbewin' ut
senescalli abbatis, qui non habuit eum
coram iusticiariis ; et ideo est in miseri-
cordia ; et habeat eum ad alium diem, ita
recordatur comitatus.'
I.
PLEAS OF THE FOEEST PLEADED AT NORTHAMPTON
ON THE FEIDAY 2 NEXT BEFORE THE FEAST OF SAINT
MATHIAS THE APOSTLE IN THE TENTH YEAR OF THE
REIGN OF KING JOHN.
Robert of Oakley is in mercy because he had not Godwin his
forester, whom he pledged ; and let him have him to-morrow.
Elias of Carlton is in mercy because he had not the hart's head
which was entrusted to him ; and let him have it to-morrow.
Robert of Rushton and the tithing of Richard his brother are in
mercy for the flight of the aforesaid Richard. The chattels of the
same Richard are five shillings, wherefor Roger de Neville must answer.
The tithing of Henry Trenchnot of Rushton is in mercy for the
flight of the same Henry ; the price of his chattels was three shillings
and sixpence, wherefor the same Roger must answer. The same
Henry is to be exacted.
The tithing of Wiot is in mercy for the flight of the same Wiot.
He had no chattels ; and he is to be exacted ; and similarly the
tithing of Richard Sprang the man of Richard the brother of Robert
of Rushton.
The frankpledges of William Warin the man of John Basset are
in mercy for the flight of the same William.
The sheriff must answer to-morrow as to the aforesaid Richard,
Henry, Richard Sprang and Wiot, if they were outlawed. And the
sheriff says they were outlawed.
Roger Grim, the reaper of the abbot of Peterborough, was taken
B 2
2 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
cum canibus quatuor bissas. Et traditus fuit in custodia magistri
Gaufridi Gilbewin' ut senescalli abbatis de Burgo. Et non habuit
ilium coram iusticiariis. Iudicium comitatus quod idem Gaufridus
Gilbewin' sit in misericordia quia non habuit predictum Rogerum ; et
custod'.cras. remaneat in prisona ; et liberatur vicecomiti custodiendus.
mis ?. ri - Simon Vicor de Norhamton' in misericordia pro stultiloquio.
cordia. * *
Terra Petri Tanet scilicet sex acre, quas habuit de capellano de Vfford'
in manu ....
regis. saisiatur in manu regis.
mterrog'. Idem Petrus et Ricardus Gerewold' interrogandi sunt, qui visi
fuerunt in foresta cum arcubus et sagittis in bersa. Non habuerunt
catalla. Et preceptum est vicecomiti quod illos exigat secundum
assisam in comitatu ; et si non uenerint vtlagantur. 1
cordia. Robertus de Vfford' clericus et villata comuniter 2 in misericordia
pro fuga predictorum Petri et Ricardi.
iij s. De villata de Witering' tres solidi quia non habuerunt quod
plegiauerunt.
Samuel filius Iacobi de Norhamt' inueniat plegios habendi waran-
tum suum de vno damo quern habuit apud Bernak' die Veneris 3 prox-
ima ante mediam quadragesimam. Plegius eius Samuel filius Deodati.
Willelmus filius Simonis de Barton' liberatur in prisona quia
conuictus fuit quod falso et per odium imposuit super Stephanum de
Pinu clericum quod in domo sua debuerat commedisse duos feones
vnde respondebit de catallis suis apud Bernek'.
xx s. Robertus del Toe in misericordia quia non habuit viginti solidos
de precio trium equorum, quod plegiauit, qui fuerunt Gaufridi persone
de Quappelad' ; et respondebit de predictis viginti solidis. 4
iij marce. Robertus de Neuill' clericus respondebit de precio trium equorum
Petri de Paris clerici, scilicet, de tribus marcis pro arcu inuento in
societate ipsius Petri.
miseri- Adam de Crumle in misericordia quia non habuit Radulfum filium
cordia. .' * . . .. .
Simonis de Noua Landa in Wirecestresir' coram iusticiariis, qui
tulit arcum cum corda et vna sagitta barbata et vna bulsone.
Et habeat eum ad alia placita. Postea finem fecit pro quietancia
plenine.
miser- Radulfus films Hugonis de Chaucumb' et Hugo de Bereford' in
misericordia quia non habuerunt Walter um de Ringesdun', quern
1 ' Vtlagentur ' is intended. 1844, at p. 184.
2 The true reading of this word is doubt- ■ 6 March 120§.
ful. It is entirely omitted in the transcript. 4 Geoffrey's horses had been forfeited to
The word ' comuniter ' is similarly used in the king and sold. The purchase money
1 he Great Roll of the Pipe of 1 Bic. I. pub- was then handed over to Robert del Toe to
lished by the Record Commissioners in be produced at the next eyre.
apnd
Bernak.
Bernek'
prison'.
cordia.
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE EYRE, A.D. 1209 2
as he followed with his dogs four hinds. And he was delivered into
the custody of master Geoffrey Gilbewin as the steward of the abbot
of Peterborough ; and he had him not before the justices. Judgment
of the county : — that the same Geoffrey be in mercy because he had
not the aforesaid Roger ; and that he remain in prison, and he is
delivered to the sheriff in custody.
Simon Yicor of Northampton is in mercy for contemptuous
speech.
Let the land of Peter Tanet, to wit, the six acres which he had of
the chaplain of Ufford, be seized into the king's hands.
The same Peter and Richard Gerewold are to be exacted. They
were seen in the forest with bows and arrows within an enclosure.
They had no chattels. And the sheriff is ordered that he exact them
according to the assize in the county ; and if they do not come, let
them be outlawed.
Robert of Ufford, clerk, and his whole township are in mercy for
the flight of the aforesaid Peter and Richard.
Of the township of Wittering three shillings, because they had not
what they pledged.
Let Samuel the son of James of Northampton find pledges of
having his warrant of one buck, which he had at Barnack, on the
Friday 3 next before the middle of Lent. His pledge is Samuel the
son of Deudon.
"William the son of Simon of Barton is delivered into custody,
because it was proved that falsely and through hatred he imputed to
hen de Pin, clerk, that he had feasted upon two fawns, wherefor
he will answer with his chattels at Barnack.
Robert del Toe is in mercy because he had not twenty shillings,
the price which he pledged of three horses which were the property of
Geoffrey the parson of Whaplode. And he will answer for the twenty
shillings aforesaid.
Robert de Neville, clerk, will answer for the price of three horses
of Peter de Paris, clerk, that is to say for three marks for a bow found
in the company of the same Peter.
Adam of Crumlegh is in mercy because he had not before the
justices Ralph the son of Simon of Newland in Worcestershire, who
carried a bow with a string and a barbed arrow and a bolt. And
let him have him at the next pleas.
Afterwards he made fine for an acquittance from his suretyship.
Ralph the son of Hugh of Chalcombe and Hugh of Bar ford are in
mercy because they had not Walter of Ringsdon, whom they pledged,
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
miseri-
cordia.
memoran-
dum.
peregrina-
cio.
moituus in
prisona.
[eras] de
waranto.
plegiauerunt, captum cum arcu et corda in foresta. Et dictum est
quod mortuus est. Iohannes filius Gerard' et Willelmus de Chau-
cumb' in misericordia quia fecerunt se plegios predicti Walteri et
non fuerunt.
Villata de Neweton' comuniter J in misericordia pro fuga Bicardi
Gelee messarii sui retati de damo bersato in curto bosco de Nassinton
pro quo Henricus filius Benselin' de Neweton' captus fuit.
Forestarii inuenerunt in bosco de Nassinton' vnam damam
habentem gorgiam abscisam et prope hide inuenerunt Henricum
filium Bence latentem sub quodam bussone ; et ipsum ceperunt et
in prisonam posuerunt. Idem venit coram iusticiariis et defendit quod
de dama ilia nunquam aliquid sciuit, nisi tantum quod ibat in bosco
illo ad querendum equm suum. Forestarii ilium ceperunt et duxerunt
usque ad damam 2 illam. Forestarii et viridarii, requisiti si ipse
culpabilis sit inde uel non, dicunt quod non credunt quod ipse
culpabilis sit, set credunt melius quod Bicardus Gelee messarius de
Neweton' sit inde culpabilis quoniam fugiit quamcito audiuit quod
predictus Henricus captus fuit. Et quoniam ipse Henricus cruce
signatus fuit et non malecreditur et diu iacuit in carcere, concessum
est ei quod ipse faciat peregrinacionem suam. Et moueat ante
Pentecosten, et si redierit et possit plegios inuenire de fidelitate,
maneat in foresta.
Thomas Inkel, forestarius de Cliue, inuenit in bosco de Siberton'
quandam placiam sanguinolentam ; et traciauit 3 sanguinem in niue
usque domum Badulfi Bed de Siberton' et statim mandauit viridarios
et probos homines. Cerchiauerunt domum suam et in ea inuenerunt
carnem cuiusdam dame et ipsum Badulfum ceperunt et posuerunt in
prisona apud Norhamt', in qua obiit, set ante obitum suum quando
fuit in prisona appellauit Bobertum Sturdi de Siberton' et Bogerum
Tocke de eadem quod simul cum eo fuerunt malefactores de foresta.
Et forestarii et viridarii scrutati sunt domum predicti Boberti, et in
ea inuenerunt ossamenta ferarum et ipsum ceperunt et in prisona
miserunt. Et in domo Bogeri Tocke inuenerunt aures et ossamenta
ferarum. Et idem captus fuit et inprisonatus. Bobertus Sturdi
uenit coram iusticiariis et dicit quod canes Walteri de Preston'
solebant iacere in domo sua. Venacionem manducauerunt uenatores
sui vnde ilia ossamenta fuerunt et inde uocat warantum predictum
Walterum, et habeat eum die crastina. Venit Walterus et warantizat
1 See p. 2, n. 2.
8 In place of this and the following word
both texts have ' domum ilium,' which
seems to be a clerical error. In the previous
entry the same beast is described as a buck.
3 This word is so written in the tran-
script. In the original roll it might be
read as ' trazauit.'
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE EYRE, A.D. 1209 3
who was taken with a bow and a string in the forest. And it is said
that he is dead. John the son of Gerard and William of Chalcombe
are in mercy because they represented themselves to be pledges of
the aforesaid Walter ; and they were not. -
The whole township of Newton is in mercy for the flight of
Eichard Gelee, their reaper, who was accused of a buck shot in the
short wood of Nassington, for which Henry the son of Benselin of
Newton was taken.
The foresters found in the wood of Nassington a doe with its
throat cut, and hard by they found Henry the son of Benselin lying
under a certain bush. And they took him and put him in prison.
He comes before the justices and denies that he ever knew anything
of that doe, except only that he went into that wood to seek his horse.
The foresters took him and led him to that doe. The foresters and
verderers, being asked if he were guilty thereof or not, say that they
do not think that he was guilty, but they believe rather that Bichard
Gelee the reaper of Newton is guilty thereof, because he fled as soon
as he heard that the aforesaid Henry was taken. And because Henry
himself has taken the cross, and is not suspected, and has lain for a
long time in prison, it is granted to him that he may make his
pilgrimage ; and let him start before Whitsunday ; and if he return,
and can find pledges of his fealty, let him remain in the forest.
Thomas Inkel, forester of Cliffe, found in the wood of Siberton a
certain place wet with blood, and he traced the blood in the snow as
far as the house of Balph Bed of Siberton ; and forthwith he sent
for the verderers and good men. They searched his house, and
in it they found the flesh of a certain doe; and they took Balph
himself and put him in prison at Northampton, where he died. But
before his death, when he was in prison, he appealed Bobert Sturdi
of Siberton and Boger Tock of the same town, because they were
evil doers to the forest together with him. And the foresters and
verderers searched the house of the aforesaid Bobert, and in it
found the bones of deer ; and they took him and sent him to
prison. And in the house of Boger Tock they found ears and bones
of wild beasts. And he was taken and imprisoned. Bobert Sturdi
comes before the justices and says that the dogs of Walter of Preston
used to be kenneled at his house. Walter's hunters ate the
venison whence came the bones ; and Bobert vouches the aforesaid
Walter to warranty of this; and let him have him tomorrow.
4 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
eum dicens quod canes sui iacuerunt in domo eius per quindecim dies
dum currebant ad damos.
maneat Predietus Eogerus Tocke uenit coram iusticiariis et totum defendit.
forestwo Et viridarii et forestarii testantur quod aures et ossamenta inuenta
in domo sua fuerunt de bestiis quos venatores W. de Preston' ceperunt.
Et quoniam idem Eogerus diu iacuit in prisona ita quod feremortuus
est, adiudicatum est quod eat quietus ; et maneat extra forestam.
miseri- Willelmus filius Kadulfi de Weston' in misericordia pro falsa
cordia.
presentacione.
inisori- Bobertus de Hale et Willelmus de Suwic' viridarii in misericordia
quia non habuerunt ossamenta eis commissa.
miseri- Eicardus Engan' ponit se in misericordia ante iudicium pro dicto
cordia. . * ■ L
SUO.
Eicardus filius Willelmi de Baseuill' de Ketene captus fuit in
parco de Cliue, ferens vnam cutem dami recentem, per Gaufridum
hominem Eogeri Blundi, cui cognouit, ut idem Gr. dicit, quod corium
illud inuenit ; et ductus fuit apud Eokingeh' et inprisonatus. Et
idem Eicardus uenit coram iusticiariis et dicit quod corium illud
emit apud Kenebauton' de quodam garcione ignoto ; et mittitur
apud Eokingeh' in prisona ad inquirendum ad placita de Eoteland die
Lune 1 proxima ante mediam quadragesimam apud OKham'. Postea
finiuit per viginti solidos ut quietus sit [quin] 2 inquisi[tum sit]
quod illud corium emit apud Kenebalton', Mauricio de Andel' plegio
denariorum.
Quidam ceruus inuentus fuit mortuus in curia Willelmi de Trum-
pinton' uulneratus, quern Baldewinus prepositus eiusdem Willelmi
custodiuit [in] 2 Asseby. Et habuit vnam perticham fractam usque
ad cerebrum. Et quatuor villate propinquiores summonite, requisite
nichil sciunt dicere de [facto] 2 illo. Et quia perticha fracta fuit
usque ad cerebrum, creditur quod per Willelmum magis quam per
in maim alios hiterfeetus erat : et ideo [seisita est villa] ta 2 in manu regis et
regis. ...
mquiratur.
Capud cuiusdam cerui recens inuentum fuit in bosco Henrici de
Alneto apud Maideford' per forestarios regis. Et forestarius predicti
Henrici mortuus est. Et quia nichil potest inquiri de ceruo illo, pre-
ceptum est quod tota predicta uilla de Maideford' saisita sit in manu
regis cum bosco pertinente [ad] 2 eandem uillam desicut predietus
Henricus nichil scit de ceruo illo certificare.
1 2 March 120£. are taken from the transcript, the original
- Words and letters in square brackets roll being damaged.
in maim
regis.
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE EYRE, A.D. 1209 4
Walter comes and warrants him, saying that his dogs were kenneled
in his house for fifteen days while he was hunting bucks.
The aforesaid Koger Tock comes before the justices and denies
everything. And the verderers and foresters witness that the ears
and bones found in his house were those of beasts which the hunters
of "Walter of Preston took. And because Koger lay for a long time in
prison, so that he is nearly dead it is adjudged that he go quit ; and
let him dwell outside the forest.
William the son of Ealph of Weston is in mercy for a false pre-
sentment.
Eobert of Hale and William of Southwick, the verderers, are in
mercy because they had not the bones which were entrusted to them.
Eichard Engayn puts himself in mercy before judgment for his
statement.
Eichard the son of William de Baseville of Ketton was taken in
the park of Cliffe, carrying one fresh skin of a buck, by Geoffrey the
man of Eoger Blund, to whom he confessed, as the same Geoffrey
says, that he found that skin. And he was taken to Eockingham and
imprisoned. And Eichard comes before the justices and says that he
bought that skin at Kimbolton from a certain unknown boy. And
he is sent to prison at Eockingham for inquiries to be made at the
pleas of Eutland on the Monday ■ next before Mid-Lent at Oakham.
Afterwards he made fine by twenty shillings that he might be quit of
the inquiry whether he bought that skin at Kimbolton, Maurice
Daundelay being pledge of his pence.
A certain hart was found dead and wounded in the court of
William of Trumpington, of which Baldwin the reeve of the same
William took charge in Ashby. And it had one antler fractured as
far as the brain. And four neighbouring townships being sum-
moned and questioned say they know nothing of the deed. And
because the antler was fractured as far as the brain, it is believed
that it was killed by William rather than by any other person ; and
therefore let his township be seized into the king's hand, and let
inquiry be made.
The head of a hart recently dead was found in the wood of Henry
Dawney at Maidford by the king's foresters. And the forester of the
aforesaid Henry is dead. And because nothing can be ascertained
of that hart, it is ordered that the whole of the aforesaid town of
Maidford be seized into the king's hand with the wood belonging to
the same town, on the ground that the aforesaid Henry can certify
nothing of that hart.
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
interrog.'
miseri-
cordia.
miseri-
cordia.
inter-
rogate,
miseri-
cordia.
misen-
cordia.
Villata de Merston' Prioris de Weneloc in Warwiksir' in miseri-
cordia quia non leuauerunt clamorem super malefactores regis, scilicet,
super Elyam Horfstail] 1 de eadem et Eandulfum le Meser de
Herdewik'. Uisi fuerunt ab hominibus de Botintun', ubi occiderunt
vnam bissam in campo de Botintun'. Et fugerunt et euaserunt de
hominibus illis. Et interrogandi sunt per comitatum.
Bobertus Walen' seruiens comitis de Wint' in Bukebi in miseri-
cordia quia non habuit coram iusticiariis duos brachettos comitis
tesantes vnum ceruum usque in forestam, quos recepit habendi 2
coram iusticiariis et non habuit.
Villata de Snokescumb' in misericordia comuniter, quia fecerunt
Nicholaum messarium, qui fugitiuus est. Et captus fuit et inprisona-
tus ; et postea euasit de prisona ; [et interrogandus 3 per comi-
tatum].
Thomas filius Eustach' et Thomas de Albo Monasterio in miseri-
cordia, quia portauerunt arcus et sagittas in foresta regis sine
licencia ; et monstrandum est regi.
Henricus de Stauerton' in misericordia quia conuictus est de
mendacio.
Canes comitis Dauid capti fuerunt in foresta super vnum damum
per forestarium. Et per dictum forestarium dimissus sub pleuina
Willelmo Grimbald' et Simoni de Hocton' habendi coram iusticiariis.
Willelmus venit et defendit pleuinam illam. Et ideo adiudicatum
est ei vt defendat se secundum assisam foreste. Et Simon
veniet eras. Postea uenit predictus Willelmus Grimbald' coram
iusticiariis et posuit se in misericordia.
Villata de Brechol' in misericordia quia non habuerunt quern
plegiauerunt.
Badulphus Neirnut de Threwelton' 4 in misericordia quia balista et
arcus inuenta fuerunt in domo sua sine waranto.
Bogerus Wandard in misericordia pro leporaria habita contra
assisam.
Hii sunt qui fuerunt ad retinendum Willelmum 5 viridarium apud
Norhamt', Johannes Samson prepositus Norhamt', Petrus Preston',
Emeraud 6 Destreis, Willelmus filius Pagan', Gaufridus Buffus
de Farding, Bestwald Ca.
1 Words and letters in square brackets
are taken from the transcript, the original
roll being damaged.
2 This word is so extended in both texts.
3 The reading in the transcript is 'in-
terrogate which is probably an error.
4 This word is clearly written in both
texts, but perhaps Chrewelton' is in-
tended.
5 This is probably the "William of South-
wick mentioned on p. 4.
6 The reading of this name is doubtful.
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE EYRE, A.D. 1209 5
The prior of Wenlock's township of Marston in Warwickshire is
in mercy because they did not raise the hue and cry on evil doers to
the king, that is to say upon Elias Horstail of the same town and
Ranulph the reaper of Hardwick. They were seen by the men of
Bodington, where they killed a hind in the field of Bodington ; and
they fled and escaped from those men ; and they are to be exacted
by the county.
Robert the Welshman the servant of the earl of Winchester in
Buckby is in mercy because he had not before the justices two
braches of the earl which worried a hart into the forest ; and he
received them to have before the justices ; and he had them not.
The whole township of Snorscomb is in mercy because they
made Nicholas, who is a fugitive, their reaper. And he was taken
and imprisoned ; and afterwards escaped from prison. And he is to
be exacted by the county.
Thomas the son of Eustace and Thomas of Oswestry are in
mercy because they carried bows and arrows in the king's forest with-
out licence ; and the matter must be shown to the king.
Henry of Staverton is in mercy because he is convicted of false-
hood.
The dogs of Earl David were taken in the forest upon a buck by
the forester. And by the said forester he was put on pledge to
William Grimbald and Simon of Houghton, to have them before
the justices. William comes and denies that pledge, and there-
fore it is adjudged that he defend himself according to the assize of
the forest. And Simon will come to-morrow. Afterwards the afore-
said Grimbald came before the justices, and put himself in mercy.
The township of Brockhall is in mercy because they had not him
whom they pledged.
Ralph Neirnut of Threwelton is in mercy because a crossbow and
a bow were found in his house without warrant.
Roger Wandard is in mercy for a greyhound bitch which he had
against the assize.
These are the persons who were to keep William the verderer at
Northampton, John Samson, the reeve of Northampton, Peter Preston,
Emerald D^streis, William the son of Pain, Geoffrey Red of Farding,
and Restwald Ca.
6 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
coram rege. Gaufridus filius Petri agistauit vno anno ducentos porcos et alio
anno centum et quinque porcos.
Henricus de Alneto duas marcas pro habendo bosco suo in pace
capto in manu regis.
II. 1
PLACITA VENACIONIS PLACITATA APUD OCHAM IN EOTEL'
DIE MARTIS 2 PROXIMA ANTE MEDIAM QUADRAGE-
SIMAM ANNO REGNI REGIS IOHANNIS DECIMO.
Radulfus de Martiwast dat viginti marcas ut quietus sit de eo
quod filius suus inuentus fuit in chimino magno in foresta cum arcu
sine corda. 3
Regardores Rotel' et Leyc' communiter in misericordia quia non
fecerunt quod facere debuerunt.
Yeredictum militum comitatus Rotel' quod ad summonicionem
iusticiariorum de foresta venire debent ad placita foreste omnes de
comitatu Leic' comuniter qui manent extra forestam ad distanciam
duarum leucarum.
Viscera cuiusdam cerui inuenta fuerunt subtus molendinum
Roberti filii Ade de Skeftindon', et perticha similiter. Et erat vna
percussura in perticha, ac si esset facta de quadam securi. Et
molendinarius scilicet Willelmus Alani requisitus de ceruo illo dixit
quod nichil scit. Et quia molendinum erat ita remotum, 4 a villa et
prope choopertum foreste, preceptum est quod molendinum capiatur
in manus regis, et molendinarius remaneat in custodia hominis
Nicholai de Verdoun de Skegenton' ad inquirendum.
Elias de Lutterwrthe in misericordia pro stultiloquio facto coram
iusticiariis.
In domo Henrici filii Lefsi inuentus fuit [preapws] 5 vnius cerui.
Et interrogatus vnde uenerat hoc dixit quod venatores regis ilium ei
1 Forest Proceedings, Treasury of Be- arrows to the bow with the string. Perhaps
ceipt, No. 249, Koll 11. This is an official the absence of the string raised a suspicion
transcript made towards the close of the of its being used as a snare,
thirteenth century. The original no longer 4 MS. ' remotus.'
exists. 2 3 March 120§. 3 This word was probably wrongly
3 It is difficult to see the reason for the transcribed from the original roll. The
insertion of the words ' sine corda.' A man letters here printed in italics represent
might pass through the forest with a bow contractions in the roll. Perhaps the word
and arrows provided that he bound the in the original was ' perticha ' or ' perchia.'
RUTLAND EYRE, A.D. 1209 G
Geoffrey fitz Peter agisted in one year two hundred pigs and in
another year one hundred and five pigs.
Henry Dauney gives two marks for having in peace his wood
which was taken into the king's hand.
II.
PLEAS OF THE VENISON PLEADED AT OAKHAM IN RUT-
LAND ON THE TUESDAY 2 NEXT BEFORE THE MIDDLE
OF LENT IN THE TENTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF
KING JOHN.
Ralph de Martinvast gives twenty marks that he may be quit of
this, that his son was found in the high road in the forest with a
bow without a string.
The regarders of Rutland and Leicester are all in mercy because
they did not that which they ought.
The verdict of the knights of the county of Rutland is that at the
summons of the justices of the forest all men of the county of Leicester
ought to come to the pleas of the forest who dwell outside the forest
as far as two leagues.
The entrails of a certain hart were found under the mill of Robert
the son of Adam of Skeffington ; and an antler likewise. And
there was a fracture in the antler as though it were made with
a certain axe. And the miller, that is to say William the son of Alan,
being asked about that hart, said that he knows nothing. And
because the mill was so far away from the town and near to the covert
of the forest, it is ordered that the mill be taken into the king's
hands ; and that the miller remain in the custody of the man of
Nicholas of Skeffington for inquiries to be made.
Elias of Lutterworth is in mercy for contemptuous speech before
the justices.
In the house of Henry the son of Lefsi there was found the [antler]
of a hart ; and being asked whence it came he said that the king's
7 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
dederunt. Et forestarii dubitauerunt quod ille ceruum asportauerat
quern rex inter fecit in foresta, et fuit deperditus.
Et inquisicio facta coram iusticiariis quod non malecreditur de
ceruo illo ; et ideo remanet in custoclia villate de Skeftinton' ad inquir-
endum. Et Willelmus filius Gunnild' manet in custodia lohannis filii
Simonis domini sui ad inquirendum, qui visus fuit prout dicebatur
prope locum vbi predictus ceruus interfectus fuit. Et debent reddi a
Pascha anno regni regis lohannis decimo infra annum completum.
Eobertus de Langeton' et Kobertus Sampson, viridarii Leic', in
misericordia quia contradixerunt scripto suo.
Michael de Neuill' et Eobertus de Wiuill' viridarii in misericordia
quia non fecerunt quod facere debuerunt ; et Hugo forestarius et
Samuel socius eius in misericordia pro eodem.
Eogerus filius Petri de Vppingham in misericordia pro stulto facto.
Thomas de Hotot, Willelmus de Fraxino et Henricus de Vppingham,
Alexander de Martinesthorp', viridarii, in misericordia quia fecerunt
quod facere non debuerunt.
Villata de Ocham in misericordia quia non habuerunt Eobertum
seruientem comitis Heref quern plegiauerunt.
Villata de Egildun' in misericordia quia non venerunt coram
iusticiariis sicut venire debuerunt. 1
Villata de Cnossinton' in misericordia quia non habuerunt quos
plegiauerunt, scilicet, Eicardum et Willelmum, qui inuenti fuerunt
cum arcubus et sagittis in chimino versus Eokingh'.
Benedictus de Haueresham offert dimidiam marcam domino regi pro
habendo bosco suo capto in manu regis ; et inquirendum [per quern].
Eogerus Monachus offer t domino regi dimidiam marcam pro eodem.
Vicecomes Eotel' in misericordia quia [non] habuit prisones qui
liberati fuerunt ei in custodia per manus forestariorum.
Memorandum quod boscus Eeginaldi de Wittok' capiendus est in
manu regis.
Boscus sokemannorum de Prestegraue similiter.
1 MS. ' debuit.'
RUTLAND EYRE, A.D. 1209 7
hunters gave it to him. And the foresters suspected that he carried
away a hart which the king killed in the forest, and it was lost.
And an inquisition was made before the justices, which says that
he is not suspected of that hart ; and therefore he remains in the
custody of the township of Skeffington for inquiries. And William
the son of Gunnilda remains in the custody of John the son of
Simon his lord for inquiries, because he was seen, as it was said,
near the place where the aforesaid hart w T as killed. And the inquisi-
tions ought to be returned within one year after Easter in the tenth
year of John.
Robert of Langton and Robert Samson, verderers of Leicester, are
in mercy because they contradicted their writing.
Michael de Neville and Robert of Wyville, verderers, are in mercy
because they did not that which they ought ; and Hugh the forester
and Samuel his colleague are in mercy for the same reason.
Roger the son of Peter of Uppingham is in mercy for a con-
temptuous act.
Thomas of Huttoft, William of Ash and Henry of Uppingham,
Alexander of Martinsthorpe, verderers, are in mercy because they did
that which they ought not to do.
The township of Oakham is in mercy because they had not Robert
the servant of the Earl of Hereford, whom they pledged.
The township of Egleton is in mercy because they did not come
before the justices as they ought.
The township of Knossington is in mercy because they had not
those whom they pledged, to wit Richard and William who were
found with bows and arrows in the road towards Rockingham.
Benedict of Haversham offers half a mark to the king for having
his wood which was taken into the king's hand ; and an inquiry is to
be made, by whom.
Roger le Moin offers to the king half a mark for the same.
The sheriff of Rutland is in mercy because he had not the prisoners
who were delivered to him by the hands of the foresters to guard.
Be it remembered that the wood of Reynold of Withcote is to be
taken into the king's hands.
The wood of the sokemen of Prestgrave likewise.
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLJ.S
III. 1
PLACITA FOBESTE APUD SALOPESBUEY DIE 2 SABBATI
PEOXIMA POST MEDIAM QUADEAGESIMAM ANNO EEGNI
EEGIS IOHANNIS DECIMO COEAM H. DE NEUILL' ET
P. DE LEONIBUS.
Quidam ceruus intrauit in balliua castelli de Bruges per posternam ;
et castellani de Bruges eum ceperunt et tulerunt ad castellum. Et
viridarii hoc audientes illuc venerunt et interrogauerunt a Thoma 3
de Ardinton' tunc vicecomite quid fecisset de ceruo illo. Et ille
recognouit quod ita fuit, et rnanucepit homines suos veniendi coram
iusticiariis etc ; scilicet Matheum constabularium Eogerum de Fugeriis
et Eicardum de Bromwic et Eobertum Portarium et Walranum
fratrem Mathei ; et non habuit eos coram iusticiariis. Iudicium etc.
Villata de Bruges attachiata fuit pro eodem ceruo.
Eicardus de Prestwode itinerans per balliuam suam de Morf
sequebatur duos homines quousque inuenit eos scilicet Hugonem de
Bectebury et Thomam fratrem eius ; et habebant tres leporarios extra
lessam et quinque lepores. Et cum ipse Eicardus cepisset predictum
Hugonem, predictus Thomas frater eius extracto gladio eum liberauit,
et fugauerunt ambo et idem Eicardus statim leuauit clamorem, et
sequebatur eos donee nox ab eo illos abstulit etc.
Eobertus venator Eoberti Corbet et Eobertus films eiusdem
Eoberti Corbet ceperunt vnum ceruum sub villa de Stratton' ubi venit
Codigan seruiens vicecomitis cui dederunt vnam quissam et vnam
costam ad portandum cum eo apud Eintheton. Et aliam quissam
dederunt Codwellan'. Tunc supervenit Eadulfus forestarius Waited
de Muneton', et cepit predictum Eobertum venatorem et duos canes.
Eobertus films Eoberti fugiit cum capite cerui et furcio et cornu cerui
et vnam de costis ; et illos tradidit Hugoni filio Eoberti qui dimisit
predictum Eobertum et canes et venacionem custodiendos per breue
Hugonis de NeuhT usque ad placita foreste. Custodes 4 Eoberti Corbet,
Eogerus Purcell', Eobertus de Hanewode, Hugo Mersse, Eobertus de
1 Forest Proceedings, Treasury of Re- the counties of Stafford and Salop from
ceipt, No. 144. This also is from an official Michaelmas 1204 to 13 April 1216. See
transcript made towards the close of the List of Sheriffs, p. 117.
thirteenth century. 4 The word ' uenatoris ' is probably
3 14 March 120§. omitted here.
3 Thomas of Ardington was sheriff of
SALOP EYRE, A.D. 1209
III.
PLEAS OF THE FOKEST AT SHEEWSBUKY ON THE SATUR-
DAY 2 NEXT AFTER THE MIDDLE OF LENT IN THE
TENTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OP KING JOHN BEFORE
HUGH DE NEVILLE AND PETER DE LION.
A certain hart entered the bailiwick of the castle of Bridge by the
postern ; and the castellans of Bridge took it and carried it to the
castle. And the verderers on hearing this came there and demanded
of Thomas of Ardington, who was then the sheriff what he had done
with that hart, and he acknowledged the truth, and undertook that
his men should come before the justices, that is to say Matthew the
Constable, Roger de Feugeres and Richard of Bromwich and Robert
the Porter, and Walerand the brother of Matthew ; and he had them
not before the justices etc. Judgment etc.
The township of Bridge was attached for the same hart.
Richard of Prestwood, journeying through their bailiwick of Morf
followed two men until he found them, that is to say Hugh of Beckbury
and Thomas his brother ; and they had three greyhounds unleashed
and five hares. And when the same Richard took the aforesaid Hugh,
the aforesaid Thomas his brother, with drawn sword, delivered him ;
and they both fled. And the same Richard immediately raised the
hue and followed them until night stole them away from him etc.
Robert the hunter of Robert Corbet and Robert the son of the same
Robert Corbet took a hart under the town of Stretton, where came
Codigan the servant of the sheriff, to whom they gave a thigh and a
rib to carry with him to Rhiston, and they gave the other thigh to
Codwellan. Then came up Ralph, the forester of Walter of Minton,
and took the aforesaid Robert the hunter and two dogs. Robert the
son of Robert fled with the hart's head, and the breast, and an antler,
and one of the ribs. And Ralph delivered them to Hugh the son of
Robert, who by the writ of Hugh de Neville delivered the aforesaid
Robert and the dogs and the venison to be kept safely until the pleas
of the forest. The custodians of [the hunter of] Robert Corbet were
Roger Purcell, Robert of Hanwood, Hugh Mersse, Robert of Hope,
9 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
Hope, Eadulfus de Le, Wido de Arundel, Eogerus Springehose, Wido
de Merse, Kobertus de Langeford, Robertus films Maddoc, Keinerus
de Acton' et Ricardus de Witon'. Et quia non habuerunt x predictum
venatorem nee venacionem nee canes qui commissi fuerunt eis in
custodia, adiudicat. 2
Custodes 3 predicti, preter Robertum Corbet, ante iudicium finem
fecerunt per sexaginta marcas vt quieti sint 4 de custodia ilia. Vice-
comes habet plegios.
Robertus Corbet dicit quod dominus rex condonauit ei loquelam
illam, et non ilium trahit ad warantum. Et quia est baro domini regis
et regem trahit ad warantum, dies datus est ei coram rege a die
coram rege. Mercurii 8 proxima post diem Pasche in vnum mensem ad habendum
ibi Robertum venatorem suum.
De Rogero filio suo dixit qui fugiit cum capite cerui et cum furchia
quod fuit cum comite Cestr' et nesciuit vbi fuit, set id mandaret ei
quod veniat ad curiam et si ipse illuc veniat in posterum ipsum in
manu capiet habendi recto.
Ricardus de Holton', Wilkinus de Estlegh', Hulle de Hineton' et
Hulle Robucke seruientes comitatus inuenerunt in domo Hugonis le
Scot venacionem, et ipse H. fugiit ad ecclesiam. Et cum viridarii et
forestarii illuc uenissent interrogauerunt de ipso H. vnde ilia venacio
venit, et ipse et quidam alius Rogerus de Welinton' nomine recognouit
quod occiderant vnam bissam vnde ilia venacio fuit ; et ipse noluit
exire de ecclesia ilia, set ibi moram fecit per vnum mensem et postea
euasit in specie mulieris. Et fugitiuus est ; et Rogerus de Welinton'
similiter. Preceptum est autem quod exigantur et nisi uenerint 6
vtlagentur.
Villate de Welinton', Ardulueston', Laueleg', Keteleg' in miseri-
cordia, quia negauerunt quod prius cognouerunt.
Preceptum est quod viuarium 7 de Stirlegh' capiatur in manu regis
pro ceruo in eo submerso.
Inquirendum de exitu terrarum forestariorum de Clauerlegh' et de
Yrfeld postquam amoti fuerunt a forestaria.
Villata de Kenelegh' in misericordia quia negauerunt quod prius
dixerunt.
Milites et homines manentes in Brewode in Salopsir' dant domino
regi centum marcas vt ipsi et heredes eorum sint inperpetuum de-
1 MS. ' habuit.' sible for his hunter and his son as his
2 The original probably contained the mainpasts.
words ' ad iudicium ' instead of this word. 4 MS. ' sunt.' 5 29 April 1209.
8 The elder Robert Corbet was respon- 8 MS. ' uenit.' 7 MS. ' virarium.'
SALOP EYRE, AD. 1209 9
Ralph of Lee, Guy of Arundel, Roger Springehose, Guy of Marsh,
Robert of Langford, Robert the son of Maddoc, Reyner of Acton and
Richard of Wytton. And because they had not the aforesaid hunter
nor the venison nor the dogs which were' entrusted to them to keep
safely, to judgment with them.
The aforesaid custodians, except Robert Corbet, made fine before
judgment by sixty marks in order that they might be quit of that
custody. The sheriff has the pledges.
Robert Corbet says that the king pardoned him that plea, and
now he vouches him to warranty, and because he is a baron of the
king and vouches him to warranty, a day is given him on Wednesday 5
a month after Easter to have there Robert his hunter.
Of Robert his son, who fled with the hart's head and with the breast,
he said that he was with the Earl of Chester and that he did not know
where he was, but would send orders to him to come to the court, and
if he come thither afterwards he will undertake to have him stand to
right.
Richard of Holton, Wilkin of Eastlegh, Hulle of Hinton, and
Hulle Roebuck, the Serjeants of the county, found venison in the house
of Hugh le Scot. And Hugh fled to the church ; and when the
foresters and verderers came thither they demanded of Hugh whence
that venison came. And he and a certain other person, Roger of
Wellington by name, acknowledged that they had killed a hind from
which that venison came. And he refused to leave the church but
lingered there for a month ; and afterwards escaped in the guise of a
woman. And he is a fugitive ; and Roger of Wellington likewise.
It is ordered that they be exacted, and unless they come let them be
outlawed.
The townships of Wellington, Arleston, Lawley and Ketley are in
mercy because they denied what they had previously acknowledged.
It is ordered that the vivary of Sturchley be taken in the king's
hand for a hart which was drowned in it.
An inquiry is to be made as to the issues of the land of the foresters
of Claverley and Worfield after they were removed from office.
The township of Kenley is in mercy because they denied what
they had previously said.
The knights and men dwelling in Brewood in Shropshire give to
the king a hundred marks so that they and their heirs may be for ever
c 2
10 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
afforestati secundum quod continetur in carta 1 domini regis quam ipsi
et homines de Staffordssir' inde, 1 ita quod omnes illi de comitatu de
Salopes' qui venati sunt uel bestias ceperunt in predicta Brewode infra
comitatum Salop' communicent cum predictis militibus et hominibus
ad predict um finem racionabiliter secundum quod quilibet eorum sit.
Warinus de Wilegh' in misericordia pro pall' dentis inuentis in
sepe sua ; set non malecreditur.
De Eoberto de Bromfeld duo solidi pro essarto.
Iohannes Hopestan et Willelmus de Wistaneswic in misericordia
pro falsa querela.
Willelmus de la Bugge dat dimidiam marcam ne boueria sua,
quam leuauit super terram suam apud Sutton', remoueatur.
De Philippo de Fernlawe dimidiam marcam quia non habuit quern
plegiauit in Stafford sir.'
miseri- Hamo filius Marescalli 2 cepit lepores in warenna de Bulregg'.
miseri- Hugo Extraneus similiter.
miseri- Homines Willelmi filii Alani similiter.
cordia.
Walterus de Bascherthe in misericordia quia cognouit quod prius
negauit.
staffordesir'. Viuianus de Bushal' dat tres marcas vt quietus sit de plegiacio.
Preceptum est Guidoni venatori quod cum viridariis capiat terram
Thome de Costentin et boscum suum qui per falsam iuratam eiectus 3
fuit de foresta, et similiter quod inquirat nomina illorum qui iuratam
illam fecerunt, et habere faciat.
Iohannes Baggot recepit apud BlemenhulP canes et bersatores in
Staff' qui veniebant ad currendum in Turrewode.
Hamo de Weston' similiter recepit canes et bersatores apud W^estan'.
Nomina 4 viridariorum in Salopsir'. 5
1 The Charter above mentioned is thus 3 MS. ' eiecit.'
enrolled on the roll of Charters of the fifth 4 The names are not written in the roll-
year of John : — 5 The above official transcripts were
1 Carta de Broivuda. Iohannes dei gracia made in the reign of Edward i. when his
etc. Sciatis nos omnino deaforestasse forests were being perambulated with a
forestam de Browuda de omnibus que ad view to those parts of them which had
forestam et forestarios pertinent. Quare been improperly afforested being disaffor-
uolumus et firmiter precipimus qnod pre- ested. His advisers had transcripts made
dicta foresta et homines in ea manentes et of some of the forest eyre rolls of the reigns
heredes eorum sint deaforestati inper- of John and Henry iii. in order to ascer-
petuum et soluti et quieti de nobis et here- tain what places had formerly been con-
dibus nostris ab omnibus que ad forestam sidered to be within the forests. The fol-
vel forestarios pertinent. Testibus G. filio lowing entry is written on the last official
Petri etc., W. Marescalio comite de Penbroc transcript printed above : —
E. comite Cestr', W. comite Sarr', W. 'Et sciendum quod plures alii amerci-
comite de Warenn', Willelmo de Breosa etc. antur pro eodem prout continetur in rotulo
Data per manum S. prepositi Beuerl' etc. qui incipit sic : — Amerciamenta de viridi,
apud Bruges xiij die March anno etc. usque Summam vij li' ix s\ Et quia nulla
quinto.' mentio fit de aliqua villata non scribitur
2 MS. ' Marescat.' plus de rotulo illo.'
SALOP EYRE, AD. 1209 10
disforested according to the contents of the king's charter which they
and the men of Staffordshire have thereof; upon condition that all
those of the county of Shropshire who have hunted or taken beasts
in the aforesaid Brewood within the county of Shropshire may share
with the aforesaid knights and men in the aforesaid fine each accord-
ing to his means.
Warin of Willey is in mercy for found in his hedge ; but he
is not suspected.
Of Eobert of Bromfield two shillings for an essart.
John Hopestan and William of Wistanswick are in mercy for a
false complaint.
William of the Bidge gives half a mark in order that his cowhouse
which he erected upon his land at Sutton be not removed.
Of Philip of Fernlaw half a mark because he has not him whom he
pledged in Staffordshire.
Hamo the son of the Marshall took hares in the warren of Bul-
ridge.
Hugh l'E strange likewise.
The men of William fitz Alan likewise.
Walter of Baschurch is in mercy because he acknowledged what
he had previously denied.
Vivian of Bushall gives three marks in order that he may be quit
of his suretyship.
Guy the hunter is ordered, with the verderers, to take the land
of Thomas de Costentin and his wood which by a false jury was
put out of the forest, and in like manner to inquire the names of
those who formed that jury, and let him cause ....
John Baggot harboured at Blymhill dogs and poachers in Stafford-
shire who came to hunt in Turrewode.
Hamo of Weston in like manner received dogs and poachers at
Weston.
Names of the verderers in Salop. . . .
11 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
IV. 1
PLACITA FOEESTE IN COMITATU HUNTINDON' A DIE
SANCTE TKINITATIS IN QUINDECIM DIES 2 ANNO KEGNI
BEGIS HENB1CI FILII KEGIS IOHANNIS TKICESIMO
NONO COEAM WILLELMO LE BRITON' NICOLAO DE
BOMES' GALFEIDO DE LEUECNOE' ET SYMONE DE
TBOPP' 1USTICIAEIIS ITINEBANTIBUS AD PLACITA
FOEESTE IN COMITATU HUNTIND' ET ALUS COMI-
TATIBUS. 3
ii marce Symon de Copmanford' (alibi), Eobertus Wyne (j marca 4 ), Iohannes
Ballard (dimidia marca) Eicardus le Port' (dimidia marca) viridarii
in misericordia, quia non presentauerunt rotulos suos primo die.
Eicardus de Grafha' qui fuit canonicus Huntond' stulte recessit a
domo sua et venit per patriam quasi vagus, suspectus habebatur.
Forestarii inuenerunt ilium in domo Willelrai de Grafha' ; et illuc
inuentus fuit vnus arcus cum quinque paruis sagittis. Et dictum
Eicardum ceperunt et arcum et sagittas ; et ipsum Eicardum in-
prisonauerunt. Qui venit coram iusticiariis. Et protestatum fuit
per forestarios et viridarios et per quatuor villatas quod non fuit
quietus. malefactor in foresta, nee in aliquo culpabilis ; et ideo quietus. Et
dictus Willelmus, in cuius domo ipse fuit inuentus, deaduocauit arcum
misericordia e t sagittas, nee sciuit dicere, cuius fuerunt ; et ideo in misericordia.
5 Presentatum est 6 per forestarios [et] viridarios quod quidam
Micbaelis de Dupenha' manupastus Iohannis de Dupenha' occidit
vnum damum in campo de Iakel' cum quadam hacha a pik. Qui
Michaelis captus fuit per Hugonem 7 de Goldinha' senescallum foreste,
1 Forest Proceedings, Treasury of Re- of it, and the past participle with the perfect
ceipt, No. 41, Roll 6. 2 6 June 1255. indicative of the auxiliary verb ' esse '
3 The letters patent appointing these instead of the perfect passive. Thus ' pre-
persons itinerant justices are enrolled on sentalum est' means 'it is presented,' and
Patent Roll 65, m. 7, and the letters close ' presentatum fuit,' ' it was presented.'
ordering the Sheriff of Huntingdon to sum- 7 The forest of Huntingdon was part of
mon all who ought to attend at the court a large forest bailiwick, which extended
of the forest eyre on Close Roll 70, m. 12 from Stamford bridge to Oxford bridge,
in dorso. Hugh of Goldinghamwas appointed steward
4 The amercements which are inter- or warden of this bailiwick, but not
lineated in the original and printed in the until 6 March 125f. (See Patent Roll 65,
Latin text above in brackets are omitted in memb. 12.) It is clear from the inquisition
the English translation so as to save space. printed on p. 76 that this trespass was
5 See p. 76. committed on 6 October 1250. Hugh must
6 In mediaeval Latin the present indica- therefore have been only deputy steward at
tive passive of many verbs was not in general this lime to Geoffrey of Langley, who then
use, the perfect passive being used instead held the office.
lj 9.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 11
IV.
PLEAS OF THE FOREST IN THE COUNTY OF HUNTINGDON
IN THE QUINDENE 2 OF HOLY TRINITY IN THE THIRTY-
NINTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF KING HENRY THE
SON OF KING JOHN BEFORE WILLIAM LE BRETON
NICHOLAS OF ROMSEY GEOFFREY OF LEWKNOR AND
SIMON OF THORP JUSTICES IN EYRE FOR PLEAS
OF THE FOREST IN THE COUNTY OF HUNTINGDON
AND OTHER COUNTIES.
Simon of Coppingford, Robert Wynne, John Ballard, Richard le
Porter, verderers, are in mercy because they did not present their rolls
the first day.
Richard of Grafham, who was a canon of Huntingdon, con-
temptously withdrew from his house, and came through the country
as a wanderer ; he was suspected. The foresters found him in the
house of William of Grafham ; and a bow with five little arrows was
found there. And they took the said Richard and the bow and the
arrows and imprisoned the same Richard. And he came before the
justices. And it was testified by the foresters and verderers and by
four townships that he was not an evil doer in the forest nor in any
respect guilty ; therefore he is quit. And the said William in whose
house he was found disavowed the bow and the arrows ; nor could he
say whose they were ; and therefore he is in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that a certain
Michael of Debenham, the mainpast of John of Debenham, killed
a buck in the field of Yaxley with a certain pick axe. And this
Michael was taken by Hugh of Goldingham the steward of the forest
12
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
iudicium.
misericor-
dia xx s
exijjatur.
]x maroe
dimidia.
misericor-
die.
nneori-
cordia.
c s.
dimidia
marca.
et liberatus Henrico de Coleuil', 1 tunc vicecomiti Huntind', qni ipsum
posuit in prisonam de Huntind'. Et ipse euasit a dicta prisona ;
ideo ad iudicium de euasione super dictum Henricum qui mortuus est.
Et quia Iohannes de Depenha' (xx s) dictum Michaelem receptauit
post istud factum, et modo non habuit ipsum coram iusticiariis, ideo
in misericordia. Et Michaelis modo non venit, ideo exigatur etc. Et
Ricardus de Stilton' vidit ubi predictus Michaelis occidit predictum
damum, et non leuauifc hutesium. Modo non venit et fuit attachiatus
per Oliuerum de Vpton'. Et quia dictus Ricardus essoniatus fuit primo
de morte, et testatum fuit quod mortuus est ; ideo plegii sui inde
quieti. Et quia villate de IakeP (vj marce), Folkesworth' (j marca),
Stilton' (j marca), Morburn' (xx s) non venerunt coram iusticiario
[ad] inquisicionem faciendum ; ideo in misericordia.
Presentation est per forestarios quod Walterus Scbarp', venator
magistri Rogeri de Rauelingha', inuentus fuit in foresta cum arcu et
sagittis. Et testatum est per viridarios quod dictus Walterus non
venit illuc occasione malefaciendi in foresta. Et idem Walterus
venit modo et non potuit dedicere quin portaret arcum et sagittas
contra assisam foreste ; ideo in misericordia per pleuinam dicti
magistri Rogeri de Rauelinha'. Postea perdonatur.
2 Presentation est per forestarios et viridarios quod conuictum est
per inquisicionem villarum Alkesinbir', Weston', Magna Stiuecl' et
Parua quod quidam Geruasius homo Iohannis de Crachale visus fuit
noctanter in foresta occasione malefaciendi cum malefactoribus ignotis
cum leporariis arcubus et sagittis. Et postea fuit inuentus idem
Geruasius ducens hernasium domini sui Iohannis 3 de Crachal' infra
curiam grangiarum prioratus Huntind', et ibidem captus per forestarios
et in prisona Huntind' positus. Et super hoc venerunt Walterus
vicarius ecclesie sancte Marie Hunt' et alii capellani eiusdem ville,
quorum nomina ignorantur et Willelmus de Leycestr' 4 (xx s) seruiens
episcopi Line,' et dictum Geruasium de prisona ceperunt tanquam
clericum, et secum duxerunt. Et idem Geruasius modo non venit et
ideo preceptum est magistro Rogero de Raueling' archidiacono Hunt'
qui presens est quod habeat dictum Walterum vicarium et alios coram
iusticiariis die Dominica etc. Ad diem venit dictus magister Rogerus
et duxit Walterum vicarium (c s) qui dicit quod cum dictus Geruasius
(dimidia marca) captus esset et inprisonatus ut predictum est, venit
1 Hugh de Colleville was sheriff of the
counties of Huntingdon and Cambridge
from 11 May 1249 till 6 October 1251. See
List of Sheriffs. 2 See p. 77.
3 In the year 1260 John of Crakeball
was acting as king's treasurer. See Close
Koll 79, memb. 19 dorso. See p. 77.
4 The words ' prope Graham in comitatu
Lincoln' in Yngoldely ' are here inter-
im eated in the roll.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 12
and delivered to Henry de Colleville, then the sheriff of Huntingdon,
who put him in the prison of Huntingdon. And he escaped from the
said prison ; therefore to judgment for the escape with the said Henry,
who is dead. And because John of Debenham harboured the said
Michael after that deed, and now has him not before the justices,
therefore he is in mercy. And Michael does not come now, therefore
let him be exacted etc. And Richard of Stilton saw where the afore-
said Michael killed the aforesaid buck, and did not raise the hue.
Now he does not come ; and he was attached by Oliver of Upton.
And because the said Richard was essoined of death on the first day,
and it was witnessed that he is dead, therefore his pledges are quit
thereof. And because the townships of Yaxley, Folksworth, Stilton
and Morborne did not come before the justice to make inquisition,
therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters that Walter Sharp the hunter of
master Roger of Raveningham was found in the forest with a bow and
arrows. And it is witnessed by the verderers that the said Walter did
not come there for the purpose of evil doing in the forest. And the
same Walter now came, and could not deny that he carried a bow and
arrows against the assise of the forest ; therefore he is in mercy by
the pledge of the said master Roger of Raveningham. Afterwards he
is pardoned.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that it is proved by
an inquisition of the towns of Alconbury, Weston, Great Stukeley and
Little Stukeley that a certain Gervais a man of John of Crakehall was
seen at night in the forest for the purpose of evil doing with unknown
evil doers, with greyhounds, bows and arrows. And afterwards the
same Gervais was found carrying the harness of his lord, John of
Crakehall, within the court of the granges of the priory of Huntingdon,
and was there taken by the foresters and put in the prison of Hunting-
don. And upon this came Walter, the vicar of the church of St.
Mary of Huntingdon, and other chaplains of the same town, whose
names are not known, and William of Leicester, a servant of the
bishop of Lincoln. And they took the said Gervais from prison as a
clerk, and led him away with them. And now the same Gervais does
not come ; and therefore master Roger of Raveningham, archdeacon
of Huntingdon, who is present, is ordered to have the said Walter the
vicar and the others before the justices on Sunday etc. At that day
came the said master Roger, and brought Walter the vicar, who says
that when the said Gervais was taken and imprisoned as aforesaid, he
13
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
W. et G.
liberati
niagistro
Rogero
Archidia-
cono.
misen -
cordia.
x marce.
coram rege.
cum sociis suis capellanis et fecit ammonicionem quod ipsum G. a
prisona deliberassent et sancte ecclesie restituissent, eo quod clericus
fuit. Et forestarii timentes excomunicacionem ipsum permiserunt
abire, et nichil aliud fecerunt. Et dictum est dicto Waltero quod
predictum G. contra pacem et vi a prisona extraxit et abduxit. Re-
quisitus qualiter se velit aquietare dicit quod noh uult in ista curia
respondere. Ideo requisitum est a forestariis et viridariis vtrum
dictus Walterus et alii ipsum G. a prisona abduxerunt uel forestarii
sentenciam timentes ipsum voluntarie abire permiserunt. Qui dicunt
quod Willelmus de Leyc' et Walterus et alii venerunt ad forestarios
cum libris et candelis volentes ipsos excomunicare nisi predictum G.
a prisona deliberassent, qui dixerunt quod non habuerunt potestatem
ipsum deliberare ; et tunc accesserunt ad prisonam et ipsum G.
extraxerunt et abduxerunt. Et magister Roger us venit et petit dictum
Walterum tanquam capellanum. Et liberatus fuit ei convictus de
predicto facto. Et postea venit dictus G. et convictum est per
forestarios et viridarios quod est malefactor de venacione. Et pre-
dictus magister Rogerus petit ipsum tanquam clericum et liberatur ei
tanquam malefactor aperte et de hoc convictus. Et quia Iohannes de
Crachal' (x marce) receptauit ilium Geruasium post illud factum et
adhuc stat cum eodem, ideo in misericordia.
1 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod Ricardus cocus
domini Ricardi comitis Gloc', Willelmus marescallus et Walterus
clericus de camera eiusdem comitis in eundo de Huntind' uersus
miseri-
cordia.
Stanford' ad parandum hospicium domini sui, die Veneris 2 proxima
ante festum sancti Andree, quando dictus comes iuit uersus Ebor',
ceperunt vnam damam cum leporariis suis. Quod factum forestarii
domino comiti statim intimauerunt, qui factum illud bene aduocauit.
Et ideo coram rege.
3 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod die 4 Sabbati
proxima ante annunciacionem beate Marie anno etc. tricesimo septimo
infra noctem capti fuerunt duo leporarii per forestam currentes ad
bestias. Inquisicio facta fuit per villatas de Magna Stiuecl' (xx s),
Kypton' Abbatis (xx s), Herford' (j marca) et Rypton' Eegis (j marca)
de dictis leporariis cuius essent et vnde venissent. Et nichil in-
quiri potuit. Et quia dicte villate non venerunt plenarie ad
inquisicionem ; ideo in misericordia. Et Iohannes 5 Mansel' tunc
1 See p. 78.
8 See p. 78.
24 November 1251.
* John Mansel was appointed bailiff of
the forests between Stamford bridge and
Oxford bridge in succession to Geoffrey of
Langley by letters patent dated 24 October
1252. See Patent Roll 61, memb. 1.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 13
came with his fellow chaplains and admonished them that they should
deliver the same Gervais from prison, and restore him to holy Church
on the ground that he was a clerk. And the foresters, fearing excom-
munication, permitted him to depart and did nothing else. And the
said Walter was told that he took out of prison and carried away the
aforesaid Gervais against the peace and by force. And, being asked
how he wished to acquit himself, he says that he will not answer in
this court ; therefore the foresters and verderers are asked whether the
said Walter and the others carried away the same Gervais from prison
or whether the foresters, fearing an ecclesiastical sentence, of their
own will permitted him to depart. They say, that William of Leicester
and Walter and the others came to the foresters with books and
candles meaning to excommunicate them if they did not deliver the
aforesaid Gervais from prison, and they said that they had not power
to deliver him. And then William and the others went to the
prison and dragged out and carried away the same Gervais. And
master Eoger comes and demands the said Walter as his chaplain,
and he was delivered to him convicted of the aforesaid deed. And
afterwards comes the said Gervais ; and it is proved by the foresters
and verderers that he is an evil doer to the venison. And the afore-
said master Eoger demands him as a clerk ; and he is delivered to
him as a manifest evil doer, and one convicted of this. And because
John of Crakehall harboured this Gervais after that deed, and he still
stands by him, therefore he is in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that Eichard the
cook of Sir Eichard, earl of Gloucester, William the marshall, and
Walter the clerk of the chamber of the same earl, on their way from
Huntingdon to Stamford to make ready the house of their lord, on
the Friday 2 next before the feast of St. Andrew, when the said
earl was going towards York, took a doe with their greyhounds. And
the foresters forthwith made known this deed to the earl, who vouched
it well. And therefore before the king.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that the Saturday 4
next before the Annunciation of the blessed Mary in the thirty-seventh
year during the night, two greyhounds which were running through
the forest after beasts were taken. Inquisition was made by the
townships of Great Stukeley, Abbots Eipton, Hartford and King's
liipton concerning the said greyhounds, whose they were, and whence
they came ; and nothing could be ascertained. And because the
said townships did not come fully to make inquisition, therefore they
14
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
responsurus
est.
miseri-
cordia.
miseri-
cordia.
mandatum
est.
summus senescallus foreste habuit dictos leporarios de quibus est
responsurus.
1 Presentatum est per forestarios [et] viridarios quod vnus capellanus
et septem clerici inuenti fuerunt cum arcubus et sagittis in regali via
infra forestam. Capti fuerunt per forestarios per suspicionem, quos
Hugo de Goldinha' senescallus 2 foreste in prisona retinuit. Et postea
illos liberauit Symoni 3 de Hogton' tunc vicecomiti Huntind' qui ipsos
inprisonauit in prisona Cantebr'. Et postea coram magistro Symone 4
de Wauton' et sociis suis iusticiariis itinerantibus apud Huntind'
deliberati fuerunt Koberto 5 tunc Line' episcopo tanquam clerici. Et
quia dictus Symon tunc vicecomes non intimauit dictis iusticiariis
quod capti essent in foresta per forestarios pro malefacto et trans-
gressione, ideo in misericordia. Et quia Symon de Copmanford',
viridarius, cui arcus et sagitte traditi fuerunt, quod illos haberet coram
iusticiariis, et modo non habuit, ideo in misericordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod die 6 sancti
Johannis Baptiste post prandium inuentus fuit quidam leporarius
currens post vnam herdiam bestiarum, quern leporarium Henricus de
Hecmundecote tunc forestarius pedes cepit. Et statim quidam garcio
sequutus fuit dictum leporarium, quern garcionem similiter cepit cum
vno cornu et septem sagittis. Et ipsum et leporarium duxit ad
hospicium Willelmi de Kading', dommi sui forestarii equitis ; qui
garcionem et leporarium pro eo quod fuerunt de domo et familia
magistri Symonis de Wauton', tunc existentis iusticiarii itinerantis
apud Hund', duxit ad hospicium dicti magistri Symonis, et ipsos ei
liberauit. Ideo mandatum 7 est vicecomiti Buk' quod venire faciat
Galfridum 8 de Childewyc', tunc senescallum foreste, sub quo dictus
Willelmus de Bading' fuit, coram iusticiariis 9 etc. die Veneris 10 proxima
post festum sancti Barnabe apostoli. Ad diem non venit, ideo man-
datum est iterum.
Galfridus filius Alani de Sybetorp' suspectus de malefacto in
foresta cum arcu et sagittis venit ; et requisitus qualiter se velit
1 See p. 79.
2 See p. 11, note 7.
8 Simon of Houghton was sheriff of
Huntingdon and Cambridge from 6 October
1251 to 17 October 1253. See List of
Sheriffs.
* Simon of Walton was itinerating with
other justices at Huntingdon from 25 May
to 23 June 1253. See Feet of Fines, Case
92, File 10.
5 This was the illustrious Robert Grosse-
tete, bishop of Lincoln.
6 24 June 3253.
7 In these rolls ' mandatum ' means an
order sent to a person not present ; ' precep-
tum,' an order given to a person who is
present. The distinction is accurately ob-
served.
8 There is no enrolment in the Patent
Eolls of the appointment of Geoffrey of
Childwick as steward of the bailiwick be-
tween Oxford and Stamford bridges. It is
probable that, like Hugh of Goldingham,
he was only a deputy steward.
9 MS. ' istic.'
10 18 June 1255.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 14
are in mercy. And John Mansel, then chief steward of the forest,
had the said greyhounds ; and he is to answer for them.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that a chaplain and
seven clerks were found with bows and arrows in the king's road
within the forest. They were taken by the foresters on suspicion.
And Hugh of Goldingham, steward of the forest, retained them in
prison ; and afterwards he delivered them to Simon of Houghton,
then sheriff of Huntingdon, who imprisoned them in the prison of
Cambridge. And afterwards they were delivered before master Simon
of Walton and his fellows justices in eyre at Huntingdon to Eobert
then the bishop of Lincoln as clerks. And because the said Simon,
then the sheriff, did not send word to the said justices that they were
taken in the forest by the foresters for an evil deed and for trespass,
therefore he is in mercy. And because Simon of Coppingford, the
verderer, to whom the bows and arrows were delivered, that he might
have them before the justices, now had them not, therefore he is in
mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that on the day 6 of
St. John the Baptist after dinner a certain gieyhound was found
running after a herd of beasts. And Henry of Heathencote, then a
walking forester, took the greyhound ; and immediately afterwards a
certain boy followed the said greyhound. And he took in like manner
the boy, with a horn and seven arrows. And he brought him and
the greyhound to the house of his lord William of Reading, the riding
forester, who brought the boy and the greyhound, on the ground that
they were of the house and establishment of master Simon of Walton,
then a justice in eyre at- Huntingdon, to the house of the said
master Simon, and delivered them to him. Therefore an order is
sent to the sheriff of Buckingham that he cause Geoffrey of Childwick,
then the steward of the forest, under whom the said William of
Reading was, to be before the justices etc. on the Friday 10 next after
the feast of St. Barnabas the Apostle. On this day he does not come ;
therefore an order is sent a second time.
Geoffrey the son of Alan of Sibthorpe, who was suspected of an
evil deed in the forest with a bow and arrow, comes, and, being asked
15 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
aquietare de ilia suspicione, dicit quod per forestarios viridarios et
quatuor villatas propinquiores. Qui dicunt super sacramentum suum
quod non est culpabilis de aliquo malefacto in foresta. Et quia idem
Galfridus non venit primo die, et fuit attachiatus per Symonem Man
de Sybetorp', Willelmum Man fratrem eius de eadem, Iohannem
forestarium de eadem, Willelmum de Well' de eadem, Kicardum
Gamelyn de eadem et Walterum Buc de Elincton', ideo omnes in
mis ? ri - l misericordia.
cordie.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod die 2 Martis
proxima post clausam Pasche anno tricesimo nono circa mediam
noctem tres malefactores ignoti venerunt apud Sappell' cum arcubus
et sagittis et duobus leporariis quos permiserunt curere ad bestias.
Et forestarii ceperunt dictos leporarios et miserunt domino regi.
Inquisicio facta qui essent ipsi malefactores per villatas de Eypton'
Regis (alibi) et Bjpton' Abbatis (alibi), Her ford' (alibi), Parua Stiuecle
i marca. (j marca), qui nichil inde potuerunt inquirere. Et quia non venerunt
niireri- plenarie ad inquirendum, ideo in misericordia. Et quia Magna
Stiuecle (alibi) non venit coram iusticiario ad inquisicionem inde
miseri- faciendam, ideo in misericordia.
cordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios quod Willelmus de Boleuil' habet
leporarios infra metas foreste sine licencia. Qui venit et dicit quod
nullos habet nee habuit et de hoc ponit se super viridarios et quatuor
villatas, scilicet, Pacston', Toleslund', Offord' et-Gomecestr', qui dicunt
quod dictus Willelmus nullos habet nee habuit leporarios ; et ideo
quietus. inde quietus.
Presentatum fuit per regardatores coram Ernaldo 3 de Bosco, tunc
iusticiario foreste, quod Willelmus Cardon' habuit leporarios infra
metas foreste sine licencia. Qui venit et defendit et dicit quod nullos
habet nee habuit ; et de hoc ponit se super forestarios viridarios et
quatuor villatas propinquiores, qui dicunt quod dictus Willelmus est
residens in comitatu Norhamt' infra libertatem, 4 et ibi habet leporarios
cum quibus Willelmus Brond' et Gilbertus de Yslep' homines dicti
Willelmi et Willelmus Cardon' films eius cuccurerunt in isto comitatu
infra forestam et lepores ceperunt. Et dictus Willelmus Cardon'
venit ; et Willelmus filius eius, Gilbertus de Yslep' et Willelmus Brond
1 This word is erased and followed by of a district in which a subject had the
1 quia homines abbatis de Rames'.' right of exercising certain royal privileges,
2 6 April 1255. seems to have occasionally denoted any
8 Arnold de Bois was appointed justice land not subject to the forest law. At this
of the forest south of the Trent by letters time there was more of ' foresta ' than
patent dated 16 February 125|. See Patent ' libertas ' in the county of Northampton.
Roll 62, memb. 16. See also p. 44.
The word 'libertas,' besides being used
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 15
how he wishes to acquit himself of that suspicion, says by the foresters,
verderers, and four neighbouring townships, who say upon their oath
that he is not guilty of any evil deed in the forest. And because the
said Geoffrey did not come the first day, and was attached by Simon
Man of Sibthorpe, William Man his brother of the same town, John
the forester of the same town, William of Wells of the same town,
Richard Gamelyn of the same town and Walter Buck of Ellington,
therefore they are all in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that on the Tuesday 2
next after the close of Easter in the thirty-ninth year about midnight,
three unknown evil doers came to Sapley with bows and arrows and
two greyhounds which they permitted to run after beasts. And the
foresters took the said greyhounds and sent them to the lord king.
An inquisition was made as to who were the malefactors by the town-
ships King's Eipton, Abbots Ripton, Hartford, Little Stukeley, who
could ascertain nothing thereof. And because they did not come
fully to make inquiries, therefore they are in mercy. And because
Great Stukeley did not come before the justice to make inquisition
thereof, therefore it is in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters that William de Bolleville has
greyhounds within the metes of the forest without licence. He comes^
and says that he has none, and had none ; and of this he puts him-
self upon the verderers and four townships, to wit Paxton, Toseland,
Offord and Godmanchester, who say that the said William neither
has nor had any greyhounds ; and therefore he is quit thereof.
It was presented by the regarders before Arnold de Bois, then
justice of the forest, that William Cardun had greyhounds within the
forest without licence. And he comes and denies it ; and says that
he has none and had none, and of this he puts himself upon the
foresters, verderers, and four neighbouring townships, who say that
the said William resides in the county of Northampton within the
liberty, and has there greyhounds, with which William Brond and
Gilbert of Islip, men of the said William, and William Cardun, his
son, coursed in this county within the forest, and took hares. And
the said William Cardun comes ; and William his son, Gilbert of Islip
16
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
misericordie
XX s.
non veniunt. Et ipse inuenit plegios haberidi eos coram iusticiariis
die Lime sequenti, scilicet Willelmum filium Eanulfi et Eadulfum de
Metny. Ad diem venerunt predicti Willelmus Cardon' et alii, et non
potuerunt dedicere quin currerent cum dictis leporariis infra metas
foreste ad lepores sine waranto. Et dictus Willelmus senior illos
habuit ; et hoc permisit sine waranto ; ideo omnes in misericordia.
Plegii misericordie, dictus Willelmus senior, Willelmus filius Eanulfi
de Catteworth'. Postea taxatur pro se et hominibus suis ad viginti
solidos.
preceptum
est.
baillium.
1 Adhue de venacione.
Presentatum est per forestarios quod Eicardus de Weston' seruiens
abbatis de Wautha' et Willelmus Turkil de Witleshege et Bartholo-
meus frater eius de eadem de homagio prioris de Ely, et alii quinque
homines ignoti de grangia dicti abbatis de Wautha' in W T estfen'
ceperunt quadraginta cheuerellos in marisco de Kingesdelf ' infra metas
foreste die 2 Iouis et die Veneris ante festum beati Thome apostoli
anno tricesimonono per preceptum fratris Geruasii de Alfricheseye de
abbacia de Wauth', qui eos receptauit. Et non venerunt. Et pre-
ceptum est vicecomiti quod faciat eos venire de die in diem. Ad diem
venit frater Geruasius et quidam Bartholomeus Turkil de Witleshege
et defendit capcionem dictorum cheuerellorum et omne malefactum
in foresta domini regis. Et inquiritur per forestarios et viridarios
rei ueritas qui dicunt quod Geruasius non est culpabilis de dicto
malefacto nee alio 3 in foresta, set re uera dicunt quod predicti 4
Eicardus et quidam Bartholomeus culpabiles sunt de capcione dic-
torum quadraginta etc. ; set vtrum sit iste Bartholomeus, qui presens
est, an alius Bartholomeus esset ad illud factum nesciunt ; ideo com-
mittitur senescallo prioris de Ely quod sit etc. Et Eicardus non
venit etc. Et preceptum fuit vicecomiti Bedef etc. ; ideo pre-
ceptum est iterum eidem vicecomiti quod habeat etc. apud Norhamt'
in octabis sancti Iohannis 5 etc. Iterum venit dictus Bartholomeus
coram iusticiariis, et propter breuitatem temporis non potuit rei
ueritas inquiri de facto suo inquirendo ; traditur per baillium etc.
quod sit apud Norhamt' in octabis sancti Iohannis. 5
Presentatum est per forestarios quod venator abbatis de Barnes'
1 Koll 6 in dorso.
2 17 December 1254.
8 This word is repeated in the MS.
4 This word is so extended in the MS'.
5 1 July 1255.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 16
and William Brond do not come. And William Cardun the elder finds
pledges of having them before the justices on the Monday following, to
wit William the son of Ealph and Ealph of Metny. On that day came
the aforesaid William Cardun and the others, and they could not
deny that they coursed with the said greyhounds for hares within the
metes of the forest without warrant. And the said William the elder
had them and permitted this without warrant ; therefore they are all
in mercy. Pledges of the amercement the said William the elder,
William the son of Ealph of Catworth. Afterwards the amerce-
ment is taxed for him and his men at twenty shillings.
As yet of the venison.
It is presented by the foresters that Eichard of Weston, a servant
of the abbot of Waltham, and William Turkil of Whittlesey and
Bartholomew his brother of the same town, of the homage of the
prior of Ely and five other unknown men of the grange of the said
abbot of Waltham in Westfen, took forty roes in the marsh of Kings
Delph, within the metes of the forest on the Thursday l and Friday
before the feast of St. Thomas the Apostle in the thirty-ninth year,
by order of brother Gervais of Arlesey, of the abbey of Waltham,
who harboured them. And they did not come. And the sheriff is
ordered to cause them to come from day to day. At the appointed
day comes brother Gervais and a certain Bartholomew Turkil of
Whittlesey, and denies the taking of the said roes and every evil deed in
the forest of the lord king. And the truth of the matter is inquired
by the foresters and verderers, who say that Gervais is not guilty with
respect to the said evil deed, nor to any other in the forest. But in
truth they say that the aforesaid Eichard and a certain Bartholomew
are guilty of the taking of the said forty etc. ; but whether it is this
] Bartholomew who is present or another Bartholomew who was at
that deed, they do not know ; therefore he is committed to the steward
of the prior of Ely that he be etc. And Eichard does not come etc.
And the sheriff of Bedford was ordered etc. therefore the same sheriff
is ordered a second time to have etc. at Northampton on the octave 5
of St. John the Baptist. The aforesaid Bartholomew came before the
justices a second time, and on account of shortness of time, the truth
could not be ascertained concerning the deed under inquiry. He is
delivered in bail etc. that he be at Northampton on the octave A of
St. John.
It is presented by the foresters that the hunter of the abbot of
cordia.
cordia.
17 SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
et sex canes ipsius abbatis curentes in foresta capti fuerunt per
Eobertum de Twywell' forestarium inHumberdale infra metas foreste.
Et ipsos liberauit Hugoni do Goldinham l senescallo foreste qui dictos
venatorem et canes nunc habet coram iusticiariis. Et super hoc
venit electus 2 Elyens' per atornatum et dicit quod dicti venator et
canes capti fuerunt in libera chacia dicti electi domini sui de
Humberdal'. Et petit quod inquiratur per viridarios et forestarios ;
qui dicunt quod dicti venator et canes capti fuerunt in foresta et
extra banleucam ; set dicunt quod diet us venator non venit ibidem
oeoasione malefaciendi in foresta ; immo venit de libertate domini
sui infra banleucam suam, et quidam canum suorum currebant
uersus mariscum et quidam uersus forestam ; et post canes illos iuit
ad eos reclamandos et non alia de causa; et hoc fecit inuito
abbate et nesciente. Ideo abbas inde quietus et dictus venator, scilicet,
misers Kicardus Trussehare in misericordia quia stulte intrauit forestam
cum arcu et sagittis. Et testatum est per forestarium quod septem
canes capti fuerunt tunc ibidem ; et inuenit plegios habendi illos
unseri- coram iusticiariis, et modo non habet ; ideo plegii in misericordia,
scilicet, Willelmus le Noreis et Willelmus de Framlingeham.
4 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod cum forestarii
fecissent vigiliam sub Sapple occasione bailliue sue custodiende
obuiauerunt octo hominibus malefactoribus cum leporariis ; qui, cum
forestarios percepissent ipsos, statim fugerunt. Set vnum de eis
ceperunt nomine Kadulfum de Fenton', qui missus fuit in prisonam
apud Hunt' ; et tunc fuit vicecomes Philippus 5 de Stanton'. Postea
convictum est per viridarios quod mutauit nomen suum et fecit se sic
appellari cum proprium nomen suum esset Hugo le Fekere et quod per
cordia. infortunium postea submersus fuit. Et quia receptatus fuit in villa
de Wardeboys (xx s) extra decennam, ideo in misericordia. Et
testatum est per eosdem quod fuit inprisonatus apud Hunt' et ab ipsa
euasit ; ideo ad iudicium de euasione super Philippum de Stanton'
tunc vicecomitem. Idem Hugo le Fekere, quando fuit captus
indictauit quosdam Osebertum le Marscall' et Geruasium cocum de
consorcio et malefacto de venacione domini regis. Et convictum est
1 See p. 11, note 7. this file :-- -' De abbate de Rames' pro
2 The bishop elect here mentioned was boscis suis vastatis de veteri et pro defalta
William of Kilkenny, to whose election the forestariorum triginta marce.'
king gave his assent on 25 December 1254. 4 See p. 75.
See Patent Roll 65, memb. 15. 5 Philip of Stanton was appointed sheriff
3 This word is cancelled and followed by of Cambridge and Huntingdon on 15 Fe-
the words ' quia in fin' abbatis de Rames'. bruary 124£, and continued in office until
The cancellation is perhaps explained by 19 April 1249, when John de Chalers suc-
the following entry on the second roll of ceeded him. See List of Sheriffs.
XX s
miseri
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 17
Ramsey and six dogs of the same abbot, which were running in the
forest, were taken by Robert of Twywell the forester in Humberdale,
within the metes of the forest. And he delivered them to Hugh of
Goldingham, the steward of the forest, who now has the said hunter
and dogs before the justices. And upon this comes the bishop-
elect of Ely by his attorney, and says that the said hunter and dogs
were taken in the free chace of Humberdale of him the said bishop-
elect. And he seeks that inquiry may be made by the verderers and
foresters, who say that the said hunter and dogs were taken in the
forest and outside the banlieu ; but they say that the said hunter
did not come there for the purpose of evil doing in the forest ; but he
came from the liberty of his lord within his banlieu ; and some of his
dogs were running towards the marsh and some towards the forest ;
and he went after those dogs to call them back, and for no other
reason ; and this he did against the will and without the knowledge
of the abbot. Therefore the abbot is quit thereof, and the said
hunter, to wit Richard Trussehare, is in mercy, because he con-
temptuously entered the forest with a bow and arrows. And it is
witnessed by the forester that the seven dogs were taken then and
there ; and he found pledges of having them before the justices,
and now he has them not ; therefore his pledges are in mercy, to
wit William le Noreis and William of Framlingham.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that when the
foresters had set watch over Sapley for the purpose of guarding
their bailiwick they met eight malefactors with greyhounds, who
when they saw the foresters forthwith fled. But the foresters took
one of them, by name Ralph of Fenton, who was sent to prison at
Huntingdon; and Philip of Stanton was then sheriff. Afterwards it
is proved by the verderers that he changed his name and caused
himself to be so called, when his real name was Hugh le Fekere,
and that he was afterwards drowned by accident. And because he
was harboured in the town of Warboys outside a tithing, therefore it
is in mercy. And it is witnessed by the same persons that he was im-
prisoned at Huntingdon and escaped therefrom ; therefore to judgment
for the escape upon Philip of Stanton who was then the sheriff.
The same Hugh le Fekere 'when he was taken, indicted certain
persons, Osbert the marshall and Gervais the cook, of consorting with
him and of an evil deed to the king's venison. And it is proved by
D 2
18
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
exigatur
et vtlagetur.
dimidia
mai ca.
preceptutn
est.
miseri-
cordia..
miseri-
cord ie.
ij inarci*.
per viridarios quod dicti Osebertus et Geruasius fuerunt aperti male-
factores de venacione. Et Geruasius venit et liberatus fuit archi-
diacono ut patet supra inter placita. 1 Et Osebertus modo non venit
nee aliquis uult eum manucapere uel pro eo respondere, ideo exigatur
et vtlagetur.
Preceptum fuit per Robertum 2 Passel' et socios suos iusticiarios
itinerantes vltimo hie ad placita foreste quod domus Vincencii de
Stanleg' (dimidia marca) in Litleheye leuate ad nocunientum foreste
prosternerentur 3 ; quod fuit inpeditum per quosdam Colinum de
Merton' et Ricardum de Toleslond' balliuos Philippi de Stanton' tunc
vicecomitis Hunt'. Et viridarii testantur quod cum ipsi et forestarii
venissent ad dictas 4 domos prosternendas sicut 5 fuit preceptum dicti
Colinus et Ricardus de Tolelind' inhibuerunt eis quod non pro-
sternerent illas 6 domos. Et cum forestarii manus dictis domibus
inposuissent ad illas discooperiendas et prosternendas dicti Colinus
(dimidia marca) et Ricardus (dimidia marca) ipsos vi repulserunt
dicentes quod nullo modo prosternere permitterent quia preceptum
Philippi de Stanton' tunc vicecomitis Hunt' inde habuerunt. Et
viridarii et forestarii ad ipsum vicecomitem accesserunt eidem inti-
mantes quale preceptum habuerunt de dictis domis prosternendis, et
quomodo per balliuos suos predictos per preceptum suum fuerunt
impediti. Et dictus vicecomes dixit quod nullum preceptum inde
habuerunt ab eo, set factum eorum penitus deaduocauit ; vnde sic
remanet preceptum iusticiariorum et comodum domini regis de pre-
dicts domibus prosternendis inperfectum. Et ideo preceptum est
vicecomiti quod faciat venire de die in diem dictos Colinum et
Ricardum. Postea venit Ricardus et non potuit dedicere quin
inpediret dictos forestarios et viridarios ut predictum est, et hoc sine
waranto ; ideo in misericordia.
Quidam damus captus fuit in campo de Weninton' die 7 Mercurii
proxima post festum sancti Gregorii anno tricesimo ut dicebatur.
Inquisicio facta fuit per villatas Valton' (j marca), Rauel' Parua
(dimidia marca), Ripton' Abbatis (alibi) et Weninton' (dimidia marca),
qui dicunt quod nichil sciunt. Et quia villate non venerunt plenarie
etc., ideo in misericordia.
Quedam dama inuenta fuit mortua morina in campo de Alcumbir'.
Inquisicio fuit. Et quia villate de Alcumbir' (xx s), Parua Stiuekele
1 See p. 13, supra.
2 The letters patent appointing Robert
and his fellows itinerant justices are not
enrolled ; but the amercements of their
eyre are enrolled in the Pipe Rolls of
29 Hen. III. 3 MS. ' prosternarentur.'
4 MS. 'dictos.'
d This word is repeated in the MS.
8 MS. ' alias.'
7 14 March 124|.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A J). 1255 18
the verderers that the said Osbert and Gervais were overt evil doers
to the venison. And Gervais came and was delivered to the arch-
deacon, as appears above among the pleas. And now Osbert does not
come, nor is anyone willing to be his mainperner or to answer for
him ; therefore let him be exacted and outlawed.
It was ordered by Eobert Passelewe and his fellow justices
last in eyre here for pleas of the forest that the houses of Vincent
of Stanley which had been raised to the nuisance of the forest
should be pulled down ; and the doing of this was hindered by certain
persons, Colin of Merton and Richard of Toseland, the bailiffs of
Philip of Stanton the sheriff of Huntingdon. And the verderers
witness that when they and the foresters came to pull down the said
houses, as they were ordered, the said Colin and Eichard of Toseland
prohibited them from pulling them down. And when the foresters
laid their hands on the said houses to unroof and pull them down,
the said Colin and Eichard forcibly drove them back saying that they
would not in any way allow them to pull them down, because they
had the precept to that effect of Philip of Stanton, who was then the
sheriff of Huntingdon. And the verderers and foresters went to
the same sheriff, and told him the nature of their precept concerning
the houses to be pulled down, and how they were hindered by his
bailiffs aforesaid by his precept. And the said sheriff said that they
had no order thereof from him, and disavowed their deed entirely ;
whereby the order of the justices and what was for the king's advan-
tage concerning the aforesaid houses to be pulled down remains
undone. And therefore the sheriff is ordered that he cause the said
Colin and Eichard to come from day to day. Afterwards Eichard
came ; and he could not deny that he impeded the said foresters and
verderers as is aforesaid, and this without warrant ; therefore he is in
mercy.
A certain buck was taken in the field of Wennington on the
Wednesday 7 next after the feast of St. Gregory in the thirtieth year,
as it was said. An inquisition was made by the townships of Walton,
Little Eaveley, Abbots Eipton and Wennington, who say that they
know nothing thereof. And because the townships did not come
fully etc. therefore they are in mercy.
A certain doe was found dead of murrain in the field of Alconbury.
There was an inquisition, and because the townships of Alconbury,
19
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
miseri-
cordie.
ij marce.
miseri-
cordie.
ij marce.
murdrum
in f ra fin'
abbatis de
xvj d.
exigatur et
vtlagetur.
(alibi), Wolfle (dimidia marca) et Etlynton' (j marca) non venerunt
plenarie etc. ideo in misericordia.
Quidam feto inventus fuit in campo de Elynton' mortuus.
Inquisicio facta per villatas Elinton' (alibi), Wlfley (alibi), Alcumbir'
(alibi) et Brampton' (ij marce) qui nichil inde sciunt. Et quia non
venerunt plenarie, ideo in misericordia.
Quidam homo extraneus occisus inuentus fuit in Sappel\ Eicardus
Lenueyse forestarius pedes primus inuentor non venit nee fuit
attachiatus, quia viridarii dicunt et testantur quod nullum fecerunt
attachiamentum de inuentore dicti mortui uel oecisi infra metas
foreste, scilicet, infra dominicum boscum domini regis, nee vnquam
aliquo tempore facere consueuerunt aliquod huiusmodi attachia-
mentum de inuentore nee de quatuor viscinis ; nee aliquam Englesch-
eriam 1 presentauerunt racione assise foreste. Et quia lex terre
non debet deleri ut de morte hominis occasione assise foreste pro-
cedendum est secundum formam placitorum corone. Nulla Englessch-
eria, ideo murdrum super hundredum de Hyrstingston'. Et quia
inquisicio fuit alias minus sufficienter facta, modo inquiratur per
viridarios et quatuor villatas propinquiores, scilicet, Her ford', Ripton'
Regis, Ripton' Abbatis et Magna Stiuecle, et eciam per totum
hundredum de Hyrstingston', qui dicunt super sacramentum suum
quod dictus Ricardus le Enueise et quidam Willelmus de Cornubia
sunt malefactores de morte ilia. Et Willelmus fuit extraneus et
ignotus et statim post mortem illam recessit, nee actenus rediit, ideo
nichil de vtlageria ipsius. Et inquiratur de ipso etc. Et Ricardus
exigatur et vtlagetur. Catalla eius sexdecim denarii vnde Iohannes 3
de Marynes vicecomes respondebit.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod homines
Hugonis persone de Yrecestr' venerunt in vigilia 4 Epiphanie anno
tricesimo cum quatuor leporariis in foresta de Wauberg' qui ouiaue-
runt hominibus Symonis Maufe, scilicet, Oliuero filio persone et
Willelmo de Esseby, qui omnes ceperunt vnum fetonem vnius anni.
Et forestarii super uenientes, scilicet, Galfridus de Mortuo Mari, Hugo
de Barleye, Symon de Grafha', Iohannes de Copmanford', Ricardus
Genitas et Ricardus le Enueyse superuenerunt et ipsos Oliuerum et
Willelmum et quendam Hugonem hominem dicti Hugonis persone
ceperunt. Et Hugo euasit de manibus dicti Ricardi le Enueise cui
fuit traditus ad custodiendum, ipso Ricardo volente et consenciente ;
1 See Publications of the Selden Society,
vol. 9, p. xliii. 2 See p. 17, note 3.
3 John of Marcham was appointed sheriff
of Cambridge and Huntingdon on 17 May
1255. See List of Sheriffs.
4 Friday, 5 January 124|.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.l). 1255 19
Little Stukeley, Woolley and Ellington did not come fully etc., there-
fore they are in mercy.
A certain fawn was found dead in the field of Ellington. An
inquisition was made by the townships of Ellington, Woolley, Alcon-
bury, and Brampton who know nothing thereof. And because they
did not come fully to make inquisition, therefore they are in mercy.
A certain stranger was found slain in Sapley. Eichard Lenveyse
the walking forester, who was the first finder, does not come, nor was
he attached, because the verderers say and witness that they made
no attachment of the finder of the said man who died or was slain
within the metes of the forest, to wit, within the king's demesne wood,
nor were they wont at any time to make any such attachment of the
finder nor of the four neighbours, nor did they present Englishry by
reason of the assize of the forest. And because the law of the land
concerning the death of a man ought not to be abated on account of
the assize of the forest, the procedure must be according to the form
of the pleas of the crown. No Englishry, therefore murder upon
the hundred of Hurstingstone. And because the inquisition was
before insufficiently made, let inquiry be made by the verderers and
four neighbouring townships, to wit, Hartford, King's Bipton, Abbots
Ripton and Great Stukeley, and also by the whole hundred of
Hurstingstone, who say upon their oath that the said Richard
Lenveyse and a certain William of Cornwall are guilty of that death.
And William was a stranger and unknown, and immediately after
that death he went away, and as yet has not returned, therefore
nothing of his outlawry ; and let inquiry be made concerning him.
And let Richard be exacted and outlawed. His chattels are six-
teen pence, whereof John of Mar eh am the sheriff will answer.
It was presented by the foresters and verderers that the men of
Hugh the parson of Irchester came on the vigil 4 of the Epiphany in
the thirtieth year with four greyhounds into the forest of Wey bridge ;
and they met the men of Simon Maufe, to wit Oliver the son of the
parson and William of Ashby, who all took a fawn of a year old.
And the foresters coming up, that is to say Geoffrey de Mortemer,
Hugh of Barley, Simon of Graf ham, John of Coppingford, Richard
Genitas, and Richard Lenveyse came up and took the same Oliver
and William and a certain Hugh the man of the said Hugh the
on. And Hugh escaped from the hands of the said Richard
Lenveyse, to whom he was delivered in custody, the same Richard
being willing and consenting; therefore to judgment with the said
20
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
indicium.
prison a.
ideo ad iudicium de dietis forestariis de euasione ; et Oliuerus et
Willelmus liberati fuerunt Philippo 1 de Stanton' tunc vicecomiti
Hunt' ; et postea per breue domini regis deliberati fuerunt. Et
Oliuerus obiit et fuit essoniatus primo die ; ideo nichil de plegiis suis.
Et Willelmus venit et detentus est in prisona. Et attachiatus fuit
per Oliuerum de Wolfle (raortuus) et Eogerum le Blund (xij d) de
miserieordie eadem, Petrum le Franceis (xij d) de eadem, Iacobum de Weston (xij d)
in eadem, Badulfum de Elington' (xij d) de eadem, Eeginaldum King
(xij d) de eadem, Thomam Attello (xij d) de eadem. Et quia non
presentauerunt eum primo die etc. ideo in misericordia. Et quia
Hugo persona de Yrecestr' receptauit homines suos qui euaserunt,
mandatum. mandatum est episcopo Line' quod faciat eum venire etc. apud
Norhamt' in octabis sancti Iohannis 2 etc. Et Kadulfus Kesun de
Brampton' (xij d), Philippus prepositus de Alcumbir' (iij s),
Willelmus Bissop (non est inuentus), Iobannes le Clerc' de Brampton
(xij d) et Willelmus Grey de Nidenworth' (xij d) fuerunt plegii predicti
Bicardi le Enveyse, et modo non habent ipsum, ideo in misericordia.
Item plegii eiusdem postea inuenti Nicolaus de Merton' (alibi),
Godefridus de Molesworth' (ij s), Badulfus de Brochton' (mortuus) et
Henricus de Ripton' Begis (ij s). Postea dictus Willelmus de Esseby
venit et finem fecit pro vna marca. 3 Et inuenit plegios * quod non
de cetero ' et de dicta marca videlicet Eogerum de W T olfle, Iohannem
prepositum de Alcumbir', Iohannem de Win", Iohannem Canu' de
eadem, Osbertum filium Eicardi le Clerc' de Weston', Matheum Wlfle,
Thomam Attello de eadem, Eogerum le Blund' de eadem, Eadulfum
de Bustelleys de eadem, Eeginaldum le King' de eadem, Iacobum 4 de
Weston', Petrum le Franceis. Postea venit apud Norhamt' predictus
Hugo persona de Irencestr' et finem fecit pro se et hominibus suis
per quinque marcas per pleuinam Iohannis Caperun senioris de
Siberton' et Willelmi Floribus de Irencestr'.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod Norman
Sampson, forestarius eques sub Galfrido de Childewich' tunc senescallo 5
foreste, cepit quendam hominem existentem cum persona de Cole-
worth' sub Wauberg' infra agistamentum domini regis anno tricesimo
octauo ; et dictum hominem apud Houton' ad domum Willelmi Dering'
hospitis sui super vnam herciam eum ponens magnas penas ei intulit,
ita quod dedit ei duodecim denarios ut a dietis penis relaxaretur, et
postea dedit ei quinque solidos quod posset sub eo quietus recedere.
Item presentatum est per eosdem de ipso eodem, scilicet, quod
misen
cordia,
[j marca.]
v marce.
Non sunt in
extractis ad
fscacca-
rium].
1 See p. 17, note 5.
MS.
" 1 July 1255.
Jacobus.'
3 An error for
5 See p. 14, note £
Per unara marcam.'
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 20
foresters concerning the escape. And Oliver and William were
delivered to Philip of Stanton, who was then sheriff of Huntingdon ;
and afterwards they were delivered by the king's writ. And Oliver
died, and he was essoined on the first day ; therefore nothing of his
pledges. And William comes and is detained in prison. And he
was attached by Oliver of Woolley, and Roger le Blund of the same
town, Peter le Franceis of the same town, James of Weston in the
same town, Ealph of Ellington of the same town, Reynold King of
the same town, Thomas Attello of the same town. And because they
did not present him the first day, therefore they are in mercy. And
because Hugh the parson of Irchester harboured his men who
escaped, an order is sent to the bishop of Lincoln that he cause him
to come at Northampton on the octave of St. John 2 etc. And Ralph
Resun of Brampton, Philip the reeve of Alconbury, William Bissop,
John the clerk of Brampton and William Grey of Needingworth were
the pledges of the aforesaid Richard Lenveyse, and now have him
not; therefore they are in mercy. And pledges of the same were
afterwards found, Nicholas of Merton, Godfrey of Molesworth, Ralph
of Broughton and Henry of King's Ripton. Afterwards the said
William of Ashby came and made fine by one mark. And he found
pledges ' quod non de cetero,' and of the said mark, to wit, Roger of
Woolley, John the reeve of Alconbury, John Canun of the same town,
Osbert the son of Richard the clerk of Weston, Mathew of Woolley,
Thomas Attello of the same town, Roger le Blund of the same town,
Ralph of Bustellevs of the same town, Reynold le King of the same
town, James of Weston and Peter le Franceis. Afterwards at North-
ampton came the aforesaid Hugh the parson of Irchester and made
fine by five marks for himself and his men by the pledge of John
Caperun the elder of Siberton and William of Floore of Irchester.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that Norman
Sampson, the riding forester under Geoffrey of Childwick then
steward of the forest, took a certain man at Weybridge who was with
the parson of Colworth within the time of the agistment of the lord
king in the thirty-eighth year ; and he took the said man to Houghton
to the house of William Dering his host, and he put him upon a
harrow, and pained him sorely, so that William gave to him twelve
pence that he might be released from the said pains, and afterwards
he gave to him five shillings that he might by his aid be able to with-
draw quit.
It is presented also by the same persons of the same person that
21
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOKEST EYRE ROLLS
mandatum
est.
i] marce ;
non sunt
quidam Norman garcio eiusdem simul cum ipso fuerunt malefactores
de venacione domini regis. Et quod idem Norman Sampson vendidit
tres quercus in Wauberg' ; et quod plures alias fecit transgressiones
dum fuit forestarius, ideo mandatum est vicecomiti Warr' etc. quod
habeat etc. apud Norhamt' in octabis sancti Iohannis Baptiste etc.
Et quod idem vicecomes etc. quare non habuit etc. apud Hunt' etc.
in octabis sancti Barnabe apostoli sicut etc. Postea venit Norman
Sampso' apud Norhamt' et fecit finem per duas marcas per pleuinam
Henrici de Ludbroc' et Eustachii de Watford', qui habent terras in
comitatu Norhamt'.
miseri-
cordie.
1 Adhuc de venacione.
2 Quidam feto inuentus fuit in bosco de Brampton' uulneratus
quadam sagitta. Inquisicio facta, qui nichil sciunt. Et quia villate
de Brampton' (alibi), Elington' (alibi), Grafha' (dimidia marca) et
Edelinton' 3 (dimidia marca) non venerunt plenarie ; ideo in
misericordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod quidam damus
et vna hanchia venacionis et leporarius inuenti fuerunt in domo
magistri Henrici tunc rectoris scolarie Huntidon', qui Henrieus et
Bobertus submagister suus pro suspiccione dicte venacionis capti
fuerunt et liberati Philippo 4 de Stanton' tunc vicecomiti Hunt' ; et de
deliberacione nichil ad presens. Et convictum est per viridarios quod
predictus Bobertus fuit apertus malefactor de venacione cum leporariis ;
et quod receptatus fuit in domo predicti Henrici qui fuit consenciena
malefactis suis de venacione. Et quia clerici sunt nee habent laicum
feodum per quod distringi possunt, et B. 5 bone memorie, tunc Line'
episcopus. . . . 6
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod Badulfus de
Holecot' clericus itinerans uersus Hunt' cum vno garcione, qui duxit
leporarios. Et euaserunt de manibus suis et prostrauerunt vnum
fetonem de etate vnius anni. Quod cum Ricardus Lenveyse forestarius
hoc percepisset cum esset prope, cepit dictum Badulfum et garcionem
1 Eoll 5. The pleas on this roll are
earlier in date than those on Eoll 6, which
are printed on pp. 11-21, but the order is
reversed, because the scribe wrote the head-
ing of the pleas on Eoll 6 instead of on
Eoll 5. 2 See p. 74.
3 The reading is clear, but probably Dill-
ington, which is the township mentioned in
the inquisition on p. 74, is intended.
* See p. 17, note 5.
5 According to Mathew Paris, Eobert
Grossetete died on 9 October 1253. See
Chronica Maiora, Eolls Series, vol. v. p.
407.
6 The sentence is unfinished in the
original.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 21
a certain Norman his page and he himself were evil-doers to the
venison of the lord king, and that Norman Sampson sold three oaks
in Weybridge, and committed many other trespasses while he was a
forester ; therefore an order is sent to the sheriff of Warwick etc. to
have etc. at Northampton etc. on the octave of St. John the Baptist
etc. And that the same sheriff etc. why he had him not etc. at
Huntingdon etc. on the octave of St. Barnabas the Apostle as etc.
Afterwards Norman Sampson came to Northampton and made fine
by two marks by the pledge of Henry of Ludbrook and Eustace of
Watford, who have lands in the county of Northampton.
As yet of the venison.
A certain fawn was found in the wood of Brampton wounded with
a certain arrow. An inquisition was made, and the townships know
nothing. And because the townships of Brampton, Ellington,
Grafham and Dillington did not come fully, therefore they are in
mercy.
It was presented by the foresters and verderers that a certain
buck and one haunch of venison and a greyhound were found in the
house of master Henry then the rector of the school of Huntingdon.
And this Henry and Bobert his undermaster for suspicion of the said
venison were taken and delivered to Philip of Stanton then the sheriff
of Huntingdon ; and of his delivery nothing at present. And it is
proved by the verderers that the aforesaid Bobert was an overt evil
doer to the venison with greyhounds ; and that he was harboured in
the house of the aforesaid Henry, who was privy to his evil deeds to
the venison, and because they are clerks and have not a lay fee by
which they can be distrained, and B. of good memory then bishop of
Lincoln. . . .
It was presented by the foresters and verderers that Balph of
Holcot a clerk was journeying towards Huntingdon with a page who led
greyhounds. And they escaped from his hands and brought down a
fawn of a year old. And when Bichard Lenveyse the forester, being
near, saw this, he took the said Balph and his page and the greyhounds ;
22
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
preceptum.
misen-
cordie.
suum et leporarios qui missi fuerunt domino l E. Passel'. 2 Et Eadulfus
liberatus fuit Philippo 3 de Stanton' tunc vicecomiti Hunt' qui non
venit nee de deliberacione sua uel aliorum inprisonatorum tempore
suo aliquid respondet ; ideo preceptum est vicecomiti Hunt' quod
capiat etc. quod sit coram iusticiariis de die in diem etc. Et quia
viridarii, scilicet, Symon de Copmanford', Iohannes Ballard' de sancto
Yuone, Eobertus Wyne, et Eicardus Port' et Galfridus 4 de Mortuo
Mari tunc senescallus foreste nullam fecerunt mencionem in rotulis
suis de nomine dicti garcionis, nee de deliberacione uel euasione sua
vnde negocium domini regis quantum ad dictum garcionem penitus
remanet inperfectum ; ideo in misericordia. Et de Eadulfo de
Holecot' ponitur in respectum usque ad placita apud Norhamt' propter
preceptum. absenciam dicti Philippi de Stanton' vicecomitis de quo preceptum
est ut supra. Et quia viridarii non debent nee possunt inrotulare in
rotulis suis nisi presentacionern forestariorum ; et forestarii nichil
presentauerunt de predictis ; ideo inde quieti. Et ad iudicium de
euasione super Galfridum de Mortuo Mari eo quod habet cartam
domini regis etc.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod Eogerus le
Despens', Willelmus de Line' et Eogerus venator venerabilis patris
E. quondam Line' episcopi die 5 Sabbati proxima post Ascensionem
Domini anno tricesimo primo ceperunt vnum damum in bosco de
Dudington'. Et non fuerunt attachiati quia euaserunt antequam
capi possent ; ideo exigantur et vtlagentur.
Presentatum est quod quidam damus captus fuit in Limining' de
qua capcione inquisicio fuit facta per villatas de Graf ha' (alibi), Pyrie
(dimidia marca), Elington' (alibi) et Bichamsted' (dimidia marca)
qui dicunt quod homines equites et pedites currebant fugando quandam
bestiam in Limining' ; set nesciebant qui fuerunt. Et quia predicts
villate non venerunt plenarie ad inquirendum, ideo in misericordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod quidam Henricus
filius Petri le Noble de Bokeden' et quidam alius ignotus sequuti
exig.intur et
vtlageutur.
] marca.
miserl
cordie.
1 It must be remembered that the Latin
word ' dominus,' like the English word
1 Sir,' did not imply knighthood. Eobert
Passelewe was not a knight, but a cleric
and an archdeacon.
2 Robert Passelewe acted as justice of
the forest south of the Trent about this
time, but his appointment is apparently
not recorded on the Patent Eolls. He was
succeeded in the office by Geoffrey of
Langley, who was appointed on 4 March
12fg. (See Patent Roll 50, memb. 7.)
Robert Passelewe was also appointed warden
of the forests between Stamford bridge and
Oxford bridge in succession to Thomas le
Mansel by letters patent dated 15 February
124|. (See Patent Roll 55, memb. 6.)
3 See p. 17, note 5.
4 There is no enrolment of the appoint-
ment of Geoffrey de Mortemer as steward
of the forest, and it is probable that, like
Hugh of Goldingham, he was only deputy
steward. See p. 11, note 7.
* 11 May 1217.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 22
which were sent to Sir Eobert Passelewe. And Ealph was delivered
to Philip of Stanton then sheriff of Huntingdon, who does not come
nor makes answer of his delivery or of the delivery of other persons
imprisoned in his time. Therefore the sheriff of Huntingdon is
ordered to take etc. that he be before the justices from day to day
etc. And because the verderers, to wit Simon of Coppingford, John
Ballard of St. Ives, Robert Wynne and Richard Porter, and Geoffrey
de Mortemer then the steward of the forest, made no mention in their
rolls of the name of the said page, nor of his delivery, nor of his
escape, and the business of the king so far as it relates to the said
boy is entirely undone, therefore they are in mercy. And of Ralph
of Holcot matters are respited until the pleas at Northampton on
account of the absence of the said Philip of Stanton the sheriff about
whom it was ordered as above. And because the verderers ought not
and are not able to enrol anything in their rolls except a present-
ment of the foresters, and the foresters presented nothing of the
matters aforesaid, they are therefore quit thereof. And to judgment
with Geoffrey de Mortemer as to the escape, on the ground that he
has the king's charter.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that Roger le
Despenser, William of Lincoln, and Roger the hunter of the venerable
father R. formerly bishop of Lincoln on the Saturday 5 next after Ascen-
sion day in the thirty-first year took a buck in the wood of Did-
dington. And they were not attached because they escaped before
they could be taken ; therefore let them be exacted and outlawed.
It is presented that a certain buck was taken in Lymage ; and an
inquisition was made about it by the townships of Grafham, Perry,
Ellington and Beechampstead which say that men on horseback
and on foot were hunting a certain beast in Lymage ; but they did
not know who they were. And because the four townships did not
come fully to the inquisition, therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that a certain Henry
the son of Peter le Noble of Buckden and a certain other unknown
23
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
preceptum
est.
vj marce
tniseri-
cordie.
alibi.
miseri-
cordie.
alibi.
miseri-
cordie.
alibi.
miseri-
cordie.
fuerunt quendam brokettum fugando eum ultra aquam cum duobus
leporariis usque villam Offord' Cluny ; et ibidem ipsum ceperunt et
ipsum secum asportauerunt integrum retro vltra aquam. Et dictus
Henricus obiit. Et convictum est per viridarios quod [dictus ignotus
vocabatur] ] Eogerus Venator, qui habet terram apud Bukeden, fuit cum
eo. Et preceptum est vicecomiti quod distringat ipsum per terras
etc. quod babeat eum de die in diem etc. Et quia villate Offord'
Cluny (xx s), Offord' Denays (xx s), Gummecestr' (xl s), et Brampton'
(alibi) non venerunt plenarie ; ideo in misericordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod die 2 Martis
proxima ante Purificacionem beate Marie anno tricesimo quod 3 due
dame capte fuerunt in Sappel'. Inquisicio facta fuit per quatuor
villatas Kypton' Abbatis, Magnam Stiuecle, Hereford' et Eypton' Begis,
que nichil inde potuerunt inquirere. Et quia villate non venerunt
etc., ideo in misericordia.
Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod quidam damus
inuentus fuit uulneratus in bosco de Brampton'. Et inquisicio facta
fuit per quatuor villatas Brampton', Grafha', Dylincton' 4 et Elyngton'
que nichil inde sciunt. Et quia villate non venerunt etc. ; ideo in
misericordia.
5 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod quedam bestia
capta fuit sub Wauberg' cuius intestina inuenta fuerunt in parco sub
Wauberg' per forestarios pedites, scilicet, Bobertum de Skipton' et
Ricardum le Waleys. Inquisicio facta fuit per villatas propinquiores
Alcumbir', Wolfle, Elinton' et Brampton' qui nichil aliud inde sciunt.
Et quia villate non venerunt etc. ; ideo in misericordia.
6 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod Galfridus films
Stephani Swyft inuentus fuit in haya domini regis de Waberg' die 7
Lune proxima ante festum sancti Iohannis Baptiste anno tricesimo
secundo cum arcu et quinque sagittis barbatis. Et captus per
forestarios, scilicet, per Iohannem Bere et Iohannem Prentuit, qui
Galfridus statim cognouit se cepisse duos fetones et illos tradidisse
Bogero filio Philippi de Alcumbir'. Et quia prisona de Hunt' fuit
fracta ductus fuit apud Herford' et traditus per ballium villate de
1 The words in brackets are interlineated
in the MS.
2 30 January 124|.
3 This word is perhaps written in error
for ' secundo,' in which case the date of
the trespass would be 28 January 124|.
4 The word ' alibi ' in the margin means
that the amercement is entered elsewhere
in the roll. Thus, where a township is re-
corded to have been in mercy more than
once, an amercement is written above its
name in the enrolment of the first offence,
and the word ' alibi ' is similarly written in
the enrolment of subsequent offences. Now,
as Dillington has not occurred before, it is
probable that the ' alibi ' here refers to the
word ' Edelinton ' on the preceding page.
3 See p. 74.
6 See p. 75.
7 22 June 1248.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A.D. 1255 23
person followed a certain brocket, and hunted it across the water
with two greyhounds as far as the town of Offord Cluney ; and there
they took it and carried the whole of it back again across the water.
And the said Henry died. And it is proved by the verderers that
the said unknown person who was with him was called Eobert the
hunter ; and he has land at Buckden. And the sheriff is ordered to
distrain him by his lands, etc. that he may have him from day to
day, etc. And because the townships of Offord Cluney, Offord
Darcy, Godmanchester and Brampton did not come fully to the
inquisition, therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that on the Tuesday 2
next before the Purification of the Blessed Mary in the thirtieth
year two does were taken in Sapley. An inquisition was made by
four townships of Abbots Bipton, Great Stukeley, Hartford and King's
Bipton, who could ascertain nothing thereof. And because the town-
ships did not come etc. ; therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that a certain buck
was found wounded in the wood of Brampton ; and an inquisition
was made by the four townships Brampton, Graf ham, Dillington and
Ellington, who know nothing thereof; and because the townships did
not come etc. ; therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that a certain beast
was taken at Weybridge, of which the entrails were found in the park
at Weybridge by the walking foresters, that is to say Eobert of Skipton
and Bichard the Welshman. An inquisition was made by four
neighbouring townships, Alconbury, Woolley, Ellington and Brampton,
^ ho know nothing else thereof; and because the townships did not
come etc. ; therefore they are in mercy.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that Geoffrey the
son of Stephen Swift was found in the king's enclosure of Weybridge on
the Monday 7 next before the feast of St. John the Baptist in the thirty-
second year with a bow and five barbed arrows. And he was taken
by the foresters, that is to say by John Bere and John Prentut. And
Geoffrey immediately acknowledged that he had taken two fawns and
handed them over to Boger the son of Philip of Alconbury. And
because the prison of Huntingdon was broken, he was brought to
Hertford, and delivered in bail to the township of Alconbury; and
now he does not come ; therefore let him be exacted and outlawed ; and
24
SELECTIONS FROM THE FOREST EYRE ROLLS
exigatur et
vtlagetur.
perdonatur.
xls.
gaolle.
xx s.
plegii
quod etc.
j marea.
Alcumbir'. Et modo non venit; ideo exigatur et vtlagetur ; et villata de
Alcumbir' in misericordia. Et Eogerus filius Philippi et Philippus
pater ipsius convicti de receptamento raalefacti sui, capti fuerunt
et inprisonati apud Herford', et postea per breue K. 1 Passel' capi-
talis iusticiarii deliberati fuerunt per pleuinam Iohannis filii Nicolai,
Elie Seleg', Nicolai filii Alicie, Willelmi de Aula, Eicardi Gody et
aliorum. Et quia non habuerunt primo die etc. (perdonatur) ;
ideo in misericordia. Et 2 Philippus et Eogerus modo veniunt ; et
detenti sunt in prisona. Postea convictum est per viridarios quod
Iohannes le Bere tunc forestarius cepit duas marcas de Willelmo filio
Fabr' de Alcumbir' per sic quod permitteret ipsum abire quietum ;
ideo committitur gaolle. Iterum convictum est per eosdem viridarios
quod predictus Willelmus filius Fabr' non fuit culpabilis de aliquo
malefacto ; ideo inde quietus. Postea venit Iohannes le Bere et
finem fecit per vnam marcam pro transgressione. Plegii de dictis
tribus marcis Willelmus le Moyne, Symon de Bypton', magister
Eicardus de Toleslond', magister Gilbertus de Wepsted, Eicardus de
Catteworth', Eobertus Freman de Wauton', Willelmus de Catteworth'.
Postea venit dicti Philippus et Eogerus. Et Philippus finem fecit per
vnam marcam et Eogerus per dimidiam marcam. Plegii dicti Philippi
de fine Willelmus de Alcumbir' et Elias le Lord' de eadem. Idem
vna cum subscripts manucapiunt quod non decetero etc. Iohannes
filius Nicolai de eadem, Elias Seled de eadem, Willelmus filius Eoberti
de eadem, Eicardus in Angulo, Elias ad Solium, Eicardus Paie,
Eogerus Aldit, Willelmus filius Hugonis, Samuel in Lana, Willelmus
Long', Alanus filius Alani. Et plegii dicti Eogeri quod non decetero
Willelmus Secrestein de eadem, Nicolaus Tixtor', Henricus Franceis,
Nicolaus filius Hawis, Iohannes Canu', Iohannes de Wlfli, Walterus de
Eston', Iohannes filius Willelmi, Turstan filius Marg', Simon Kuit,
Symon filius Gregor, Stephanus West.
3 Presentatum est per forestarios et viridarios quod duo leporarii
secuti fuerunt vnum damum sub hay a de Wauberg', set nemo visus
fuit cum illis. Tandem quid am Stephanus Fot et Galfridus filius
Osberti inuenti fuerunt in campis, quos forestarii ceperunt et duxerunt
apud Herford' ad inprisonandum eos ibidem. Et Galfridus euasit a
custodia forestariorum ; et Stephanus fuit inprisonatus. Postea facta
fuit inquisicio per villatas Alcumbir' (alibi), Wolle (alibi), Bokesworth'
(j marca) et Brampton' (alibi) qui nichil inde sciunt nee inquirere
potuerunt, cuius leporarii fuerunt; nee predictos Stephanum et
Galfridum habuerunt suspectos nee de aliquo malefacto in foresta ;
1 See p. 22, note 2. 2 The word ' quia ' is here inserted in the roll. 3 See p. 75.
HUNTINGDON EYRE, A/D. 1255 24
the township of Alconbury is in mercy. And Roger the son of Philip
and Philip the father of this Roger, being convicted of receiving his
evil deed, were taken and imprisoned at Hartford ; and afterwards, by
the writ of Robert Passelewe the chief justice, they were delivered on
the pledge of John the son of Nicholas, Elias Selegh, Nicholas the son
of Alice, William of the Hall, Richard Gody and others. And because
they had them not on the first day, therefore they are in mercy.
And Philip and Roger now come, and they are detained in prison.
Afterwards it was proved by the verderers that John le Bere, who was
then a forester, took two marks from William the son of the smith of
Alconbury for permitting him to go quit ; therefore he is committed
to gaol. Again it is proved by the same verderers that the aforesaid
William the son of the smith is not guilty of any evil deed ; therefore
he is quit thereof. Afterwards John le Bere came and made fine by
one mark for his trespass. Pledges of the said three marks, William
le Moin, Simon of Ripton, Master Richard of Toseland, Master Gilbert
of Wepstead, Richard of Catworth, Robert Freeman of Walton and
William of Catworth. Afterwards the said Philip and Roger came ;
and Philip made fine by one mark, and Roger by half a mark.
Pledges of the said Philip for his fine, William of Alconbury and
Elias le Lord of the same town. The same persons with the under-
written undertake that he will not in future etc. : John the son of
Nicholas of the same town, Elias Selegh of the same town, William
the son of Robert of the same town, Richard atte Nook, Elias atte Loft,
Richard Paie, Roger Aldit, William the son of Hugh, Samuel Inthelane,
William Long and Alan the son of Alan. And the pledges of the said
Roger that he will not in future etc. are William Secrestein of the
same town, Nicholas the weaver, Henry Franceis, Nicholas the son
of Hawis, John Canun, John of Woolley, Walter of Easton, John the
son of William, Thurston the son of Margery, Simon Kuit, Simon the
son of Gregory and Stephen West.
It is presented by the foresters and verderers that two greyhounds
followed a buck at the enclosure of Weybridge but nobody was seen
with them. At length certain men Stephen Foot and Geoffrey the son
of Osbert were found in the fields, and the foresters took them and
brought them to Hartford to imprison them there, and Geoffrey
ped from the custody of the foresters, and Stephen wa 
