TRIPARTITE CHIROGRAPH or A KENT FINE

KENT RECORDS

 

CALENDAR

OF

KENT FEET OF FINES

to the end of Hem): III’s reign

PREPARED IN COLLABORATION BY
IRENE J. CHURCHILL, O.B.E., D.Phi1., F.S.A.
the late RALPH GRIFFIN, F.S.A.
the late F. W. HARDMAN, LL.D., F.S.A.

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

FRANK W’. JESSUP, M.A., LL.B., F.S.A.

}’.S‘.S'UI:‘D TO SUBSCRIBERS TO THE RECORDS 1}l(‘A./\/CH
IQENT ARCEUEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Reflmduced by /mrn11'.v.r1'oI1 (f the I’ur'1Z1'£ Rrrm'd Ojfice.

Re-ft-rc‘nc<‘: C.P. 25 (I) _u8.;,_~”,.1rl37: Ii 210/16.2, H93: ace p. xvii.


   

ABBREVIATIONS

 

_ CONTENTS
For the parttes .' f page
Q for QuerenteS_ _, , I. The nature of a fine xiii
D for Deforciantes. ' II. The purposes for which fines were used xxii
pet. for petentes. III. Forms of action xli
'°‘3n- for teI18n158S- in I IV. Forms of the agreement : xlviii
imp. for impedientes. .- '  (1) Quitclaim xlix
. . I (2) Acknowledgment of right li
F - l t h : .
or reawns W8 (3) Acknowledgment of right as of the gift of
br., brs. for brother, brothers. conusor “ii
dau., daus. for daughter, daughters. (4) other f01‘mS Of agreement [V
s., ss. for son, sons. V. Correlation between form of action, form of agree-
sig, for sister_ ment, and purpose of fine lvi
w. for wife. VI. Tenures lviii
Wid- for Widow. VII. Conditional estates [xv
“mi VIII. Dower, free-bench, and tenancy by the courtesy of
mess. for messuage. England 1XXi
IX . Warranty lxxix
X. Consideration lxxxvii
XI. Rent-service, forinsec service, rent-charge and
distress xci
XII. Homage, fealty, and consent to alienation xcviii
XIII. Restraint upon alienation and waste c
XIV. The subject-matter of final agreements : <-
(I) Nature of the property c
(2) Description of the property cii
(3) Easements, etc. viii
(4) Vill and manor civ
(5) l\’Ieasurements_of land - civ
(6) Common fields ovi
XV. Geographical distribution of the properties in Kent
to which fines relate (‘VIII

XVI. C‘on0lusi(»n Cxii

xi


 
    

ico1$I*rE1v1*s"oir AINTTRODUHCTION

 

Appendix
I. Fines concluding contentious litigation cxiii .
II. References to fines for which feet are not extant cxxii 

III. Formulary : six typical fines cxxxiii

The method of reference to fines which has been adopted
throughout the Introduction is as follows: the number of the fine is
given first, and then the number of the page of this volume on which
the abstract of the fine appears. Thus, fine 95. 11. 52. is referred to
as 52/67, fine 97. 38. 730 as 730/275, and so on.

In the remainder of the volume, the reference numbers are those
in use at the Public Record 0fi‘1ce,i.e. the Case number is given first,
followed by the File number, and then the number of the individual

fine.

INTRODUCTION

1. The nature of a fine

A fine, or finalis ooncordia to give it its full title, was an agree-
ment between the parties to an action at law (which might be a
friendly suit) toput an end to the action. Such an agreement
could be made only with the licence of the court, for once the court
was seised of the action it was no longer to be regarded as a mere
private matter between the parties. The fine was a device already
in use during the reign of Henry II.‘ The treatise that is known
by the name of Glanvil], who was Justiciar from 1180 until 1189.
records that :

c.l. It frequently happens that suits moved in the King’s
court are terminated by friendly compromise and con-
cluding agreement (finalis concordia), with the consent
and licence of the King or his justices} Whatever be the
plea, whether concerning land or any other thing. It is
commonly the practice for such an agreement to be
reduced into written form, mutually agreed upon by the
parties} for the document to be read out before the
King’s justices then sitting on the bench, and for identical
copies of the document to be delivered to each party
in the presence of the justices ; and it should be made in
this form : '

(3.2. This is the final concord made in the court of the lord the
King at VVestminster on the vigil of St. Peter the Apostle
in the thirty-third year of the reign of King Henry the
Second, before Ranulph de Glanvill, justiciar of the lord
King, and before H. R. \V. and T. and other faithful men
of the lord King who were then present, between the

‘ Perhaps as early as the l160’s; see J. H. Round. Feudal Englnml,
p. 509 ; J. H. Round, The Earliest English Fines, E.H.R. XII, p. 293 :
and L. F. Salzmann, Early Fines, E.H.R-. XXV, p. 708; also H. G.
Richardson, An Early Fine, 48 L.Q.R., p. 414.

’ Licence to agree would usually be sought as soon as the parties were
before the court, but a suit might progress as far as the waging of a duel
before the parties expressed a desire to make agreement ; soc, e.g.. 242/118.

3 per communem a.<rsen.<nnn partiium. Prof. G. E. Woorlbine, in his
ndii ion of Glanvill, points out that this implies that the parties must he
lreoqnen ; p. 2236.

xiii


xiv ‘V: T  ‘i 

Prior and Brathére tr at Hospital of Zleriisalem, and T

W. T., son of Norman, and Alan, his son, Whom he made

his attorney in the Kings court to gain or to lose, con-*
cerning all that land and its appurtenances, except one

bovate of land and three tofts, which W. held : concern-

ing which land (save the aforesaid bovate and three

tofts) a plea was commenced between them in the court

of the lord King ; to wit, that the aforesaid W. and Alan

grant and ratify the gift which Norman, father of W.,

made thereof to them [i.e. to the Hospital] and he

released all that land from himself and his heirs to the
house of the Hospital and to the aforesaid Prior and
Brothers for ever : except the aforesaid one bovate of
land and the three tofts which remain to W. and Alan
and their heirs, to hold from the house of the Hospital
and the aforesaid Prior and Brothers for ever by the free
service of four pence a year for all service : and for this
grant, ratification and release, the Prior and Brothers of
the Hospital have given to William and Alan a hundred
shillings sterling.

c.3. . . . And note that a final concord is so called because it
puts an end (finds) to the law-suit, so that neither of the
litigants can, in future, withdraw from it. For if either
of them does not keep it, or do what is proper, and the
other party complains thereof, the sheriff will be ordered
to put him to good pledges that he come before the King’s
justices to answer why he has not kept the fine}

Glanvill gives also a copy of a fine made in the court of
Geoffrey fitzPeter and recorded in the curia regis before the Bishops
of Ely and Norwich and Glanvill himself. The termination of a
suit by agreement between the parties is so obvious a method to
bring litigation to an end that it would be surprising if it were not
known in other courts besides the curia regis. The extent of its
use in seignorial courts must remain an open question, for early
records of such courts are scanty? Moreover if, as Glanvill seems

‘ Tractatu.u de. legibus Angliae, Lib. V111. . '

2 F. M. Stenton. The First Century of English Feu{ia_hSm. 13- 51, g1V95
a fine made between 1162 and 1166 in the court of W'1lham earl Ferrars.
Dugdale mentions a fine made In the court of Roger de Lacy, (ionstablle odf
Chester, at 'Pontefract, in 3 John : ()mgines_JurzuMciales, p. 9.3. Mait an}
refers to other examples of fines made in se1gnor1al courts : Pollock ant

Maitland, H.E.L.. ii, p. 971%

   

iiscraonucrros xv

to imply, a fine could be made in the King’s court without writing
(although the procedure would be unusual)1 it seems reasonable to
think that in manorial courts, where no doubt clerical skill was
sometimes wanting, fines might more often have rested upon an
oral agreement recited in the court and committed, for preserva-
tion, to the memory of the suitors of the court. Occasionally
references are found in cases heard in the King’s court to fines
levied in seignorial courts. There are four such cases in Bracton’s
N ate-Book, none of them concerning Kent, but a Kent case appears
on the roll for Easter Term, 2 John. Anselm has brought an
assize of novel dis.s'ez'sin against his brother Alexander de Clendon
for land at Herst (or Derherst), and is met with the answer that his
brother clcraiglierl the land against him in the court of the Bishop
of Rochester. Eobert Miller and ten others come and say that by
agreement made between the brothers in the Bishop’s court, with
the licence of the Bishop, Alexander recovered seisin of the land
as his reasonable portion. The proceedings in the Bishop’s court
are proved, not by the production of a written record, but by the
testimony of elevt-,11 suitors to the court.

Fines were acc:uston1e<l to be made also in the county court (in
Bmcton’s .\'ote-Book. no. 180, there is a case on a fine made in the
co11nt_v court of Bi-<.lford, and Dugdale gives an example of a fine
made in the county court of Nottingham_i11 1 John.)2 Fines
(-.o11l(l also be levied in some borough courts, as appears from a
number of borough custumals." A combination of burghal with
seignorial jurisdiction is exemplified in a fine levied, in 3 Henry III.
" in the chief court of the lord abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury,-
and in the burghmote of the city of Canterbury ” (see Appendix
ll, p. cxxxii).

Not only, in the twelfth century, were fines levied in the full
r-uric, regis itself, but also before the justices itinerant, and in the
lilxcliequer. Madox gives a good many examples of “common
pleas ” business taken in the Excl1equer,4 but notes only one fine,
although Dugilale says there are other examples. As the one
example given by Madox concerns land in Kent, and is the second

‘ Ulu11vill‘s words are, Sole! autcm plerumque concordia talis in communem.
-Wwipturunr. rmIi_r]z'.
” op. cit., p. 93.
3;1*‘or references to fines levied in the courts of the Cinque Ports, see
below. p. cix.
V‘ Madox, History of the Exchequer, pp. 141-5. There was, of course, at
Illlspericid much overlapping of personnel between the curia regvis, the
Justices itinerant. and the Exchequer.

2
\

    
   
  


 

xvi lN’J.‘RODUCTION

earliest known Kent fine, it seems proper to give a translation of it
in full here‘ :

This is the final concord made in the court of the lord

King at Westminster, in the Exchequer, in Michaelmas term

in the twenty-ninth year of the reign of King Henry the
Second, the Sunday next before All Saints’ Day, before R.
Wynton and G. Elyens and J. N orwyc, bishops, and Godfrey

de Lucy, and Richard the Treasurer and Roger Fitz-Reim

frid and VVilliam Basset and Ranulf de Geddynge and
Robert de Wytefeld and Michael Belet and other barons of

the lord King then present, between the Prior and monks of
Rochester, and Juliana, daughter of Fulk de Newnham and

Robert de Champeynes, son of Juliana, concerning the '

advowson of the church of Norton [Northtone], whereof a
recognition? was had between them in the court of the lord
King ; to wit, that the aforesaid Juliana and Robert her son
have given and granted to the aforesaid Prior and monks
the advovvson of the aforesaid church of Norton, and they
have conceded the advowson which Fulk, father of Juliana.
made to them of the said church.

There is no hint in Glanvill that suits concluded b_v fine might
be not genuinely litigious, but collusive. Yet from an early date
the most frequent use of a fine was to terminate a friendly action,
the purpose of the transaction being to use the procedure of the
court for effecting an assurance of land. The fine, as a means of
conveying interests in land and barring entails. had a long history,
for it remained in existence until it was abolished by the Fines
and Recoveries Act, 1833.

Perhaps it was the quickly perceived usefulness and popularity
of the fine that led to an administrative improvement introtluced
by the Curie Regis in 1195. A fine dated the l5th July, I195,
bears an endorsement that it was the first to be made in accord-
ance with the new practice evolved by Hubert \Valter, the justiciar,
and the other barons of the King ; for the future, instead of two
copies of the fine being made (as prescribed by Glanvill) it was to
be copied out three times on the same membrane. and the three
copies were to be separated by an indented cut, usually through
the Word Cyrograplmm, in this wise :

‘ A copy of this fine was included by 'l‘horp<: in 1i’c_r/is/r_’unI I.’r>fi‘€rM‘l%.
p. 508. He took it from the Regist. Temporal. ErrI€.»‘. «I E])7S(‘0['}. lx’0fl¢’N .

fo. 47b. , ,
’ For the significmiee of 2'e('0_r}ni!iu, see I’0lloel~: and Mmtlund. II./LI; .

ii, p. 622.

 

INTRODUCTION xvii
tr: ‘ 2
Q .
Q .
O .
3» .'
9 V I
E T
63' I
53 I
C .
=3 .
0 .
O - _
-s
E xi
5” *5
, Li

0
O
1:
o
u
.9
T:
:
<5
¢J
{D
o
0
<22
:13
hunt

lC;n~h party took one part. of the fine when the membrane had been
cut. and the " foot ” l'(‘Y'Il:1ill(‘tl in the Treasurv. To Prove the
<lH<'HllI<'m. it was only net-essarv to bring the parts and the foot
togc-tlwr and <-oinparv them. Such a svstem would seem to be
pg-out‘ .'|L'.'1ilI\'i fr.-nul. yet. :1 number of audacious rather than skilful
attempts to lltlwriente spurious fines are on record.‘ It so happens
that the two p.'Irts and the foot ofone line. a Kent fine made in the
fxtitln pveur of llt-nry lliis reign. have Come together in the custody
of the l’uhli<- Hm-ortl (Mfiee. With the permission of the Deputy
i\vopc‘r ot the Rm-orrls an illustration of this fine is given as the
iT~rIt1.<}vi«-we to this volume?

Frmn about H78 onwards. the curirz )'cqi.9 seems usually to

I
WV-‘I:-:= H. II. i)\l<'lI2I!'(i\UI‘:. 7'/Ir I"nr{/1‘rj/ of I"1'1w.s‘, lC,H.l{. XXXV, pp,
:1 , ,
‘:"'4l'in* 11-.iio‘l"‘J.t-.' 1IllI1|i)»‘rn['thi<4{inn is {iS,;';;‘}_]]67 ; it is Sunnnnrizpd on
‘I. 1 u ,

 


   

xviii INTRODUCTION

have functioned as two tribunals——-the court coram rege on the one
hand, and the justices of the bench, on the other——except during
the prolonged absence of Richard I overseas, during the minority
of Henry III, and during the period from about 1209 until 1215
when John was apparently trying to concentrate all’ justice in his
own hands. This was the abuse that Magna Carta sought to
remedy by ordaining that common pleas (which included actions
concerning land) should not follow the King’s court but should be
held in a definite place} which, in later practice, became identified
with Westminster.

All the Kent fines belonging to the reign of Richard I were
made before the justices at Westminster, except for the last year
of the reign when a considerable number were made at Bermond-
sey. This shows how the King’s long absence overseas gave an
unusual stability of location to his court at home. During John’s
reign the majority of Kent fines were again made before the
justices at Westminster, or at Bermondsey, the Tower of London,
or St. Bride’s, but suitors had sometimes to go farther afield, to
Porchester, Winchester, Woodstock, Northampton, Wilton, York.
or even Newcastle-upon-Tyne. A recital of this list of towns
wherein the King’s court paused from time to time to transact
its affairs shows the inconvenience that litigants had to suffer in
following a peripatetic court, and goes far towards explaining
why, as noted below, few fines were levied during the last seven or
eight years of John’s reign, when he was endeavouring to gather
all royal justice into his own hands.

The fines for Henry III’s reign were almost all made either at
Westminster (or in 3 Henry III at Bermondsey) or within the
county itself, usually at Canterbury, less often at Rochester, and
on two occasions at Tonbridge. At such towns fines were made
and recorded before itinerant justices, with a commission from the
King either to hold all pleas in the county, or to hold pleas of a
particular kind, e.g. novel disseisin or mart d’am:estor. Not all of
those commissioned to hold such pleas would necessarily be
justices regularly sitting on the bench at Westminster ; they
included knights of the shire and prominent ecclesiastics?

It will be noticed that the number of fines levied each year
fluctuated widely, partly because of the large numbers made in
those years when the itinerant justices came into the county. For

1 c. 17; and see V. H. Galbraith, Stud17es in the Public Records, pp. .137-'8.

* Considerations of space, time, and cost have prevented the inclusion, in
this calendar, of the names of the justices before whom fines wore l6\'l6d.
They could usefully form the subject of a paper in A-rcli. Cant.

  

INTRODUCTION xix

the last four years of the reign of Richard I and for the first three
years of John the numbers are between six and thirteen each year
but in 4 John there is a sudden increase to 42, followed by a drop,
in the next three years, to an average of eight a year. For 8 John
there are 25 (of which nine were levied at Canterbury) but for the
remainder of the reign the number never exceeds six a year, and
sometimes falls to one or two.

During the first twenty-five years of Henry III’s reign the
numbers generally remain quite small, about half-a-dozen annually
except for 3 Henry III, when 60 fines were levied, 41 of them at
Bermondsey, and except for those years when the justices were
in the county, viz. :

11 Henry III 79 fines levied, 75 of them at Canterbury.
16 Henry III 45 fines levied, 27 of them at Rochester and
8 at Canterbury.

20 Henry III 82 fines levied, 78 of them at Canterbury.

25 Henry III 63 fines levied, 61 of them at Canterbury.
For the next twenty years, the average for the ordinary years rises
fairly steadily from about 12 to about 24, with much larger
numbers during the eyre years : "

32 Henry III 91 fines levied, 88 of them at Canterbury.

39 Henry III 84 fines levied, 59 of them at Canterbury and
1 at Rochester.

47 Henry III 77 fines levied, 69 of them at Canterbury,
5 at Rochester, and
1 at Tonbridge.

During the remainder of the reign the number of fines in ordinary
_\'cars varies from a minimum of one to a maximum of 18, with an
average of less than nine a year. On the other hand, the number
of fines made before the itinerant judges is the highest for any
year of the reign :
_ 55 Henry III I03 fines levied, 82 of them at Canterbury,
14 at Rochester, and
3 at Tonbridge.

l‘l1ese figures (and the trends they indicate are closely borne out
by the Lincoln fines for the same period‘) suggest that during the
‘ ‘vfiee F'1'nulConcorzis of the Cozmty of Lincoln, Vol. 11, 1244-72, ed.
 W. hoster. I he peak years for Lincoln during this period are 29 Henry III
(W4). 34 Heiiry I11 (132), 41 Henry III (105). 47 Henry III (152) and 56

l“£(‘.lll‘_V’ _I1I (J42), witli an annual average during tho ordinary years of about
1.) until 47 Henry III, and thereafter a fall to only six 9. year.

 


xx INTRODUCTION

years up to about 1235 Kent litigants (or feoffors) were becoming
more and more accustomed to effect their transactions by way of
levying fines, and that from then until 1262 it was a procedure
very generally resorted to. However, it declined in popularity
during the last ten years of Henry III’s reign, except as a form of
conveyance by a married woman. This may have been due in
part to the unsettled condition of the kingdom during those years,
although the two preceding decades could scarcely be regarded as
periods of quiet and stable government. It seems more likely
that this decline in popularity was due to the fact that a further
exercise of the legal ingenuity which devised the fine could evolve
means of defeating it. The fact that at the end of the thirteenth
century statutes] were made prescribing the manner in which fines
should be levied and who should be bound by them, and the
limitations imposed upon the defences available in an action based
on a fine, suggest that during the latter part of the century some
uncertainty had grown up about the proper procedure for levying
a fine, and about its effect, particularly on the claims of third
parties? Indeed the Statute dc finibus levatis, 1290, recites some
of the difficulties which the King’s lawful subjects were encounter-
ing : “ Forasmuch as fines levied in our Court ought, and do, make
an end of all matters . . . and now, by a certain time passed, as
well in the time of King Henry of famous memory our grandfather,
as in our time, the parties to such fines and their heirs, contrary to
the Laws of our Realm, of ancient time used, were admitted to
adnull and defeat such fines, alleging that before the fine levied,
and at the levying thereof, and since, the Demandants or Plaintiffs
or their ancestors were alway seised of the lands contained in the
fine, or of some parcel thereof ; and so fines lawfully levied were
many times unjustly defeated and adnulled by jurors of the
country falsely and maliciously procured,” etc. . .
By these two statutes many of the doubts and uncertainties
which could be raised by a thirteenth century lawyer concerning
the procedure for levying a fine, and its effect, were swept away,

‘ The date and nature of mic of these so~called statutes, the Statute
dz’ Mada Lrvandifmee are uncertain. It is given in the Sl(Il1ll'f’~*’ U‘ ]L‘"i£7'

* ‘ ' " 1 . ’ , v , 3 {.3 I
under the year 1290 as 18 Edward I, 5%. 4- 111 lh9_N¢1Wl'€‘ Pf gm ‘fl 7”
(Record Commission) it is included under statutes of uncertain age (1: ‘P’
214). The other statute. the Statute of Fiiioeg), wgs 1111811116 11:13]-:l9?mjt7
Edward 1_ cap. 1. Statutes of {lie Realm, i, p. 1.. . ee 0 00 n , .
land, History of English Law, 11, p. 93, Y1- 5-

2 See below. p. xxxv.

INTRODUCTION xxi

with, in consequence, a much more frequent levying of fines in the
fourteenth century. For example, during the reign of Edward II,‘
the average number of Kent fines levied each year was about 50,
compared with fewer than 10 during the ordinary years of the
latter part of Henry III’s reign. It is worth noticing that
7 Edward II, when 64 fines were levied at Rochester and 46 at
Canterbury, compared with only eight at Westminster, was the
last year when fines were levied in the county before itinerant
j1lSt~lCeS.2 Thereafter they were levied at Westminster, or, verv
occasionally, at York, when the Court of Common Bench was
sitting there. The discontinuance of the practice of levying fines
before itinerant justices may be connected with the co-called
Statute of Carlisle,3 which, amongst other things, provided that if
one of the parties was unable, because of age, illness. or debility
to come personally before the justices, two of the justices, or one
justice with another man of good fame, should go to the party and

take his acknowledgment of the plea. In time the allegation ol

the part_v’s inability, through illness or debility, to appear before

the justices without danger to his life became pure fiction. and

writs of dedimus potestatem to a serjeant-at-law to take an

acknowledgment were granted as a matter of course. This

development, however, belongs to the later history of the

fine.

A comparison with feet of fines for other counties suggests
that, (hiring the late twelfth, and the thirteenth century, people
in Kent were neither precocious, nor backward, in adopting the
use of the fine. Norfolk stands out in marked contrast : for the
years 1198 to 1202 there are some 460 Norfolk fines. contrasted
with about ml) for Kent during the same period. The difference
can probably be accounted for by the larger population and
greater wealth of Norfolk, and by the larger proportion, in East
Anglia, of freemen, who alone were competent to lev_v a fine.

1 A caleiulnr of feet of fines for the years I307 to 1333 ap])(‘H.l'l-4 in vols.
X1, XII, XIII, XIV, XV, XVIII and XX of Arch. (lrmt.

2 Apparently no Wiltshire fines were levied elsewhere than at VVcst4
miiister after 1285! ; see Feet of Fines, IVilts. ed. R. B. Pugh. (\\'iltshii'e
Arr-liaeological and Natural History Society, Records Branch, i, 1939.)

" The date of this ordinance is uncertain. It is printed in the .S'mIule.s- ul
Lrzrgc us The Statute of (»'arl1,'sle. made 15 Ed. 2. An. Dom. 1322. In the
Smrufes of the Realm (Record Commission) it is included amongst the statutes
of uncertain date (i. p. 215). G. J. Turner took the date of the ordinance-
io l)U 1307 (A Calendar of the Feet of I4’ines. relating to the r'oun.t_z/ of HunIfn_u-
«Ion. (‘uinbridge Antiquarian Society, 1913. p. cxxx).

 

 


 

   

xxii T INTRODUCTION

II The purposes for which fines were used

Broadly, fines were used either to put an end to genuine
litigation} or to assure land, a rent, or some other right regarded
as having the characteristic of realty. Of the particular purposes
for which they were employed Madox rightly says : “ The Design
and Purport of Final Concords seem to have been anciently as
various as the matters litigated between men. or the Rights to be
accorded to them.”2

More often than not the information which can be derived from
the fine itself is not suflicient for us to be able to say with certainty
for which of these two purposes the fine was levied. Occasionally
the nature of the claim suggests strongly, almost conclusively, that
the litigation is genuine, the dispute real ; sometimes the nature
of the concord and the relationship of the parties suggests equally
strongly that the action is a friendly one, to convey an interest in
land ; in, unfortunately only a few, cases extraneous evidence is
available from, for example, the Curie Regls Rolls, the .~lbbrem'atz'o
Placilorum, or Bracton’s Note-Book, to show that a litigated dispute
was the basis of a fine. Cases of the latter kind which I have been
able to discover are given in Appendix I. Some of the more
interesting of them are referred to at greater length below.

Miss Dodwell believes that, of the Norfolk fines for 11984202.
probably the great majority resulted from real litigationf‘
Although no satisfactory proof is possible, I do not think that this
is true of the Kent fines. The frequency with which, in the earlier.
and presumably less sophisticated, years, the part of the releasor
or conusor is played by the plaintiff (much more often, until about
1230, than by the deforciant), and the regularit_\f with which
certain formulae are employed and the consistency of the roles
sustained by each party in relation to the various formulae.
indicate not a dispute where the outcome was uncertain but the
use of a procedure to achieve known ends, according to recognized
and accepted conventions. The frequent incompleteness of

1 On some occasions the parties may have been driven reluctantly to
levy a fine because of the difficulty of getting together‘ :1 Jury to make 21
recognition. Entries on the Curie Regis Rolls for Trinity and .\li<-linelmas
Terms 8 John, show that at least three abortive attempts were made to
collect a jury of 12 knights to determine the action of Grand Assme brought
by Cecilia de Gretenesse against Stephen do Cusinton. l’rcsumabl_v line
I13/43 was ultimately made because the parties despair-ed of ever getting
their suit concluded in any other way.

' Formulare Anglicanum, p. xvii.

3 Feet of Fines for the County of Norfolk, I198-9 (Mill IIi)9.l‘.7l):3 : ed.
B. Dodwell (Pipe Roll Society. N.S. XXVII, 1950), p. 23.

 

 

‘ '-  "x,% 

 

--I5:
5%
,4’:

ii

 

 

INTRODUCTION xxiii

statistics concerning medieval institutions and procedures makes
their use of uncertain value, but although it cannot be proved
statistically that, even during the early part of the period, the
majority of Kent fines were based on collusive actions, the follow-
ing figures point in this direction :

. N0. of Known I) q1u'l~ Q qm‘t- I"z'nc.>' in the form
Perwcl fines II"/'ig((Im[ ('In{m,~; 4-[(,;,,;,t
icvierl ru:!1’(m.s'1 /0 Q to D I)-Q-[)2 QJ)-Q3

Ric. l 48 l 18 23 2
John 147 I5 [5 42 43 10
L10 1-len..lII. 123 ll 5 34 2] 9

3l 8 37 38 99 66 19

During the later years of Henry llI’s reign there can be no
doubt that, whilst litigious actions were sometimes settled by :1.
final concord, the majority of fines were merely examples of a
well-established eo11\'e_van(-ing procedure. In this context. the
pro}')ortion of fines which were levied in actions commenced by
writs of V\’arranty of Charter or (‘ovenant is significant ', for the
last 35 years of .Henr_\' lll’s reign the proportion is as high as
three-quarters of the total number offines levierl.

As was suggested al_)o\'e. in some fines the nature of the claim
seems to indicate that there was a litigious dispute. Of these, the
largest number-—~about 40. the earliest of them (lat-in;_r from the
year 1228- —eom-ern claims for arrears of rent. or for the perform-
ance of services by a tenant. The usual concord in these cases is
that the deforeiant un(lert.21l<es for the future to pay the rent. or
perform the services due. and the plaintill quitelaims. in whole or
in part, the arrears. Soluetimcsr——perhups because of the legal
disability of one of the par't.ies----»tlxe rent has been in arrear for
several years. even as rn;1n_v as ten or twelve. and in one case 2%‘.
before the plaintiff brings his action. Tliere is. however, the
possibility that some of these actions nuiy liave been collusive. not
litigious, and (lesigned to (-route a record of the terms on which the
tenant held his land of the plaintiff, or to commute services into a
money payment (e.g.. perhaps. 936/335. whereby Bartholomew de
Ottringebir’ releases to his tenant. Fulk dc Seerstede. a sixth part
of a knight’s fee, 25d. to castlegiizml at R,oc-hester. and suit of

‘ “ Known litigated actions" include those fines where extraneous
e\r'i(lm1ce. (Lg. entries on the (‘. Ix’. I€., make it eertuin. or probable, that there
was a dispute between the parties.

2  I.) acknowledged the right of Q for which Q granted to D.

3 i.e., usually, Q quitelnimerl to (or acknowlotlgerl the right of) T), for
which D granted to Q.

 


jlxxivi 7 * iiNTRbbUorIon"

court from three weeks to three weeks, in return for an under-
taking to do the service of a twentieth part of a knight’s fee and
the grant of an annual rent of 6s. 8d.) .

About a dozen fines are founded on complaints that the plaintiff
has been constrained to perform services to a superior lord which
ought to be performed by the defendant, who is intermediate
(mesne) between the plaintiff and the superior lord. It is hard to
think that these fines can represent anything else than the
compromise of real disputes, and the same is true of those actions
in which the heir complains that the dowager andher husband,
or the tenant by the courtesy, ‘commit waste (429/166 and
1101/391).

As today, disputes were no doubt much more often about
questions of fact than about questions of law. Just possibly at
the time when Godfrey Wallensis brought his suit against Ralph
de Ardern (11 John : 55/56) there may still have been some doubts
about the rights of a widower who had not had issue by his
deceased wife, though it seems hardly likely, for the law relating
to tenancy by the courtesy of England was already established.
An interesting dispute is that between the Abbot of Bee and the
"Prior of St. Martin, Dover (623/229) ; the two houses, by royal
grant, had been given conflicting liberties, the Priory to be allowed
to exact consuetudinem passagii, the Abbey to be exempt from the
payment of customs and tolls. Bracton gives the rule which
should determine a dispute such as this : the party who first
actually exercises the liberty granted will be preferred.‘ In this
case. the Prior undertakes that, for the future, the Abbot and his
successors. the monks of the Abbey, and all the men of their
household shall have free and quiet passage.

Another fine concluding litigation which raised questions of
law is 250/I20. The case is recorded in Bracton’3 Note-Book, so
we are able to discover what the dispute was really about. The
Priory of St. John of Jerusalem held four messuages in Eden-
bridge, and by gavelkind partition each of the messuages had
become divided into three or four separate tenements. Formerly
each messuage paid 5d. towards a scot-ale if there was one, other-
wise nothing, and 7d. for buying and selling and stallage. Now,
alleges the Prior, Thomas de Kanvill exacts 5d. whether there is a
scot-ale or not, 7d. from each tenement into which the four
messuages have been sub-divided, 2d. for street-gavel (which
Nlaitland suggested might be a rate for street repairs, but seems

‘ ff. 56b and 57.

  

 

   

INTRODUCTION xxv

more likely to have been a payment for the liberty of trading in
the street), and gd. for selling bread. There was also a dispute
about fishing rights. Evidently the parties were willing to
compromise their rights, for the final agreement represents less
than the services which Thomas de Kanvill claims, but more than
the Prior says were customarily rendered.

Five particularly interesting fines made between 1222 and
1241, and apparently originating in disputed rights, concern the
jurisdiction of the court of the Hundred of Sharnel, which was
owned by the Knights Templars. The first ('73/75), which records
that for the future the tenants of the Prior of Rochester at Frinds-
bury and Denton are to do the same service to the Hundred Court
of Shamel as the tenants of the Archbishop of Canterbury do to the
King’s hundreds in which they dwell, is complicated because it
deals also with a dispute as to their respective rights over an inlet
(fleta) at Strood, and with the conveyance of half-an-acre of
meadow at Dartford. By the second fine of the series (95/81) the
Bishop of Rochester undertakes that his men of Hailing and
Cuxton shall do the same service to the Hundred Court. By the
third action (275/144), the Knights Templars sought to exact.
service at their Hundred Court from the men of Jollan de Nevill,
who, according to an inquisition made in 1246, held twenty
librates of land at Shorne of the King in capite by the service of one
knight’s fee.‘ Jollan de Nevill undertook that his men (except
his clavigerum and four ploughmen) should do suit at two lawdays
in the year, failure to do suit being visited by a fine upon the
individual defaulter and not upon the others in his borough or
tithing, and that the reeve and four men of the manor of Shorne
should attend the court on any other occasion when a robber was
to be judged, a plea of the crown was pending, or an inquisition
was to be taken by the King’s writ. Jollan de Nevill’s own
criminal jurisdiction was recognized by the Knights Templars as
extending to the case of a robber taken with the stolen goods
about him——‘‘ hand-having and back-bearing ”—-but it was
agreed that if it could be shown that the criminal was a man of
the Knights Templars he should be handed over for judgment in
their court. If, however, a man was arrested in the manor of
Shorne for some other crime, which lay outside the jurisdiction of
Jollan de N evill’s court, the Hundred Court was to sit at a specified
cross-roads, no doubt at or near Shorne, to do justice upon the

1 .lnquisz'tz't.nes Post Ii/lortem Esc. No. 39. 30 Henry Ill. See Arch.
Cant, II, p. 295

 


 

 

 

xxvii V CINTRODCUCTION

criminal, whose forfeited chattels‘ were nevertheles to go to
J ollan de Nevill. Finally the Knights Templars granted him the
assize of bread and ale, and of pillory and tumbril in his manor,
without the oversight of their bailiffs}

The fourth fine (362/149) was made two years later, the
defendant in this case being John, son of Hugh de Nevill, lord of
the manor of West Chalk, whose tenants were by this fine released
from suit at the Hundred Court in return for an annual payment
of 5s. Then, two years later, the manor of West Chalk having
been purchased meanwhile by John de Cobham (a justice itinerant
from 1244 to 1246 and a justice of the Common Pleas from 1244
until 1251)} the Knights Templars by fine 426/165, granted to
John de Cobham the Hundred of Shamel (reserving to themselves
certain rights in their manor of Strood) with infangtheof, out-
fangtheof, and gallows, in return for a total annual payment of 20s.
It was still so held at the time of the Hundred Inquisition made in
2 Edward I.

These five fines bring out clearly the way in which rights of
jurisdiction in the Hundred Court. in theory originally dependent
upon a royal grant, had come to be regarded as private property,
and transferable like other forms of private property. It is
difficult to say to what extent they represent compromises of
genuine disputes concerning the hundredal jurisdiction, or merely
the recording of agreements in a convenient form : that may well
be the object of the. last fine in the series. but certainly some, at
least, are of litigious origin.

Two other examples of the impossibility of determining,
merely from the information on the face of the fine, whether the
action which it terminated was litigious or collusive, may be cited.
By a fine made on the 7th November, 1204 (83/36) John Capel
acknowledged the advowson of Preston to be the right of St,
Augustine’s Abbey. and quitclaimed it to the Abbey. On the face
of it this seems to be a normal collusive action to transfer an
advowson, but the entry in 'l’ho7'ne’s (.'hroniele.. and still more the
entries on the (..'u.ria Regis Rolls, show that there was a long-

‘ The particular instance which gave rise to the dispute leading to this
action is recorded in BI_‘ucfon’s Notc—Book, 11., p. _b29. It 119 Va 11038 api:
involved story, concerning the arrest and imprxsonmentt  x Orslnand
Nevill of one Jordan Tcxtor for theft. and l'llS subse]qu<:in‘ I(.IYlO\f Jouan
hanging by John de VVatton. rustos of the Hundred. to t l(‘ amnge 0
to the value of 80 marks.

2 See Fosgfiq ,]u(]qe.s; of England, and J. G. Waller. ’I‘he Lorrls of Cobham,
Arr-h. (.'ant., XI. p. 53.

 

, INTRODUCTION xxvii

standing dispute over the advowson which led to litigation} The
other example is the fine whereby Burga, widow of Peter de
Benning’, releases to the Prior of the Holy Trinity, Canterbury,
her claim to one-third of the manor of Westwell, as her reasonable
dower, in return for a corrody (443/ 17 5). This, prima facie,
appears to be a straightforward. almost a routine, compromise by
way of fine of a claim to dower. In fact it marked the end of a
lawsuit which became something of a leading case for the later
writers of the books on gavelkind.2 We know that in a number
of other cases as well the regular formula conceals genuine litiga-
tion. but the general impression is left that, as the raw material of
tines, litigated disputes were very much the exception and not the
rule.

To understand the non-litigious use of a fine, as a means of
assuring some real right. it is necessary to keep in mind the general

state of the common law with regard to land and the conveyance ~

of real property during the period that begins with (ilanvill and
ends with Bracton.

According to feudal theor_\'. except for the property of the King
himself, all land was held of a superior lord, and immediately or
ultimately it was held of the King. The tenants in mpite were
those who held directly of the King. They, in turn, had tenants
holding of them, and each such tenant might have tenants holding
under him, and so on, without limit. Moreover. a man who was
at tenant in cap/itc of certain lands might hold other property as a
sub-tenant. Every man. therefore, except the King, might in
one relationship be lord, but in another was tenant.

A grant of land might be made by subinfeudation or by
substitution, that is the grantor might give the land to he held by
the grantee of the grantor, thus adding another link to the
tenurial chain, or he might transfer his whole right to the grantee,
so that henccforward the. grantee would stand in the place of the
grantor. To the superior lord both methods were open to
objection : substitution might present him with a personally
unacceptable tenant, a consideration that became. progressively
less serious as the lord-and-man element in the relationship of
landlord-and-tenant grew weaker : subinfeudation widened the
gap between the superior lord and the land itself, and, in the words

' Thorne Chronicle of St. Augustine’s Abbey, (}an.terbvury ; trans. A. H.
Davis, p. 168. (7.R.R., 24 John. passiin. See p. cxv l.)>l-.m'.
2 e.g., Stunner, G<welkind. 2nd edn. (1726). p. 178, Robinson, The

Common Law of Kent, ed. J. D. Norwood (1858), p. 3.3; and see Arch.
('(m!.. "I, pp. 318720. and Furley. History of the l‘l"eald of Kent, ii. p. 179.

 


 

xxviii ’ INTRODUCTION

of the preamble to the Statute of Quia Emptores, 1290,‘ the chief
lords in consequence “ have many times lost their escheats,
marriages, and wardships of landsand tenements belonging to
their fees; which things seemed very hard and extreme unto
those lords, and other great men, and moreover in this case
manifest disheritance". The Statute accordingly ordained that
for the future on any sale of land the feoffee should hold of the
chief lord of the fee, by the service and customs by which the
feofior formerly held ; if the feoflor retained part of the land, the
services should be apportioned.

During the thirteenth century, until the Statute of Quin
Emptores was made, subinfeudation seems to have been much more
frequent than substitution. Of these Kent fines, more than 1,400
in number, only about 60 expressly substitute the grantee, or
conusee, for the grantor, or conusor.’ In many cases, however, it
is not apparent whether substitution or subinfeudation is involved.
Amongst the earlier fines especially, a large proportion are in the
form of a quitclaim,3 and if, in these cases, the releasor was tenant
in fee simple and was releasing his whole right in the land, the
transaction must have been by substitution. Occasionally a fine
in the form of a quitclaim will in fact state that the releasee is to
hold of the chief lord. Fines in the form of a grant or cognizance
more often, although, during the earlier part of the period, by no
means invariably, say whether the grantee or conusee is to hold
of the grantor or conusor, or of the chief lord. That the grantor
or conusor reserves a rent is not in itself proof that the assuranceis
by way of subinfeudation, for the reservation of an annual payment
was quite consistent with the alienation of all seignorial right.‘

VVhilst. individual instances may remain doubtful, a fairly clear
pattern seems to emerge towards the end of Henry III’s reign.
An assurance made by fine will usually take the form of sub-
infeudation unless there is something exceptional about the
circumstances, as for example the partition between coheirs of a
large property.

In Glanvill’s day, and perhaps until a good deal later, the
normal method of conveying a freehold estate was feoffment with

1 Statute of Westminster III. l8 Edward .1. Statutes of the Realm
(Record Commission). i, p. 106. .

2 The conimor or ro_r/nizor was the party to a fine who recogmlled, or
acknowledged. the right ofthe other, who was called the cor'1:z.wv. or oogmzev.

3 Fines by way of quitclaim are dealt with at p. xhx. An example of
such a fine is given in Appendix Ill. 1). cxxxiii. _

‘ For a furthr-r note about such rent-cliarges. see below. 1). xcvi.

 


Jr.

.,§
if
tii
7%?

INTRODUCTION mx

livery of seisin. There was not a set verbal formula of enfeofi-
ment, b it it was essential that the grantor should use words
which showed a clear intention on his part to transfer the land to
the grantee. Further, it was essential that the grantor should
deliver seisin, that is patently put the grantee into possession, and
then himself withdraw from the land. The grant might or might
not be accompanied by writing. If writing was used, it did not
operate to effect the conveyance, but was merely evidence of the
grant : the typical charter formula is not “ I give and grant . . .’”
but “ Know that I have given and granted, and by this charter
confirm . . .” Conveyance without any written instrument
remained for centuries an accepted method of assuring land. It
seems to occasion no surprise to Littleton, and even Coke writes :
“ And albeit it is said that such a feofiment of a moitie or a third
part, etc., is not good without writing, for that (as they say) a man
cannot create an uncertain estate in land by Parol, yet is the Law
cleere that such a feoffment is good by Parol without writing,
and such an incertaine estate shall pass by Livery, and so it
appeareth in our bookes.”1 Since even a complicated transaction
of the kind which Coke is dealing with here could be effected
without a deed, ay forfiori, presumably, could simple grants be
made orally, with livery of seisin. It seems reasonable to assume
that conveyance without a deed, still a recognized method of
assurance centuries after the period covered by these Kent fines,
was in very general use in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries,
though, in the nature of the case, the lack of any permanent,
written record makes it impossible to hazard any guess about the
proportion of conveyances which were made orally compared with
those evidenced in writing. _

The disadvantage of oral enfeoflnient, that it depended for
proof upon the fallible recollections of what men had themselves
witnessed or been told by their fathers, is as obvious as the solution
to the problem~—the use of writing for making a permanent record
which continued independently of human memory. “ If writing
follow ”, says Bracton, “ the grant will be firmer. because a grant.
can be proved more easily and better by writing and instruments
than by witnesses or suit.”2 Moreover, grants of land were often
becoming complicated, and elaborate family settlements and the
like were being attempted in which the absence of a written

1 Coke upon Littleton, l90b.
“ f. 151).

 

 


xxx INTRODUCTION

record would be something worse than an inconvenience ; without
writing such transactions would be scarcely feasible at all. But
even charters, useful though they were, presented certain diffi-
culties. First, they might get lost. There are several fines in this
volume in which one party undertakes to render up to the other
his earlier charters, if he can subsequently find them. At a. time
when the safe keeping of even the Kings treasure and archives
presented serious problems to the royal ofiicers, it is not surprising
that humbler folk, in their fliinsy little dwellings constantly
exposed to the risk of fire, sometimes lost even such important
belongings as their charters.

Secondly, the authenticity of a charter might be challenged,
and forgeries were by no means unknown. Tlierefore a charter
would be made before a number of witnesses, of the more sub-
stantial sort, who, in the case of dispute could be called upon to
testify as to the authenticity of the document. Alternatively
perhaps it might be proved by a conipzirison of the seals with
those on an admittedly genuine document,‘ but if that method of
proof was not available, and if all the wit-iiesses were dead or
beyond seas, its validity must be determined by a jury. The
making of such a charter, according to Bracton, is best done in a
public place, such as the county or hundred, that it may be the
more easily proved if it should chance t.o be denied.2 Not only
were deeds made and witnessed in the county or the huiidred ;
they might also be made and recited in the presence of, and be
witnessed by, the itinerant justices and the notables who accom.
panied them." For many practical purposes a deed so made must
have had a great deal in common with a fine.

1 f. 398b, “Per nollutfomwz signarmn " are the words Hracton uses.

2 f. 38.

3 See, c.g., the deed of Eiigeiiia, daughter of John. made and recorded
before Lord VVilliam of York, VVi1liain do lnsula, Ralph de Norwich, and
Hugo de Plaiz, justices itinerant. at Canterbury, 1st May :10 Henry III 2
Arch. Cant., XV, p. 363. Other examples can be cited from the (,’,l{.11’,..'
e.g., Michaelmas Term, 3 John. an ackiiowletlgnicrit by Robert, s. of
Herbert of Faversham, of the right of Peter, s. of Airic de Makelond._ of
land in Slieppey. See also an agreement made between Peter de Bending
and the Prior and Convent of Holy Trinity. Canterbury, whereby Peter
acknowledged the manor of \Vestwell to be the right of the Prior and
convent, and they granted him the ‘manor of Little Chart at fee farm and
gave him £171 173. The recognition was made'in the presence of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, in the court of the Prior and (‘.0I1‘VeI]i'n.34nd 1“
the court of the Lord Archbishop, and in the county court. "lhe witnesses
include Henry de Cobham. Robert de Roecliele, Henry dc bandwieo, and
John de Sancto Legerio (Arch. Oant.. V1’. p. 306). On at least one 0v<'m~'i0II
in Henry III’s reign, Henry do (‘.obham acted as a justice itinerant.

;. ‘-9»!-«:4 ..~,».u.,«M, ‘Ft ,. Xv  -I:«v6'mJ :31},-\\~'v LIn.F>>¢-‘»l,x~>-~'cv:.r’vIAr.I.s~‘fc1’-zthflfi

   

INTRODUCTION xxxi

The third difficulty associated with a conveyance evidenced by
a charter was that it could be defeated unless it could be clearly
shown not merely that the grantor meant to transfer seisin to the
grantee, but that he had done so by overt act. The importance of
livery of seisin is a subject to which Bractoii constantly reverts.
“ A donation is not valid unless delivery follows, for a thing given
is not transferred by homage, nor by the making of charters or
instruments, although they be recited in public.”1 And the
transfer of seisin must be made openly and notoriously; the
donor may have intended, in his heart, to deliver seisin, but
“ man judges as man, according to outward appearance, for God
alone sees into a man’s heart.”2 Even a fine did not eliminate the
need for livery of seisin. In the thirteenth century it was still the
practice for a fine to be followed by a writ to the Sheriff directing
him to put the eonusee or grantee into possession of the property.
\Vhere the donee was already in possession, for example as tenant
for life or for a term of years, and the grant was of the reversion,
livery of seisin was, of course, physically impossible, but it
behoved the donor to make manifest. and public his intention to
grant the reversion to the tenant.

Where the conveyance was in the nature of a commercial
transaction, a sale and purchase in the usual sense of the words,
the parties could, perhaps with some inconvenience but by
exercising care, deliver and receive seisin in such a form that it
would scarcely be thiiikable that anyone should afterwards seek
to deny it. However, many coiiveyances were not commercial
transactions, but dealings with family property, often between
father and son, or father and daughter. Wills of land were iiii-
known to the common law, although allowed by the customs of
some boroughs, and therefore if a man wished his real property to
be distributed among his children in a way different from that
prescribed by the normal rules of succession, he must effect the
transaction title?‘ 2riz;(;.s*. He iniglit, for example, grant land to his
son in fee simple, to hold of the fathers heirs, or possibly of the
chief lords of the fee, and take from the son the grant of a life
estate in the property. In many cases the property would be
small, perhaps a few acres of land and one messuage. The fainil y
would all continue to live under the one roof, and to work the
holding as one unit, so that there was no permanent outward sign
of the change in legal ownership. In such circumstances the gift

‘ f. 39!».
'3 f. 50b.


 

xm, INTRODUCTION

might easily be defeated subsequently because of the difficulty of
proving that the donor had actually transferred Selslfti’. To Zlrlotvg
the donor to remain on the land after the enfeoflmen , 01‘ .eV th
come back soon afterwards as a guest, was dangcI‘01l§ § Yet "1 tr“
family circum,,+a,n man must often have made it inevitable that the
donor should remain. Bracton advises, therefo::,Ith;:0;:::Ur1;::
should be had to ll fin? made m t'h‘e Kmg S llioll l i in has been
obviate the need for livery of SelS1I1,.b11l'/‘ll’ ‘ill Sfilsbe firm and
awarded to the donee by the court, 1115 53151“ W1 _ _ , _
permanent, and thenceforward no pretended or fictitious seisin,
and so in this way the donee can without suspiCi0Y1 gram the thmg
' - - n ' f ( fi
to the donor to hold for his life. 2 Hence the 1mP"rl5::11:: ‘:)f'lla’:§
as the most satisfactory way of ‘effecting an assui » t ' d
where the relationship of the parties ‘did not Undergo an 0" ’“a‘r
and evident change corresponding Wlth the legal Change-
The importance of seisin and the effect of C011V6yance by way
‘ ) i ’ R I . I i .
of fine, can be illustrated frointwo &SSOClai3ed]l:§(IfE fiig: tefilicii
1246 and 1256’ and an mqlllilltlon takendlll M): icate of land in
fine (502/192) Wllllllm. (.le Dltton grants‘ alllilli marriagc4 with
Shofiord to his son’ Wllllam de Sllollordl m -M l V’V’1l'- m and
Margaret daughter of Alan de Maidstone, '00 holdltod 1  f
’ . . - , ‘ 1e ee.
Margaret and the heirs of their bodies of ‘tie Ciilffm :51 S £3116 and
William de Shoflord afterwards dlelll Wlllt (lll czilllled lllVIaI'gerl\/ de
Margaret’ by fine 796/282 (Wherem S dtlsl the rightoflAlan
Buklngherstl acknowledged. the Same lan :1. )6 and his heirs of
de Maidstone, as Of her g1ft> to hold to d.“ - .nnuallV
Margery and her heirs giving half a pound of cuinminiat f I  ,
-_ . - « , 2 a e air 5‘
and domg the servlclis to the Chlef lfilldsll \niil‘clh:iiltnissl1ie. Thcii
soon after levying this fin: l\§;)...ItEeI‘y d » and his Smvivilw Son.
her father-in-law, William e 1 .011, 3 ’ l l’ , .
‘ . (1 Al dc Maid-
Ralph de Ditton, took pcgssessilnagof the lan[dh:IJiumr:'Emmd that
stone brought an assize 0 none zsseirsm. . I  d her deed
Margery had enfeofEeddAlan lflliltlle :§(1\v?t’;1°§I1“a:vn from the
thereof to him, and ha glven 1”‘ Se“ ’ . - . .
‘ , d ,t, t aside, so -1
land. llhereupon Ralph Sought to have lllli€<l:tv:llieli(lurSVilr)f twelve of
jury of twenty-four was summoned to 001W ' - ~

1 f. 49b, and f. 2611).

2 f. 51. , s - Th‘~ '_, ‘n fact,
3 Esc. No. 41, 43 Henry lll V: 'A)‘C/1‘:Af,-t(1l‘It-t, llrI)‘1l't‘p1,;a‘,:4)l)l£*€‘n inl:lil:ddd with
a record of proceedings on a V\ rut of am ,

the I -rz,q1u'-mltiones post martem.
' See below, 13- lxlx-. UK-

5.?

 

INTRODUCTION xxxiii

a false oath} It seems obvious that Margery ought not, by her
fine, to be able to convey to her father, Alan de Maidstone, a
larger estate than she herself enjoyed, namely an estate for life.
However, this was not the ground on which the action proceeded,
partly perhaps because to have taken this point would have raised
the question of the right, and so have allowed the deforciant a.
number of procedural advantages, and partly because, as the
Petition of the barons in the Parliament at Oxford shows, the law
on the point was not free from doubt (see p. lxvii). The argument
which Ralph de Ditton relied upon was that, although Margery
levied the fine to her father, she did not thereupon withdraw to her
land of Bukiiiglierst, as the jury of twelve found, but remained in
seisin of the land, whereof Alan had no seisin, except at the will
of Margaret, as her father. One can see here the dangers incurred
by a daughter who, out of a sense of filial obligation, shared her
home with her father. On the issue whether Margaret remained
in seisin, or put Alan in seisin of the land, the parties placed them-
selves on the jury of twenty-four. Afterwards it was agreed
between them that Alan acknowledged the land to be the right of
Ralph, and quitclaimed it to him, and Ralph undertook to give
Alan 22 marks.

This litigation therefore ended with an agreement which looks
like a final concord, but no record of which is to be found amongst
the feet of fines. It is possible to cite a number of other references
to the making of final agreements of which no foot is preserved in
the Public Record Office. Several of these references are collected
together in Appendix II. In some cases the absence of a corres-
ponding foot is due to the fact that the fine was levied before
July, 1195, when the practice of keeping the foot in the 'l‘reasury
began. This, and not the possibility that it was levied before the
justices itinerant, is surely the explanation for the absence of a
foot corresponding to the fine printed in the Historical Manuscript
Commission Report on JISS of Lord dc l’I.sle and Dudley preserved
at I’enshurst Place (see Appendix II, p. cxxiv below). Some of the
entries on the Cu-rm Regis Rolls to the effect that the parties
concordavti szmt per licenciam justiciaromm may refer to another
kind of agreement than a final concord, but they are nevertheless
included in Appendix II. Occasionally, although the parties
came to an agreement, some hitch seems to have occurred—
perhaps one of the parties repented of the bargain and could not

‘ For this pro(‘edure, sec Hractoii. f. ilillb.


xzixiv 7 INTRODUCTION

be got into the courtr—‘and the chirograph was never delivered.
It is possible that a few fines may have been levied after July, 1195
for which the feet are not extant, but the number seems likely to
have been very small.

In the account, above, of the litigation between Ralph de
Ditton and Alan de Maidstone, it will be noticed that Margery
both executed a deed enfeofiing Alan of the land in Shofford, and
levied a fine to the same effect as the deed. Where a fine termin—
ates an action brought on a writ of Warranty of Charter or
Covenant there must have been a precedent charter or deed. In
a few cases (referred to in more detail below, p. xliv) it has been
possible to find deeds associated with fines in this way, but in
many other cases where a record of such deeds might have been
expected to be found, e.g. in the cartularies of religious founda-
tions, none exists. The absence of such references seems to be so
regular that it is tempting to wonder whether the allegation of a
prior charter or deed of covenant may itself be fictitious. Two or
three centuries later such a fiction would not be surprising, but it
is probably too audacious a speculation for the thirteenth century.

Deeds unaccompanied by fines certainly remained in very
general use for the assurance of land at this time. Of a score or so
of deeds in the Kent County Archives of this date, not one is
associated with a fine. These are all deeds of secular persons, but
it is evident from the cartularies of various monastic houses that
they, too, were content to rely upon a deed without fine. [he
cartulary of Bilsington Priory, for example, contains a record. of
about 140 deeds belonging to the thirteenth century, none of ’Wl1lCl'i
is supported by a fine ; the collection of charters relating to
Cumbwell Abbey‘ at the College of Arms contains ten charters

which might be expected to be followed by fines, but were not ;
the same is true of the cartulary of Leeds Priory, now in the KC’/Ht’
County Archives ; the Register which is Part II of The Black Boolr
of St. Augustine must contain copies of some hundreds of charters,
but there are associated fines for only two ; the cartulary of St.
Gregory’s Priory, Canterbury, contains copies of more than 200
charters, the majority dating from the end of the twelfth or the
beginning of the thirteenth century, but only one is supported
by a fine? ‘ and of the large number of deeds recorded in Thorpe s

3

., , . 194 I . . _ , .
: ifi(d:l)te‘d tI())pMrs. Aeudigy Woodcock for her kindness in allowing

me to use her transcript of the cartular)’ Of St’ Gm/30r3'lS P1‘l0"Ya ‘Vhlch She
is editing for the Camden Series.

    

 

  

 
 

 

INTRODUCTION xxx;

Registrum Rofiense, only a handful led to fines. Bracton gives a
few hints of the occasions on which it would be wise to levy a fine
—-—for example, where any doubt about change of seisin might
arise-—and the fine had an obvious use in barring an entail or
enabling a married woman to make an effective and indefeasible
assurance of her land, but the clue to the problem why, in some
apparently straightforward and uncomplicated assurances, resort
was had to a fine, whilst in other similar cases a deed was regarded
as sufficient (and perhaps even foeffment without deed) does not
seem to emerge from the Kent fines of the thirteenth century.

One conspicuous advantage of a fine, compared with a deed,
was its preclusive effect on the rights of third parties. It is
natural that both a deed and a fine should normally bind the
parties to it and those deriving title from them1 ; it is prirna facie
more surprising that a fine bound not only the parties and their
privies, but also third parties unless they put in their claims
within a period which was as short, when Bracton wrote, as thirty
days? ; for the claimant third-party “ has the space of at least one
month (according to the common provision of the realm) within
which he can conveniently come after the plea was commenced,
wherever he might be within the kingdom Within the four seas,
because whoever is impleaded ought to have at least fifteen days
summons, which may be termed a reasonable summons, and a
chirograph3 is not allowed to anyone on the first day of a lawsuit,
but he shall have another day, after an interval of at least fifteen

1 There is an example of a conusor trying to upset her own fine in an
action heard comm rege 57 Henry III (Abbr. Plac., p. 183). Maud, now
the wife of John Giffard, who by fine 853/300 acknowledged the manor of
Wickhambreux to be the right of VVilliam de Brewes (who was her brother),
now alleges that she was under age when the fine was levied, and that
William de Weston, who was of her brothers household, was falsely created
her attorney and that she never took any part in levying the fine. William
de Brewes says that the foot of the fine is proof onougli of his right, and
that the justices would never have allowed the fine to be made if Maud
were under age. Abbr. Plac. does not record the judgment of the court.
This case may be compared with fine 185/105, which it is evident from the
endorsement the justices would not allow until they had satisfied them-
selves that the coniisor was of full age. The Czmia Reg/is Rolls contain
occasional entries of agreements in the nature of a final concord where
the making of the chirograph was deferred because one of the parties was
not of age : see, c.g., the action in Trinity Term, 16 John, between Reginald
de Churchgate and others [Q] and Edith, widow of Swein, and her son
Alan [D], concerning land at Swartingeshal’, co. Kent, in which agree-
ment is reached but no cliirograph is made because three of the plaintiffs
are infants. There is no record that the fine was completed after they had
attained full ago.

2 ff. 436, 436b.

3 i.e.. the written document containing the final concord.

 

 


 

 

xxxvi INTRODUCTION

days, so that during the whole of that time he who had a right
could enter his claim.”1 Time, however, will not run against a
third party who has an adverse right and who is overseas, or a
minor, or out of his mind, or in prison, or too ill to deal with his
afiairs, or absent through force or fraud, or away on the King’s
service, or is a woman under the power of her husband. It must
have been comforting to the parties to a fine to reflect that their
transaction could not subsequently be upset by the assertion of
some adverse right, but the period of thirty days from the issue of
the summons within which third parties must enter their claims
seems unjustly short, and that view evidently prevailed, for the
Statute of Fines, 1290,? defined it as a year and a day. It will be
noticed, in fact, from a perusal of this calendar, that the assertion
of a related (not necessarily an adverse) right was by no means
frequent.

After these general remarks about real property law and con-
veyancing procedure, we must examine in more detail the non-
litigious uses to which fines were put. With a very few exceptions,
the transactions recorded in this volume fall into one or other of
the following three categories :

(a) A new estate may be created, by way of subinfeiidation :

A grants to B to hold to B and his heirs of A and his heirs,
B undertaking to perform certain services.

(b) An existing estate may be transferred, by way of substitu-
tion 2 A grants to B to hold to B and his heirs of the chief
lords of the fee.

(0) One party releases, or quitclaims, to the other some interest
in land, sometimes less than an estate in fee simple. Some-
times the nature of the interest released is evident on the
face of the fine, e.g. a right to dower, but usually it is un«
specified, and there is rarely any means of ascertaining the
true nature of the transaction. The number of simple
releases is proportionately larger in the earlier part of the
period than the later, when the typical fine was an ack-
nowledgement of the conusee’s right of the gift of the‘
conusor, and the action was in the form of Warranty oi

- ' ' f the
1 In a case brought up into the Kings court from_ the court 0
Archbishop of Canterbury, Michaelmas Term, 5 John, it is rgcotfcitgddthzt
the Archbishop took the land into his own hands. for fi._pGI1‘lO 0. b cgysé
to give possible claimants an opporturiity‘ to put him tAlie1}rb0i;‘-1(YJn5’é cozrtuhe
the plaintiff did not? then put iii his claim in t e . re 1 P
cannot now succeed in the King s court.
2 For a note on this Statute see above, p. xx.

 

 

-;.>.;»;.:.,....m»zi»;"‘  ‘ * ‘  " ‘ r'~’- v

 

 ..»_,..,~_.-u.~n, « \ . .

INTRODUCTION xxxvii

Charter. It is perhaps, possible, although there is no
definite evidence for the theory, that the earlier practice in
conveying a fee simple was to make feoffment with livery
of seisin, and to follow it with a formal quitclaim efiected
by means of a fine. Such a practice would account for the
preponderance of quitclaims amongst the earlier fines ; it
seems scarcely possible that they can all represent releases
of some smaller estate than the fee simple, such as dower,
the reversion on the termination of a life estate or term of
years, or the surrender by one colieir to another of his
reasonable portion of an inheritance. On the other hand,
a release alone would not be sufficient to assure an estate in
fee simple and its use as complementary to a feoifment
therefore seems a likely procedure.‘

Of the approximately 1,430 fines calendared in this volume,
about one-third seem to have as their object, whatever may be
the form of the fine, the unconditional assurance of an interest in
land by one party to the other. There is usually nothing to show
conclusively whether the transaction was a gift, or a sale with a
purchase price equal to the full value of the land, or whether the
services reserved by the grantor represented a “ rack rent”.

About the same proportion, namely one-third, consist of fines
in which a married woman joins with her husband in acknowledg-
ing or releasing a right, or making a grant. The proportion of
fines of this kind steadily increases during the thirteenth century,
and for the last twenty-five years of Henry III’s reign amounts to
considerably more than the one-half of the total? VVell might
the fine he described as “ the married woinan’s conveyance”.
Sometimes the land belongs to the husband, the purpose of the
wife’s participation being therefore to bar a claim by her to (lower
in the land if she should outlive her husband ; sometimes the land
belongs to the woman, having been acquired by her before or since
marriage. Her husband enjoyed the fruits of her land so long as
the marriage subsisted, and as tenant by the courtesy of England
he continued to enjoy them for life, if she predeceased him, pro-
vided that issue of the marriage had been born alive. However,

1 The possibility that a quitclaim by fine was used to strengthen feofll
mont with livery of seisin is referred to again below, p. l.

2 The pi'op(iI'tio1i of fines levied by husband and wife seems to be some-
what sinaller in later years, e.g., reg/no Edward II. Certainly in \/Viltshire
it was then a significantly smaller proportion : Wiltshire Fart of Fines,
Edward I and 11, ed. R. B. Pugh (VViltshire Archaeological and Natural
History Society, Records Branch, i, 1939).

 

 


xxxviii INTRODUCTION

the husband had no right to alienate his wife’s land, or at least to
alienate a greater interest in it than he himself enjoyed, but neither
could the wife alienate it without the concurrence of her husband}
But to take a conveyance of a wife’s land from the husband and
wife, even if evidenced by a deed, was a precarious business, for
after her husband's death the woman might repudiate the trans-
action on the ground that she had not been a free agent, but was
acting under the coercion of her husband. However, if the
conveyance was made by way of fine, subsequent repudiation was
not possible, for it would have been seen, comm publico, that the
woman was acting of her own will, and not under compulsion?
The later practice, referred to in the Statute of Fines, 1290} was
for the justices before whom the fine was levied to examine the
woman separately, and if she did not give her assent, the fine
was not allowed to be levied. Bracton has nothing to  about a
separate examination ; if the enfeoffment was made outside the
court, then indeed the woman’s act may have been coerced and
involuntary, but within the King’s court4 “ no violence is offered,
no fear is created, nor is it probable that in the King’s court
anyone will be compelled by violence to do, or not to do, some-
thing against his will, because there safety and help may be
invoked. . . . But if coercion has been used, which can easily be
seen from the look and bearing of the woman, although in the court
of the King, a chirograph thereon would never be made, nor
enrolment scarcely allowed. And it is to be noted that an
enrolment by itself, without a chirograph, will never take away the
right of action of a woman after her husband’s death.”

It is quite likely that the change from the practice described
by Bracton to the separate examination of the woman referred to
in the Statute of Fines resulted from litigation which supervened
upon a Kent fine, 258/122. Mabel de Gatton, the wife of Thomas

1 Pollock and Maitland, H.E.L., ii, pp. 410 at scq.

2 There was, of course, the danger that the man 1night'produce 21.
Woman as his wife who in fact was not his wife. A Siissex case oi 9 |<l(l\Vard.l
(Abbr. I’lar:., p. 201) results in the imprisonment oi the conusorfor this
offence, and the true wife is to recover from the conusec, theB1shop of
Excter, who presumably was acting innocently, and 1]] good faith.

3 For a note on this statute, see above, p. xx.

“ Although Bracton refers specifically to the King’s‘court (f. 32lb), fines
levied by lnisband and wife, with a separate examination of the wife, were
known in borough courts, as early as the thirteenth ccntur__v ; see Borough
(7u.s'tom.s-, ed. Mary Bateson (Sclden Society, vol. 2l,_lE}0(i), ii, p. 115. ' fora
suggested Jewish origin of this practice, see the article by 1* . Ashe Lincoln,
in b'la'rrs and J cwish Charters prescrm_'d m the [frills/I 3\I7I~<»‘€’Il7I7- (-](‘W1Sh
Historical Society of England), ll, lxxil.

 

 

 

 xxxix

de Ravelingham (or Bavelingham) complained that her husband
had alienated her land at Thurnham to Robert de Manekeseya,
who answered that he held the land by fine levied by Thomas and
Mabel. The case was heard in 1235 comm rage, and it was decided
that Robert should hold the land in peace “ until other provision
be made by common counsel of the Kingdom ”. It looks from this
as though the court was doubtful about the passing of property by
a married woman in this way, and that some alteration of pro-
cedure was contemplated.‘

Where a fine levied by a husband and wife takes the form of an
acknowledgment of right and states the terms on which the
conusee is to hold the land, it will usually record that he is to hold
either from the husband and wife and the husband’s heirs, or from
the husband and wife and the wifc’s heirs. In the latter case it
is the wife’s property that is being conveyed, in the former the
husbands property, with the wife, by joining as a party to the
line, barring any claim she may have to dower. VVhere the line
takes the form of a quitclaim by husband and wife, it seems likely
that it may have been supplementary to an cnfeoffinent made
outside the court by the husband of his own land, and that the
purpose of the line is to release the wife’s right to (lower if she
outlives her husband.

in a very much smaller number of cases, some 34 in all, and the
majority dating from the first half of Henry l'Il‘s reign, lines are
used to assure land to a husband and wife, and the wife’s heirs.
This is the nearest to a grant to a married woman known to the
law.

Other purposes for which fines were regularly used at this
period must be stated in summary form 2

(I) TllCl‘0 are more than 70 fines recording the settlement of

claims to dower. These are much more frequent during the
reigns of Richard and John and the first twenty years of
‘Henry IIl’s reign than during later years, and as suggested
below (p. lxx viii) may indicate that the law at that period as
to (lower was not yet clearly settled. For the last ten years
of the reign, there are only two fines concerning (lower.

1 I)’ru,r't(m’.s' JVOT/P-R0071‘, iii, pp. 186-8; No. 1171. The relationship of
tho pnrties in this case is far from clear : Robert do lVIu,nkcsc_v married
Mabel do (}atton’s daugliter, but vrhctlicr it was a (laughter by her first
husband Hmno do Gutton, or her second lmsluind, Thomus dc .l§a\'clingham,
is uncertain. Robert do lvlanlwscy aftcrwurds granted the land to the
Prior and Convent of Cumbwoll, und after his death the grant was con-
tinued by \\"illiam de Say us the superior lord (see A roll. flunk, V, pp. 221
at seq.).

 

nu-)0-vv-' -


 

xl INTRODUCTION

(2) About 50 fines effect exchanges of property.

(3) In rather more than 50 cases land is partitioned : this is
often a partition between coheirs on a writ of right de
mtionabili parte, but the relationship of the parties and
the motive behind the transaction are not always apparent
on the face of the fine.

(4) In about 50 fines, more than 40 of them dating from the
second half of Henry III’s reign, a conditional estate is
granted.

(5) In rather more than 60 fines an estate for life is granted.

In addition, as will be noticed from this calendar, fines at this

period were used occasionally for a variety of other purposes,
including the following :

(1) Making a family settlement-, or a grant in frank-marriage.

(2) The confirmation, by a descendant, of a grant by an
ancestor, usually by a son of his fathers grant, the grantee
frequently being a church or a religious house. Possibly
some of these fines should be linked \vith Bractoxfs state-
ment1 that if a man by his dying wish (in e.?;h'm'n(z, vol/untatc)
gives to a religious house land with his body, but dies seised
of the land, the gift fails unless it is confirmed by the heir.
Some confirmatory fines, however, seem to have been
levied many years after the original donation.

(3) On three occasions, all of them during John’s reign, a fine
is used simply as a means of getting a private deed enrolled
on the record of the court. Such a transaction suggests the
last stage of confusion between the ordinary fine procedure
and the making of a written agreement which is recited in
court, .'1r*kr1owledged by the parties, witnessed by the
justices, and enrolled for a payment of one mark on the
rolls of the court, but is not called a fine?

(4) Half-a-dozen fines record the grant of a corrody, usually by a
religious house and in return for a gift of land or the release
of a right to dower.

(5) One early fine (9 Ric. I: 25/ll) apparently creates a
vifgage: the debtor assigns to his creditor annual rents
totalling 50s. until the sum of 12% li. has been paid. The
amount of the creditor’s claim was for 20 li., but it seems

1 f. 27b. _

Z See e.g. the agreement recorded on the Cur/1.'a ltegis Rolls for Trinity
Term Id John between Thomas de Godwineton and John son of \Vi1liam
and Theobald his brother.

INTRODUCTION xli

unlikely that this was the amount of the debt. Whether
the payment of 12% li. includes an element of interest does
not appear.

(6) A fine of 14 John (140/51) records the grant of a term of
years as part of the consideration for a quitclaim. Fine
477/186, creates a “ building lease ” for a term of 26 years,
the lessee undertaking to build a house to the value of
201i. These are the only examples of fines by which terms
of years are created.

(7) Fines are occasionally used to alter the services, especially
the rent, by which land is held.

(8) A fine may be used to record an agreement for alternate
presentations, e.g. by two sisters, to a church (79/74).

(9) Fine 570 / 204 appears to have as its purpose the conversion
of a socage tenure into frankalmoign.

(10) Fine 652/242 is an agreement that the tenants at Sheldwich
of the Hospital of St. John at Puckeshall shall henceforth
do suit at the Hospital’s court at Sheldwich instead of to
its less conveniently situated court at Puckeshall in Sitting-
bournc.

(11) Fine 6‘:’.0/229 enlarges a life estate into a fee simple.

(12) Fines 907/315 and 1040 /357 are agreements about the
custody of heirs and their lands.

The true character of the transaction, as noted above, is not
always apparent on the face of the fine, and it is unlikely that these
lists of the purposes for which fines were being used by Kent people
in the thirteenth century are complete. Nevertheless, they
suffice to show the wide variety of agreements which, at this time,
might be given a legal tcgument in the form of a fine.

III. Forms of Action

From the twelfth to the nineteenth century procedural law,
and therefore often substantive law also, were governed by the
rules relating to forms of action. If one man has been wronged by
another, “it is not enough that in some way or other he should
compel his adversary to appear in court and should then state in the
words that naturally occur to him the facts on which he relies and
the remedy to which he thinks himself entitled.”‘ His first step is
to obtain from the Chancery the kind of writ that is proper to his
claim. The writ having once been sued out, the form which the

1 F. VV. Maitland. The I"a7'7m of Action at Comvmooz Law, p. 2 (first
published in 1909 in the volume entitled Equity).

1»


<»-'~w».-, ./ rV1‘ A...

 

34 KENT FEET OF FEINES 4 [545 John

of Mort d’Ancestor._ Q. quitclaimed from himself and his heirs
to D. and their heirs. D. gave 215,

[96.6.79; cf. A.C’., cxxrv.]

Higham. Octave of St. John the Baptist [1 July] Q. (pet.)
John de Beseuill and W. Petronilla. D. (ten.) William s_ of
Robert ; 16 ac. of marsh, 6 ac. of arable land, 2 ac. of meadow,
and 1 ac. 1 rod of wood in Hegham which Petronilla. claimed as
her dower from the free tenement of Robert s. of Lambert late
her husband. Q. quitclaimed Petronilla’s right to D. and his
heirs, and  has granted to Petronilla all the service of Simon de
Gatle, ‘to wit, 6s. from 5 ac. of land which he held in Hegham,
excepting the foreign service which remains to D. and his heirs.
And D. has granted to Petronilla all the land called Scereday in
the same vill to hold for her life under the name of dower. And
Q. shall do the third part of the service which belongs to the land
of D. in Hegham, less 6d. Simon was present and consented.

[95.6.77; cf. A.C., cxXv.]

Bekesbourne. Three weeks from Michaelmas [20 Oct.] Q.
(pet.) Hillaria dau. of Helliard. D. (ten.) William de Becco;
40 ac. of land in Liuingelburn. Q. quitclaimed from herself and
her heirs to D. and his heirs, and D. has granted to Q. 6% ac. of
land in Sumerfeld which she held before from D., to hold to Q.
and her heirs from D. and his heirs rendering yearly 5d. at
Michaelmas for all service saving foreign service.

[95.5.75; cf. A.C., Cxxv1.]

Bekesbourne. Octave of St. Martin [18 Nov.] Q. (pet.)
Diering de N orthwud and W. Juliana. D. (ten.) William de
Becco; 40 ac. of land in Liuingelburne. Q. quitclaimed from
themselves and their heirs to D. and his heirs. D. has granted
to Q. and the heirs of Juliana 6% ac. of land in Sumerfeld which
they held before from D. to hold from him and his heirs, rendering
yearly 5d. at Michaelmas for all service saving foreign service.

[95.5.74; cf. A.C., exxvn.]

Lewisham. Quindene [?]1 of St. Hilary [27 Jan. 1203/4.]
Q. (pet.) Walter s. of Thomas. D. (ten.) Benedict, Abbot of
Stratford ; 2 hides of land in Leueseham. Q. quitclaimed from
himself and his heirs to D. and his successors. D. gave 5 marks.

1 A die sancti yllarrii in . . . dies. Larking considers the form implies
that the obliterated letters must be 121.

 

1203-4] KENT FEET OF FINES 35

Warranty by Q. and his heirs against all men coming out of the

enclosure (ceppus) of the said Q.‘
[95.5.72; cf. A.O'., cxxv1n.]

Eynsford. One month from Easter [23 May.] Q. (pet.)

S' illa dau. of Ralph. D. (ten.) Ralph, Richard, John, Henry,
illiam, Thomas, Peter, Elyas, Geoffrey and Gilbert sons of
Alard Tundu by Ralph and Richard ; 10 ac. of land in Einesford.
Recognizance of Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitclaimed from herself
and her heirs to D. and their heirs all her right in the land, and
D. quitclaimed from themselves and their heirs to Q. and her
heirs 4s. rent in the same vill, which Q. before deraigned
(disrationare) against them in the said Court. D. moreover gave
4 marks. And note that Q. has not deraigned the 4s. rent against

D‘ except by default‘ [95.5.73; cf. A.C., Cxx1x.]

6 JOHN. 1204-5

Chislet. Octave of St. Michael 6 John [6 Oct. 1204] Q.
(pet.) Roger, Abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, by Adam his
monk. D. (ten.) Jordan de Scrres ; 40 ac. of marsh in the manor
of Cistelet. D. acknowledged marsh to be the right of Q. and of
the Church of St. Augustine, Canterbury ; for this Q. granted to
D. and his heirs to hold from Q. and his successors by the free
service of 7s. 6d. yearly payable at Christmas and St. John the

Baptist for all service. D. gave 1005.
[95.6.85; cf. A.C., Cxxx.]

Chislet. Octave of St. Michael [6 Oct.] Q. (pet.) Roger,
Abbot of St. Augustine, by Adam his monk. D. (ten.) Salomon
de Serres ; 20 ac. of marsh in the manor of Cistelet. D.
acknowledged the marsh to be the right of Q. and of the Church
of St. Augustine, Canterbury ; for which Q. granted to D. and his
heirs to hold from Q. and his successors by the free service of led.
yearly payable Christmas, and St. John Baptist for all service.

D g'‘“"3 163- 8d- [95.a.s7; cf.  CxxxI.]

Chislet. Octave of St. Michael [6 Oct] Q. (pet.) Roger.
Abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, by Adam his mOY1k- D-
(ten.) Lambin de Serres ; 20 ac. of marsh in the manor Of Cifiteleih

D. acknowledged marsh to be the right of Q.; for which Q.

1 An early record against the right of way, of. Lnrking.

 

 


33  FEET OF FINES ' A ‘[‘7..s ‘John
Elasilllia. andf (;1stance. And D. quitclaimed from themselves and

e eirs o . asiha and Custance to Q. and his heirs one eighth
part of a kmght s fee which Q. before held, and whereof there was

a plea between them in the county of Kent by Writ of Right.

$3 each of them shall hold his tenement in chief of the chief

[95.6.89; of. 11.0., oxL.]

Lydden. Octave of St. Hilary [20 Jan. 1205/6.] Q. (pe1;_)
Stephen de Ponton. D. (ten.) Richard, Abbot of Langdon by
brother Walter his Canon ; the church of Ledene. Recognizance
o-f Darrein Presentment. Q. acknowledged the Church to be the
right of D. and of his Church and quitclaimed from himself and
his heirs to D. and his successors. And D, and his convent

shall receive him in all the benefits and prayers which shall be in

their church of Langedun.
[95.6.9l; cf. A.C'., CXLL]

_Ilaversham. Quindene of Easter [16 April 1206] Q. (pet.)
William s. of Amfrey and VValter s. of Osbert. D. (ten.) Ailgar,
Abbot of Faversham ; 1% virgates of land, a salt pit and pasture
for 150 sheep in Faueresham. Q. quitclaimed from themselves

and their heirs to D. and his successors. D. gave VVi1liam

5 marks and Walter 5 marks.
[95.6.92; of. 21.0., CxLii.]

8 JOHN. 1206-7

Rainham. At VVinchester (Winton) 15 May 8 John [l2O6]1
Q. (pet.) Emma dau. of Aluered by Henry s. of John. D. (ten.)
James de Reneham ; 10 ac. of land in Reneham. Q. quitclaimed
from herself and her heirs to D. and his heirs. D. gave 15s.
[95.7.118; cf. A.O., cxLIii.]

Farningham. Octave of St. John the Baptist [1 July] Q.
Stephen Clericus of Chelefeld. D. Thomas Escotland ; 60 ac. of
land in Freningham. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknow-
ledged the right of Q. ; to hold to Q. and his heirs from D. and his
heirs by the service of the twenty fifth part of one knight’s fee,

for all service. Q. gave 5 marks.
[95.’7.ll9; of. 11.0., cxLiv.]

‘ Larking gives this year in preference to 1207 as, according to the
_King’s Itinerary, he was at Winchester on 14 May 1206, but on that date
in 1207 at Woodstock. The doubt arises from the practice of the regnal
year of King John being reckoned from the movable Feast of Ascension.

.%__..,,, -......._............—.».__  W, M p

 

1205-6]] KENT FEET or FINES 39

Bynsford. At Canterbury. Morrow of the Exaltation of the
Holy Cross [15 Sept.] Q. (pet.) Sibilla dau. of Ralph. D. (ten.)
Elyas Clericus ; one mess. in Einesford. Recognizance of Mort
d’A:ncestor. D. acknowledged land to be the right of Q. ; for
which Q. granted to D. and his heirs to held from Q. and her heirs
by the free service of 19d. yearly payable at the four quarters
for all service belonging to the same. And D. and his heirs shall
acquit the mess. against the chief lords of that fee for all services
belonging to that mess. D. gave 5s.

[95.7.l08; cf. A.C., cxLv.]

Summerfield [in Woodnesborough]. At Canterbury. Morrow
of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross [15 Sept.] [Q.] Alan de Burn.
[D.] William de Elding and w. Avicia ; 6 ac. of land in Sumerfeld.
Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged land to be the
right of Q. to hold to Q. and his heirs from D. and the heirs of
Avicia by the free service of 2s. yearly rendered at Michaelmas at
Liuingesburn [Bekesbourne] for all service. And Q. and his heirs
shall acquit the land against the chief lords of that fee from all

services belonging to that land. Q. gave 60s.
[95.7.l().5; cf. A.C'., cxi.vi.]

Bekesbourne. At Canterbury. Morrow of the Holy Cross
[15 Sept.] [Q.] William de Becco. [D.] William de Alding and w.
Avicia; 40 ac. of land in Liuingeburn. Plea of Warranty of
Charter. D. acknowledges land to be the right of Q. and quit-
claimed from themselves and the heirs of Avicia to Q. and his

heirs‘ Q‘ gewe 10 marks‘ [95.7.1l5; cf. A.C., cxLv1i.]

Gillingham. At Canterbury. Morrow of the Exaltation of
the Holy Cross [15 Sept.] Q. [pet.] Aldina the widow. D. (ten.)
Benedict de Brunstun ; 10 ac. of land in Gillingcham which she
claimed as her dower from the free tenement of Arnulf s. of Robert
late her husband in the same vill. D. granted to hold to Q. 6 ac.
of the said land which lie in VVestfield towards the west from the
road, for her life. Q. quitclaimed to D. and his heirs all her right

in the name of dower. [95.7_l03 ; cf_ A_C_’ CXLVHL]

Charing. At Canterbury. Morrow of the Exaltation of the
Holy Cross [15 Sept] Q. (pet.) William de Aketon. D. (ten.)
Robert, Jordan and Ivo, sons of Ralph ; 60 ac. of land in Cherring.

 
   

g.J./ )1

 7,573’

'\‘X Z15‘/\ ‘:’7_s>~9=>—§1 _y-w>.—~’}

 

‘<‘*f":) 


44 KENT FEET OF FINES [9 John

which she had from the free ‘tenement of Arnulfv late her husband
in the same vill. Q. quitclalmed to D. and his heirs all her right

and claim which she had against him in the name of dower. D.
gave 20s.
[95.7.l10; cf. A.0., cLxvr.]

Ash [near Wrotham]. At Wodestoek. Tuesday after the
[Octave of the Purifie]ation of the Blessed Mary [13 Feb.] Q.
Robert Teshaurarius, Prior of the Hospital of Jerusalem. D.
Eudo Paterik; the advowson of the church of Essa. Plea of
Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the right of Q. and
quitclaimed from himself and his heirs to Q. and the brethren
of the Hospital and their successors. Q. gave 10 marks.

[95.7.10l ; cf. A.O., CLXVIL]

9 JOHN. 1207-8

Bishopsbourne. Morrow of St. John 9 John [25 June
1207] Q. (pet.) William Trune by Martin Pohhe. D. (ten.)
Gilbert dc Burnes ; 13 ac. of land in Burnes. D. acknow-
ledged land to be the right of Q. ; for which Q. granted to hold
to D. for his life from Q. and his heirs by the free service of 12d.
yearly for all service payable at Michaelmas. Reversion to Q.
and his heirs quit of the heirs of D. D. rendered to Q. all the
charters which he said he had concerning the said land.

[95.7.l25; cf. A.C'., cLxvx1I.]

Bonnington. Octave of St. Hilary [20 Jan. 1207/8] Q. (pet.)
Baldewin Filloil. D. (ten.) Roger de Langeford ; half a knight’s
fee in Buninton. Recognizance of the Grand Assize. Q.
acknowledged right of D. to hold to D. and his heirs from Q. and
his heirs by the service of half a knight’s fee for all service.

[95.7.l2l ; cf. A.C., cLx1x.]

Bonnington. Same date [20 Jan.] Q. (pet.) Roger de
Langeford. D. (ten.) Gilbert de Kentewelle; half a knight’s
fee in Buninton. D. vouched to warrant Baldwin Filloil in
the same Court, who came and warranted to him. Recog-
nizance of Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitclaimed from himself and
his heirs to Gilbert and Baldwin and their heirs the half fee with
the advowson of the church of the same vill. D. gave 15 marks.

[95.7.l20; cf. A.(7., CLxx.]

V , VA’! m. EL. ». . «/“

1207-8] _ KENT FEET OF FINES 45

Ghegworth [in Ulcombe]. Octave of the Purification of the
Blessed Mary [9 Feb.] Q. (pet.) Roeisia de Chagewuthe by
Nicholas Clericus. D. (ten.) Alan de Elmestede; the dower of
Q. (Roesia) which she claimed from Hamo de Elmestede late her
husband in Chagewuthe. Q. quitclaimed to D. and his heirs.

D. gave 5 marks.
[95.7.l23; cf. A.C'., cLxx1.]

Eccles [in Aylesford]. Quindene of Easter [20 April 1208]
[Q.] Robert de Rokesle. [D.] Warin s. of Gilbert ; 88 ac. of land
and one mark rent in Eccles. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. warrants to Q. in these words. Know all present and to come
that I VVarin s. of Gilbert s. of Gerold de Eccl[es] have granted
and by this my charter have confirmed to Robert de Rokesle
88 ac. of land with appurtenances in Eceles, to wit, in Rode
26 ac., in Wrtha 22 ac., in Stonhull 16 ac., in Wiueling 7 ac.,
in Rusham 3 ac., in Estmede 2% ac. of meadow, 8 ac. of land in
Breche and 3 ac. in the Marsh, and the homage and service of
Richard de Pouesherst. Moreover I have given the said Robert
one mark rent in Eccles, to wit, the homage of Edmund de Eccles,
Robert de Langefeld, VVilliam Armigery, Robert Claviger, the
heirs of Geoffrey his br., Wlmar Thichot, and Ailwin at Cliue
with all the service which they owe to me. To hold to Robert
and his heirs from me and my heirs in fee and inheritance, freely
and quietly, wholly and finally with all appurtenances without
any reserve, doing therefore to me and my heirs the service of
half a knight for all service, things and exaction. Warranty by
VVa.rin and his heirs. Q. gave 20s.

[$157.12-L; cf. A.C.. <‘Lxxn.'l

Rainham; Borden. One month from Easter [4 May.] Q. (pet-.)
Simon dc Cref. D. (ten.) Henry de lnsula ; 20 ac. of land and
one mill in Renham. Recognizancc of Mort d’Ancestor. D.
acknowledged land to be the right of Q. and quitclaimed from
himself and his heirs to Q. and his heirs. Q. gave 7 ac. of land
in Borden which lie before D’s house towards the south. To
hold to D. and his heirs from Q. and his heirs by the free service
of 2s. yearly for all service, payable at Michaelmas. And Q. and
his heirs shall defend the 7 ac. from all foreign service.

[95.7.1‘.Z2; cf. .-1.0., cLxxm.]


     

50 KENT FEET OF FINES [l3—l4 John

1A_lard 2 a.c..of land in Parva Derteford. Q. quitclaimed from
imse and his heirs to D. and his heirs. D. gave 20s.
[95.8.l36; cf. A.O'., cLxxx1v.]

Lewisham. At Northampton. Five weeks from Easter

[8 May, 1211.] Q. (pet.) Ascelina de Leuesham. D. (ten.) Reginald
]1;°"e3t:1‘ ; 5 ac. of land in Leuesham which Q. claimed against
R. ‘as er dower which came to her from the free tenement of
eingod Alderman late her husband. Q. quitclaimed from

herself to D. and his heirs all her right in the name of dower.

D. gave 2 marks.
[95.8.l37; cf. A.C., cLxxxv.]

13 JOHN. 1211-12

Eccles [_111 Aylesford]. At Newcastle on Tyne. Three weeks
from St. Hilary 13 John [3 Feb. 1211/12] Q. (pet.) Mabel Wid. of
Warm de Eccles. D. (ten.) Walter Capellanus; the third part
of one ac. of land in Eccles which Q. claimed against D. as her
dower of the gift of Warin late her husband. Q. quitclaimed
to D., or to whomever he wished to give it, all her right in the

dower. D. ave2 b t
g es“ 5' [95.s.13s; cf. A.C., c1.xxxv:.]

Beke3b°u1'119§ Bishopsbourne ; Chelsfield ; Burcheston.1
At‘ Newcastle on Tyne. 13 John [? 3 Feb., 1211/l2]2 Q. (pet.)
William de Becco. D. (ten.) Eustace de Burne; one carucate of
land 1n Leuingesburn. Q. acknowledged land to be the right of D.
and D. gave Q. 16 ac. of the same land, to wit, 15 ac. which lie
below Q’s garden towards the east and one ac. which Jordan de
Bruera held of D. in the same vill. To hold to Q. and his heirs
together with the other tenement which he held before in the same
Vlll doing for it service to the King and his heirs as much as
belongs to one carucate of land which he holds in the same vill.
Q. quitclaimed from himself and his heirs to D. and his heirs all
his right in the superplusage of the said carucate of land and in
all other tenements which Eustace de Burne father of D. held
in Burne, Chelesfund and Burcheston. General warranty by D.

and his heirs as to the 16 ac.
[95.8.l39; cf. A.0., cLxxxv1I.]

1 Possibly Birchington.
_ ’ Larking. on the evidence of the place where fine was levied, and the
list of the Judges suggests this date. It could, however, equally well be
10 F°b1‘“3J‘y ; _cf. next Fine.

1211-12] KENT FEET or FINES 51

Eccles [in Aylesford]. At Newcastle on Tyne. One month
from St. Hilary [10 Feb. 1211/12.] Q. (pet.) Mabel Wid. of Warin
de Eccles. D. (ten.) Humfrey Balistarius; the third part of
14 ac. of land in Eccles which Q. claimed against D. as her dower

of the gift of Warin late her husband. Q. quitclaimed to D. and
his heirs all her right in the name of dower. D. gave 34} marks.
[95.8.l42 ; cf. A.C’.,CLxxxV111.]

14 JOHN. 1212

Elvindenne [in Pemburyjl. At Winchester (Wintoniam).
Octave of the Holy Trinity 14 John [27 May, 1212] Q. (pet.)
Simon de Wahull. D. (ten.) William Crespin ; one mill in
Aluinden. Recognizance of Mort d’Ancestor. D. acknowledged
the mill to be the right of Q. ; for this Q. granted to hold to D.
and his heirs from Q. and his heirs by the free service of 9s. yearly
payable at Michaelmas for all service and exaction.

[95.8.l41; cf. A.C., ULxxx1x.]

Nettlestead. Octave of St. Michael [6 Oct-.] Q. (pet.) Simon s.
of Michael de Wahull. D. (ten.) Robert, Abbot of Boxley ;
95 ac. of land and pasture on the parish of Netlested, to wit,
all the land and pasture in the place called Radden which D.
held by Michael father of Q. of the inheritance of Andrea mother
of Q. late wife of Michael. D. quitclaimed from himself and his
successors to Q. and his heirs, and Q. gave 5 marks. And besides
Q. granted to D. all his meadow which is called Langemede in
the parish of Netlestede. To hold to D. and his successors from
the feast of St. Michael 14 John for 6 years ; reversion to Q. or
his heirs quit of D. and his successors. And D. has rendered to
Q. all the charters which he had from Michael and Andrea
concerning the land and pasture of Raddenden and the meadow
of Langmad, so that if D. or his successors shall proffer any
charter it shall be accounted null. Saving only to D. or his

successors his term of Langemed as is aforesaid.
[95.8.l40; cf. A.C., oxcil

1 So identified by Larking following the description given in fine
[95.lO.50] below, p. 64. According to an entry in tho_Rcg1ster of Hamo
Hethe (f. 18“) Wahull at a subsequent date included in his grant to the
Canons of Bayham the site of two mills, one at Pembury, the other at
Elvyndenne. This suggests that the latter was not actually in Pembury,
and it may be that this name now survives in Ellenden in I-lawkhurst.
The grant is printed in Registrum Roflense, p. 516.

 

 


104 KENT FEET OF FINES [12 Hen. III.

15s. 3d. at Michaelmas for all service due except foreign service.
Warranty by Q. and his heirs. And for this D. quitclaimed
from himself and his heirs to Q. and his heirs all his right in the
common of pasture in the land of Q. in Lyvingeburn [Bekes-
boume] between these divisions, to wit, between the pasture
of Patrikeburn and the pasture of the Prior of the Holy Trinity
towards the north and between Aderesbech towards the east
so that Q. and his heirs may enclose and ditch the said pasture
between the said bounds and do as they will so far as it belongs
to D. and his heirs. And be it known that Robert de Talewurth
whom D. vouched to warranty against Q. and who used to receive
a pair of gilt spurs for the said land was present and quitclaimed
from himself and his heirs to D. and his heirs the said rent of spurs
and likewise the said fee. And D. quitclaimed to Robert and his
heirs the warranty of the said land and the charter which he had
thereof from Adam father of the said Robert he gave back to him

in court.
[96.16.l88.]

Knowlton ; Bekesboume ; Patrixboume. At Hertford. Same

date. Q. (pet.) Eustace de Burne. D. (ten.) Reginald de Corn-

hill whom John de Sancto Leodegario vouched to warranty and
who warrants to him the moiety of a carucate of land in Cnolden.

D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. and for this Q.

granted it to D. To hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and his heirs
rendering yearly 14s. at Michaelmas for all service due except
foreign service. Warranty by Q. and his heirs. And for this
D. quitclaimed from himself and his heirs all his right in the
common of pasture in Q.’s land in Lyvingeburn [Bekesbourne]
between these divisions,to wit, between the pasture of Patrickeburn
and the pasture of William de Bek towards the north so that Q.
and his heirs may enclose and ditch the said pasture between
the said divisions and do as they will therein as far as belongs to
D. and his heirs. And be it known that Robert de Talewurd
whom D. vouched to warranty against Q. and who used '60 Fe00iV8
a pair of gilt spurs for the said land was present and quitclaimed
from himself and his heirs to D. and his heirs the said rent of the
spurs and likewise the same fee. And D. quitclaimed from lum-
self and his heirs to Robert and his heirs the warranty of the said
land, and the charter which he had thereof from Adam, father

of the said Robert, he gave back to him in court.
[96.16.186.]

.....<m.—

1227-7/8] KENT FEET OF FINES 105

I-Ioplands [in Westbere] ; Orel, Emesborough, Beauveys
[all in Chislet]. At Hertford. Morrow of St. Andrew the Apostle
[1 Dec.] Q. (pet.) John s. of Richard and W. Alice, by Philip s.
of Baldewin. D. (ten.) Huward de Bikeleg’ and W. Orgoillusa, by
Richard de Buissun for Orgoillusa; 2 earucates and 60 ac. of
land in Opiland, Ore, Erneberg and Beauueis. D. acknowledged
the land to be the right of Alice and for this Q. granted it to D.
To hold to D. and the heirs of Orgoillusa of Q. and the heirs of
Alice rendering yearly 40s. at Easter and Michaelmas and service
to the chief lords of the fee. Warranty by Q. and the heirs of

Alice. D. gave 12% marks.
[96.16.192b.]

Leaveland. Octave of St. Hilary [20 Jan. 1227/8.] Q. (pet.)
John, Abbot of St. Bertin of Flandr’ [at St. Omer]. D. Richard
de Leveland; advowson of the chapel of Lcveland. Assize of
Darrein Presentment. D. acknowledged the advowson to be
the right of Q. and church and quitclaimed from himself and his
heirs to Q., his successors and church. Q. received D. in all
benefits which henceforth shall be made in his house of St. Bertin.
[E'ndorsed.] And because it seemed to the Justices that Richard
was under age they made inquisition by many knights of the
county near, about his age, who all said that he was of full age.

[96.16.185.]

Wilmington [in Sellindge] ; Ruttington Lane [in Canterbury].
Same date. Q. (pet.) Richard s. of Roger. D. (ten.) Jocelin de
Oye ; 60 ac. of land in Wilminton. Recognizance of Assize of
Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitclaimed from himself and his heirs
to D. and his heirs. And for this D. granted for himself and his
heirs that they will pay to Q. for life every year 40s. at VVilminton
at Christmas and Nativity of St. John the Baptist. Clause of
distress. And besides D. granted to Q. a messuage in the suburbs
of Canterbury in the street called Trutinton by the house of
Geoffrey le Porter to the east, to hold to Q. for life of D. and his
heirs paying yearly 17d. at the same terms for all service, and D.
and his heirs shall acquit Q. against the chief lords of the fee.
After the death of Q., D. and his heirs shall he quit of the payment
of the 40s. and the messuage shall revert to them quit of the

h ' f Q.
em 0 [96.16.19().]

1 This name new survives in Ores Farm.


 

 

 

I92 KENT FEET OF FINES
Bekesbourne. Same date. Q. (pet.) William de Beck. D.
(ten.) Richard de Beck ; a moiety of 48 ac. of land in Lyvinge-
burne which Q.3laimed as his reasonable part of the inheritance
of William de Beck their father Whose heirs they are. Q. quit.
claimed from himself and his heirs all his right in the moiety to
D. and his heirs. And for this D. granted to Q. 20s. of rent to be
received yearly by Q. and his heirs by the hands of Henry de
Bourne and his heirs of the tenement which the said Henry holds
of D. in Lyvingeburne and by the hands of all other the tenants
in future, to Wit, at Mid-Lent and at Michaelmas, at the capital
mess. of the said Henry in the said vil1., saving to D. all other
services. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and his heirs paying
yearly at Easter 1 lb. of eummin. And moreover D. grants to
Q. that he and his heirs may have pasture for 4 cows yearly in
the pasture of D. in the said vill from Easter to Michaelmas,
except the pasture of the garden of D. and his heirs which remains
to them by this fine and if D. and his heirs do not wish to put
their cows in the pasture nevertheless (nichilominus) it shall be
lawful for Q. and his heirs to turn their cows in whenever they will
without hindrance of D. and his heirs and if Henry or other
tenants fail to pay the said sum, then D. and his heirs may distrain.
Henry was present and acknowledged that he owed the said
rent. Warranty by D. and his heirs of the rent and the pasture.
[96.29.50l.]

Shofibrd [in Maidstone]. Three weeks from St. Michael
[20 Oct.] Q. Alan de Maydenston. D. William de Ditton by
William de Shoford; a carucate of land in Shoford. Plea of
Covenant. Q. acknowledged the land to be the right of D. and
for this D. at the petition of Q. granted it to William de Shoford
 and h. of D. in free marriage with Margaret dau. of Q. To
hold to William s. of D. and the said Margaret and the heirs of
their bodies lawfully begotten of the chief lords of that fee and
doing the services that belong to the chief lords. And further D.
granted that he henceforth would not give, bequeath, sell,
pledge or in any other way alienate the lands and tenements he
had in Dytton or elsewhere the day on which this concord was mad:
or of those lands and tenements woods and gardens make waste
or ruin so that after his death they should not remain to his
s. William and the said Margaret and the heirs of their bodies

to hold of the chief lords.
[96.29.5o2.]

[30 Hen. III.

      

1246-'7] KENT FEET OF FINES 193
31 HEN. III. 1246-7

Aperfield [in Cudham]. Octave of St. Hilary 31 Hen. III
[20 Jan. 1246/7.] Q. Henry de Apeltrefeld and W. Beatrice.
D. (imp.) David de Ponte Edulmi (Edenbridge) and W. Sabina ;
10 ac. of land werland in Apeltrefeld. Plea of Warranty of
Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the
gift of D. To hold to Q. for both their lives of D. and the heirs
of Sabina, paying yearly at the feast of SS. Peter and Paul a
pair of white gloves or 1d. and doing royal service as much as
belongs. After the deaths of Q. the heirs of Henry shall hold the
land of D. and the heirs of Sabina by the same service. Warranty

by D. and the heirs of Sabina. Q. gave 10 marks.
[96.29.507.]

Broomfield. Quindene of St. Hilary [27 Jan.] Q. (pet.)
Silvester de Farleg and w. Maud. D. (ten.) Henry de Ho; a
carucate of land in Bromfeld. Q. acknowledged the land to be
the right of D. To hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and the heirs
of Maud, paying yearly at Easter 4d. and doing services to the

chief lords. Warranty by Q. and the heirs of Maud. D. gave 30s.
[96.29.512.]

Aylesford ; Langley Hole [in Langley] ; Hyllel ; Ditton ;
Malling, East. Three weeks from St. Hilary [3 Feb.] Q. (pet.)
lervase del Brock and John and Daniel his brs. D. (ten.) Robert
del Brock and Richard and William his brs. ; a moiety of 3 mess.
and of 2 carucates of land in Aylesford, Langleeshole and Hylle,
which Q. claimed as their reasonable part of the inheritance of
William Balistar’ uncle of D. and Q. whose heirs they are in the
said vills. Q. quitelaimed from themselves and their heirs
all their right in the said moiety and in all other lands and tene-
ments which were of William Balistar’ anywhere in England,
to D. and their heirs. And for this D. quitelaimed from them-
selves and their heirs all their right in the moiety of all the lands
and tenements which William father of D. and Q. held in Ditton,
Aylesford and East Melinges the day on which this concord was
made, to Q. and their heirs. [96‘29.5”_]

Barham ; Evegate [in Smeeth] ; Throketonz ; Chislet ; Ore
[in Chislet]. Quindene of Easter [14 April 1247.] Q. Thomas

1 Perhaps St. Margarets in Darenth. V V
2 Probably Tokinton in l.II)(',ll1‘lI‘(‘tl’1,’(‘;/l. P.N.K., 2273.-«--l",'\\'.lwl.


20s KENT FEET or FINES [32 Hen. 111.

Upchurch. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Dionisia de
Rissindon by Nicholas de Rissindon. D. (imp.) Walter de Kynardel
and W. Alice ; 17 ac. of land, 31s. 7d. of rent, the third part of a
mill and an ac. and a rod of wood in Uppechirche. Plea of
Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the premises to be the
right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and her heirs of D. and
the heirs of Alice, paying yearly at Michaelmas one mark and
doing the services due to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and
the heirs of Alice. And for this Q. granted to D. the capital
messuage of Kersalton [Carshalton, Surrey] and 50 ac. of land in
the same vill of which 20 ac. lie in the field called Oldefeld,
3% ac. in the field called Holeden, 3 ac. in the field of Morden,
10 ac. lie in Ruweeroft and 3 ac., 1% rodslie in Westcroft and
9% ac. lie in the field called Suthfeld. To hold to D. and the
heirs of the bodies of both of them of Q. and her heirs, paying
yearly at Michaelmas 1d. and doing all services due to the chief
lords. Warranty by Q. and her heirs. If no such heirs, remainder
to the next heirs of Alice, quit of the other heirs of Walter.

[96.3U.544.]

Malling, West; Malling, East. At Canterbury. Same date.
Q. (pet.) Andrew le Tailur and Walter his br. and William s. of
Stephen by'Andrew. D. (ten.) Hugh de Stokes ; a mess. and 2 ac.
of land in Great Mallinge and 6 ac. of land in Est Mallinge. Q.
acknowledged the premises to be the right of D. To hold to D.
and his heirs of Q. and their heirs, paying yearly at Michaelmas
%d. to Andrew and his heirs, §d. to Walter and his heirs and %d.
to William and his heirs and doing services due to the chief lords.
Warranty by Q. and their heirs. D. gave 13 marks.

[96.30.545.]

Minster.‘ At Canterbury. Same date [6 Oct.] Q. (pet.)
Henry s. of Swanulda. D. (ten.) William s. of Albin; 40 ac.
of land in Menstre. Assize of Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitclaimed
from himself and his heirs all_his right in the said land to D.

and his heirs. D. gave a mark.
[96.30.547.]

Yalding ; Nettlestead. At Canterbury. Same date. Q.
Richard Buletel. D. (imp.) Godfrey Buletel; 14 ac. of land in
Alding’ and Netlestede. Plea of VVarranty of Charter. D.
acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To

1 No clue as to which Minster.

  

1243] KENT FEET or FINES 209

hold to Q. and the heirs of his body lawfully begotten by the Wife
to Whom he is betrothed of D. and his heirs, paying yearly 2d.
at the Invention of the Holy Cross and doing the services due to the
chief lords. Warranty by D. and his heirs. Reversion to D.
and his heirs quit of the other heirs of Q. And for this Q. granted
to D. 13-; ac. of land in the same vill lying in the fields called
VVestfeld and Bekenesland. To hold to D. and the heirs of his
body lawfully begotten by the wife to whom he is betrothed of
Q. and his heirs paying yearly at Michaelmas 6s. Warranty by
Q, and his heirs. Reversion to Q. and his heirs quit of the other
heirs of D.

 

[96.3l.55] .1

Bishopsboume. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Luke dc
Hegham. D. (imp.) John Stede and W. Emma and Alured Stede
and W. Beatrice ; 9 ac. of land in Bissoppesburn.’ Plea of
Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right
of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the
heirs of Emma and Beatrice paying yearly at Michaelmas «id.
to John and Emma and the heirs of Emma, and 4d. to Alured
and Beatrice and the heirs of Beatrice. Warranty by D. and the

heirs of Emma and Beatrice. Q. gave 7 marks. f96'31‘553AJ

Stockbury. At Canterbury. Same date [6 Oct.] Q. (pet.)
Robert de Aubervill. D. (ten.) Henry de Sandwlc’ and w. Joan ;
a moiety of 160 ac. of land and of 12 ac. of wood i11 Stokinbyr’.
D. acknowledged the said moiety to be the right of Q. and rendered
it to him in the same court and quitclaimed from themselves
and the heirs of Joan to Q. and his heirs. Q. gave a sore sparrow

l“"‘“'k' [96.3l.5.-34.]

Walmer. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Bertram de
0.1011 by Stephen dc Bocland. D. (imp.) Henry s. of Simon de
Sundwié and W_ Joan; 11 ac. of land in VValemere. Plea of
VV;u-ranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right
ofQ of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the
h(,h.§. 0fJ0;u1 rendering yearly at Michaelmas a pair of gilt Spurs
0,: (id and dbiivr there for the service of the fortieth part of a

. ‘ 5 _ , ‘
knight/s fee. Warranty by D. and the heirs of J can. Q. gave

'0 nmks" {!96..’}].5.~37.]
1 ('f_ $)(i.3l.-555 above, I’- 207-
l4


213 KENT FEET OF FINES [32 Hen. III.

dat:TF;(7)n(1)13«m 3 Monlzton [in Newnham]1. At Canterbury. Same
017-] Q. Richard le Clerk. D. (imp.) Guy s. of Humfrey
ffild W. Maud ; 5 ac. of land and 27{;d. of rent in Neuham and
thoniaketon. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged

e and to be the right of Q. of the gift of D.‘ To hold to Q.
and his_ heirs of D. and the heirs of Maud, paying yearly at,
Michaelmas 1d. and doing all other services due to the chief lords.
Warranty by D. and the heirs of Maud. Q. gave 45s_

[96.32.584.]

Ituckinge. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.) John de
Tanilonde. D. (ten.) William s. of Hamo de Hanningeherst and
Roger, Owen, John and Richard his brs.; 5 ac. of land in Rokinges.
Assize of Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitclaimed for himself and his
heirs all his right in the said land to D. and their heirs. D. gave
one mark.

[.<>6.32.587.]

Islingham [in Frindsbury]2. At Canterbury. Same date.
Q. Joan late the wife of Hugh de Tanit’ (? Taniton). D. (imp.)
Ilugh de Westlingham ; 2 ac. of land and 10d. of rent in West-
lingeham. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the
premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and
her heirs of D. and his heirs, paying yearly at Michaelmas 2d.
Warranty by D. and his heirs. Q. gave 40s.

196.32.ns>0.1

Bicknor. At Canterbury. Same date [20 Oet.] Q. Hubert
la Veyle. D. (imp.) Mary Mauiicel ; 220 ac. of land in Bykenor.
Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be
the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D.
and her heirsrrendering yearly at Easter 1 lb. of eummin or 2d.
VVarranty by D. and her heirs. And for this Q. granted the land
to D., to hold to D. for life of the chief lords by services belonging
and paying yearly at Christmas ld. to Q. and his heirs, rever-
sion to Q. and his heirs quit of the heirs of D. to hold of the chief
lords by service due. [On dorse.] William de Fanecurt and w.
Roesia and Baldewin s. of Luke Mauncel put in their claim.

[96.32.594.]

1 Cf. P.N.K., 287-8.

' The place is on the west side of the Medway. Cf. B.(7.S'., 195, where it
IS “ loco (fl1]llS vocabulum est Aesliiighiiin, qiiac etia1njac<~i- ad occidr-.nt-elem
parteni fluiniiiis Mcilwineain.”

1248] KENT FEET OF FINES 219

Bishopsbourne. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.)
Henry de Burne. D. (ten.) Roger Achard and w. Sarra ; 8 ac.
of land in Burne. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q.
and for this Q. granted it to D. To hold to D. for the whole
life of Sarra of Q. and his heirs, paying yearly at Easter 6d. and
doing all services due to the chief lords, reversion to Q. and his

heirs quit of Roger and the heirs of Sarra.
[96.32.5S)6.]

Romney. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet? Thomas
s. of William and w. Joan. D. (ten.) Thomas Humfrey ; 28s. of
rent in Rumenal. Assize of Mort d’Ancestor. Q. quitelaimed
from themselves and the heirs of Joan all their right in the said
rent to D. and his heirs, as well as in all the lands and tenements
which Baldewyn Preg, grandfather (avus) of Joan, whose heir
she is, held the day on which he died in fee in England. And for
this D. granted to Q. 20 ac. of land in Elderumcnal, of which
3 are called Oxelese and 17 ac. formerly belonged to Nicholas
Preg. To hold to Q. and the heirs of Joan of D. and his heirs,
paying yearly 5s. 6d. at Christmas and the Nativity of St. John
and doing royal service as much as belongs to so much land in
that fee and in defending the said land in VVall and Waterways
(Wa.ll’ et Watergangis) for all service, suit of court, custom and

exaotioii.
[!)(i.3‘.’.:'i9H.]

Selgrave [iii Faversliani]. At Caiiterbiiry. Same date [20
Oct.] Q. (pet.) VVilliam s. of Thurbert and w. Alice. D. (ten.)
Henry de Silegrave ; 2 ac. of land in Silegrave. D. acknowledged
the land to be the right of Alice. To hold to Q. and the heirs of
Alice of the chief lords by services due. And for this Q. granted
to D. an acre of the said land which lies in the field called Furaker
towards the south, to hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and the l10iI‘S
of Alice, paying yearly at Easter ld. for all services aceiistoiiied.

Warranty by Q. and the heirs of Alice.
‘ [‘.H'».32.(iH0.l

Frindsbury. At Caiiterbiiry. Suine date. Q. (pet.) Roliert
s. of William and J ollan, John, Geoffrey. Ralph and VVilliain hrs.
of Robert by Jollan. D. (ten.) Henry Talebot ; 40 ac. of land in
Frendesbyr’. Q. quitclaiined from tliemselves and their heirs
all their right in the said land to D. and his heirs. D. gave

25 marks. _
is>7.::3.m>2.}

 


 

 

256 KENT T »
FEET or FINES [38 Hen. III.

Halstead. Same .
Walter S‘ of Robert ; tézt; oQ.1a(rp§t.) I./ghee de Helles. D. (ten.)
the land to be the right of Q andmf alsted. D. acknowledged
To hold to D. and his heirs 0f.Q dor thls .Q' granted it to D-
. an her heirs, paying yearly at

the feast of St. Tho th A .
chief lords. D. gage; mjrkspostle 13d. and doing services to the
[97.36.700.]

Denstead [in Charth '

[8 July] Q‘ (pet) Ra1‘;11:1lS~ 0?lrfi11(O1::1:s (:1:  Josh: theDBaptist

Luke s. of Thomas ' h if . ens e e. . (ten.)

of rent in Densted, ,whi:h aQmc(l:dii adcarllgate of land and 8 marks

inheritance of the said Thomas f1:thaS his iiealsolilable part of the
acknowledged the premises to b t er o a p and Luke. Q.

. _ he right of D t 1

and his heirs of the chief lords 1e‘ ‘ 10 mm to D‘
heir servio A ~

D- granted ‘00 Q a certain w ( Oing t ‘'3' nd £01‘ this

~ - d in the said v'll h'- '

Le Herst and beS.d th h 00 K 1 w ith is called
Boydin and VVi11i;nesCri:te1p1IaI;:gefanctl all the service of Henry
which lie next the sa.id wood to tlieoilve ‘to llleslsi lull the Said Vin
heirs of the chief-1 d i . ‘_ s-. o 1()( to Q. and his
moreover I). for hinclielsf i:e1I‘l:)'j1:«: étlierptp tlielonging. And
forth would pa ' 2 k i ran H “it they hence"
Easter’ to Q_ gm‘ 1I:i1:rfi:ea‘ ycefir at Df°n5.t0(1. '<Ll'2‘i‘Il(‘l1£LCiII1flS and
. ause o distress in the manor of

Densted. And aft ‘ch 1
payment. er e (eath of Q. they were to be quit 0ft}1e
[97.37.7ll.]

Eynsford ; Farningham 0 t
Q. Roger de Legh. D. Roger :1:V1\eTOI¢:}“VS(:.1e1\I1cl£dC1 E) 0ct_]
4 marks of rent in Eyneford mid FR . ‘ ' . am w, onefil ;
. . ~ ‘ ham. Plea f(‘ >
1). qmtclmmed from themseh es anniiing _ 0 J()\ enant.
. . * 1 th, 1  ‘ ~ A»
right in the said rent to Q. and his heir: let: em 9;} thur
Q ‘ - , - mar s.
[97.37.703.]

Canterbury. S 1 A _

Friars Preachers :.fm(§:M:t:::.ur ]];I‘0:)ilI1EI‘ )J3h}I:, ]iI‘lOI' of the
115 feet of land in length and 5.0 f .t I P. 0 11 re Stokwcll ;

breadth in C' t» b v
Plea of Vvarm ,0 f Ch I ee '1“ an L1‘ ury.
the right of Q.  the sa£i(Iit:*r.- D. facknqwledged the land to be
his Successors and the Saidrilairs o the gift of D. To hold to Q.’
secular Service and emotion Pgfjrfipnfraikalgioigii quit of all
Q. received D. and his heirs in all the beiiefig: ‘dand his heirs,
henceforth shall be made in his house at Cant alil prayers which

er ury.
[97.37.705.]

1254] KENT FEET OF FINES 257

Rochester. Quindene of St. Michael [13 Oct.] Q. Richard
de Grean and W. Julia. D. (imp.) Gilbert Honnwyne and w.
Emma ; a mess. in Roueestre. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the mess. to be the right of Julia which Q. have
of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and the heirs of the body of
Julia, of D. and the heirs of Emma, paying yearly at Easter 1d.
and doing services to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the
heirs of Emma. And if Julia die without an heir of her body
after the deaths of Q., reversion to D. and the heirs of Emma,
quit. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk. [9-,_37_704_]

Oare. Quindene of St. Michael [13 Oct.] Q. Brother Elyas
de Smereton, Prior of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem in
England, by Brother William de Horsleye. D. Reginald de
Cornholl [sic] by Ralph de Derby ; the Manor of Ores. Plea of
Covenant. D. acknowledged the manor to be the right of Q. and
the brethren of the said Hospital and rendered it to them in the
same court and quitclaimed from himself and his heirs to Q. and
his successors and the brethren. And for this Q. gave D. 100
marks. Roger, Master of the Hospital of Osprengesgvas present
who held the said manor the day on which this concord was
made and agreed that he held nothing in the said manor but a
term from Michaelmas of the present year (38 Hen. III) for
fourteen years next following to be completed. [9-,_37_-708_]

Bishopsboume} Same date. Q. Henry s. of Gilbert. D.
Henry de Burne and w. Lucy ; a mess. and 40 ac. of land in
Biirne.1 Plea of Covenant. D. acknowledged the premises with
app. as in desmesnes, homages, services of free men, rents, woods,
meadows, pastures, mills and all else belonging to be the right
of Q. and for this Q. granted them to D. T 0 hold to D. and the
heirs of Henry of Q. and his heirs, paying yearly at Easter id.
and doing services to the chief lords : if Henry dc Burne die in
the life-time of Lucy, she shall hold the premises for the remainder
of her life of Q. and his heirs by the said service. Remainder
after the deaths of D. to the heirs of Henry de Burne to hold

as above. [97.37.709.]

Sutton-at-Hone. Same date. Q.Aymon,Prior of Bermundes-
heye. D. (imp.) William de Locolte; 9 ac. of land, E:- ac. of

1 Or possibly Bekesbourne.


. Q Eq
262 KENT FEET or FINES [38' Hen. III.

::.V:£:i:::y.°f.:::r:. 3    to be
mess to D  h e 8 t 0 D. and for this Q. granted the said
I - ‘. 0 old to D. for hfe of Q. and his heirs, paying
.Y9&1'l.Y 3«t_Easter 12d. Warranty by Q. and his heirs. Reversion
:}fet::_:‘:1d5ne:S“34ge 1:10 Q- and his heirs to hold together with

1 an o the chief lords for the services thereto belonging.

[97.38.745.]

HerI::;te11P-DA(11fmC&ntI<3rbCpry. Same date. Q. Adam le Ceu of
4 ac of ‘land i 3) 101‘ dan :le la Gare of Hertlepe and W. Cecily ;
Herti Pl, .0. an , ad. of rent and rent of a hen in
V . cpe. ea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the
PT€mlS_»eS ti? be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q.
-IE(i“Ihi..:1'heirs of D. and the heirs of Cecily, paying yearly l3d.,
  1C aelmas and Easter. Warranty by D. and the heirs of
Cecily. Q. gave 13 marks.

[97.39.753.]
de ‘lllarrietshlagm. At Canterbury. Same date. Q, (pet) Xvimam
find . . (be?) Roger s. of Ralph de Musewell ; 10 ac. of
0«(.~)§ ,of c inpiety pi a. mill, a rod of meadow, a rod of wood and
..  1 ren in erietsham: Q. (pet) the same_ Di_ (ten)
Gll-l)(,I‘t‘ s. of Ralph ; a similar property in the same vill. Q.
quitclaimed from himself and his heirs all his right in the said
premises to D. and D1. and their heirs. D. and D1. gave 100s,

[97.39.759.]

‘ Borstal [in Rochester] ; Wouldham, Little. At Canterbury.
Same date.  Robert de Woldham. D. Philip de Hofspeiiges ;
19 ac. of land in Burstall and Little Woldham. Plea of Warranty
of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of
the ‘gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and his heirs,
paying yearly at Michaelmas 1d. and doing services to the chief
lords. Warranty by D. and his heirs. Q. gave 10 li.

[97.39.767.]

Beckenham. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. John Male-
mcns.[sw]. D. (imp.) Henry Malemenis [sic] ; the fourth part of
a knight’s fee in Bechenham. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the fee to be the right of Q. of the gift of D.
To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and his heirs, doing all the service
which belongs to the said fourth part. VVarranty by D. and his

heirs. Q. ave a sore s r h; vk
g Pam)“ W ' [97.39.769.]

 

1255] ‘ KENT FEET OF FINES 263

Wye. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Ralph, Abbot of
Battle by Ralph de Greston. D. (imp.) Richard Hacun and w.
Dionisia ; 2% ac. of meadow in Wy. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the meadow to be the right of Q. and his church
of the gift of D. To hold to Q., his successors and church of D.
and the heirs of Dionisia in frankalmoign. Warranty by D. and
the heirs of Dionisia. Q. received D. into all the benefits and

prayers which henceforth were to be made in his church for ever.
[97.39.770.]

Newington (near Sittingbourne]; Hartlip. At Canterbury.
Same date. Q. Stephen de Oftun. D. (imp.) Godin le Vineter and
w. Margery ; 3 ac. of land, 2‘ ac. of land, and 2()d.of rent and rent of
2 hens and 9 eggs in Neuton and Hertlepe. Plea of VVar1'anty
of Charter. D. acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q.
of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of
Margery, paying yearly at Michaelmas Id. and doing services to
the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of Margery. Q.

gave l0 marks.
[97.39.771.]

St. Clement, vill of [in Old Romney]. At Canterbury. Same
(late. Q. (pct.) Celestria late the w. of Gerard s. of Laurence.
D. (ten.) Ralph de Bikenden and W. Mary ; 9.] ac. of land in the
vill of St. Clement. D. acknowledged the land to be the right
of Q. and rendered it to her in court and quitclaimed from
themselves and the heirs of Mary to Q. and her heirs. Q. gave
40s.

[97.39.772.]

Borden. At Canterbury. [Term omitted : probably as
above, Le. 25 June.] Q. Stephen de Hofton.1 D. (imp.) VVilliam
de Stamelc and w. Alice; 1;} ac. of land in Bordon. Plea of
VVarranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right
of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the
heirs of Alice, rendering yearly 8d. at Michaelmas and Easter.

VVarranty by D. and the heirs of Alice. Q. gave 40s.
[97.39.773.]

Patrixbourne. At Canterbury. Same date [25 June l254.]

Q. Henry Thalebot. D. Symon Dere and w. lsolda ; 5 ac. of land _

in Patrickcsburn. Plea of Covenant. 1}. acknowledged the land

1 ? Oftun, cf. [!)7.39.77l.]

 


150x
[535 Hen. III.

t: be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs
0} D‘ an_d _the helm 0f I3°1d8», paying yearly 2s., at Christmas and
t ie N atlvity of St. John the Baptist and doing foreign service.
Warranty by D. and the heirs of Isolda. Q. gave 2 marks_
[97.39.774.]

264 KENT FEET OF FINES

Tatnam [in Dymchurch] ; Orgarswick. At Canterbury. Same
(late. Q. (pet.) Mabel late the W. of William de Thatenhamme.
D. (ten.) John Colebrand; a third part of 38 ac. of land in
Thatenhamme and Odgareswik, which Q. claimed as her reason-
able dower of the free tenement which was of VVilliam her late
husband.’ Q. quitclaimed all her right in the name of dower to
D.‘ and l1]S heirs. And for this D. granted for himself and his
heirs that‘ henceforth they would pay to Q. for her life yearly at
the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, a mark, and after the death
of Q. they were to be quit.

[97.40.779.]

Matfield [in Brenchley]1 ; Winbridge [in Lamberhumt]2 ;
Eftelngge [in or near Lamberhurst]3 ; Lindridge [in Lambcrhurst].
At Canterbury. Octave of St. John the Baptist [1 Jul_v.] Q, John,
Abbot of Begenham. D. (imp.) Bartl1olome\v dc Woteringebr’ ; the
seventhpart of a knight’s fee in Matefcld, \Vymbrcgg’, Eftelrigge
and Lindrigge. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the
fee to be the right of Q. andhis church. To hold to Q., his successors
and church of D. and his heirs in frankalmoign. I-Varranty by D.
and his heirs. Q.received ‘D.into all the benefits and prayers which
henceforth should be made in his church for ever.‘ [End0rsr,-(ll
Warin dc Monte Caniso put in his claim. I

[97.3s.732.1

Sundridge. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Hcnr_v  of
Henry. D. (imp.) Henry (le Appcltrefcld’ and w. Leticia; a
third part of the manor of Sundercsse. Plea of Wlarranty of
Charter. D. acknowledged the third part to be the right of Q.
of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs
of Leticia, paying yearly to D. for their lives 12 marks at

‘ I’.N.K., 193.
2 I’.N.I\'., 202. ,

_ 3  Eppcrcgo in Keniislz. Place .\'mn.es, 69, and its possible identification
with J ippcridgo (lost) in Hastcd, U, 359, a manor in 1’en1l.>ui'_v, a parish
adjacent to Brent-liley.

4 Apparently his heirs were not included, as seems usually the case.

 

mi...»

1255] KENT FEET OF FINES 265

Michaelmas and Easter, and after their deaths to the heirs of
Leticia ld. at Easter and doing services due to the chief lords.
Warranty by D. and the heirs of Leticia. Q. gave a sore sparrow
hawk. After the deaths of D., Q. and his heirs were to be quit

of the payment of the said 12 marks.
[97.38.'/'46.]

Canterbury, Suburbs of. At Canterbury. Same date. Q.
John s. of Philip Terri. D. (imp.) Nicholas le Teynturer and
w. Mary ; 4 ac. of land in the suburbs of Canterbury. Plea of
VVarranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right
of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the
heirs of Mary, paying yearly at Michaelmas ld. a.nd doing services
to the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of Mary.
Q. gave‘6 marks.

[97.38.748.]

Upchurch ; Rainham ; Hartlip. At Canterbury. Same date.
Q. Paulinus Perdriz. D. (imp.) Maud de Cornhille ; 30 ac. of land
in Hupchcrche, Renham and Hertlepe. Plea of VVarranty of
Charter. 1). acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the
gift of D. To hold to Q. and the heirs of his body of D. and her
heirs, paying during the life of D. 100s. yearly, at Michaelmas and
Easter, and after the death of D. to her heirs yearly at Easter Id.
and doing services to the chief lords. . \Varranty by D. and her
heirs. Remain(ler to VVillel1na sis. of Q. and the heirs of her
bodv to hoiil  above. Reversion to D. and her heirs, quit.
After the death of.l)., Q. and Willelma shall be quit of the payment
of 100s. [E-rLd0rsc(l.] Roger de Northwod put in his claim.

197.39.7cs.]

Canterbury and Suburbs. At Canterbury. Same date. Q.
Thomas do Bcri. D. (imp.) Cristian (le Kantuar and w. Beatrice ;
6 shops [sckoppis] and 3 ac. of land in Canterbury and the suburbs
of Canterbury. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged
the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q.
and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Beatrice, paying yearly at
Michaelmas 2d. and doing services to the chief lords. Warranty

by D. and the heirs of Beatrice. Q. gave 26 marks.
[,97.40.7s2.’|

Burrnarsh. At Canterbury. Same (late. Q. Hamo Pitte.
D. (i1np.) Richard de Grcley and \v. Cecily ; 12 ac. of land, and


 

288 KENT FEET OF FINES [41 Hen. III.

clove gillyflower at the messuage of Q. in Rumenhal and doing
services to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the heirs of

Hawisia. Q. gave 2%, marks.
[97.41.s11.]

Greenwich; Eltham. Same date. Q. Richard, Abbot of
Westminster. D. Giles de Grenewic’ ; concerning this that I).
should acquit Q. of the service which Richard de Clare, Earl of
Gloucester and Hertford exacted from Q. for the free tenement
he holds of D. in Grenewic’. Q. complained that by default of D.,
Q. was distrained to do suit at the court of the said Earl at
Eltham from three weeks to three weeks of which D. who is
mesne between them ought to acquit Q} I). has granted for
himself and his heirs that they henceforth \vill acquit and defend
Q. and his successors against the said Earl and his heirs of the
said suits and all other custom and service which belong to the
said tenement. And for this Q. quitclaimed from himself to _l').

all damages.
" [97.4l.8l5.]

Wateringbury. Octave of the Holy Trinity [10 June] Q.
\/Villiam dc Mfolendino. D. (imp.) Bartholomew de ()t1‘ytig(rl)yr’ :
a messuage, l0 ac. of land and the moiety of a mill in ()tryngeb_vr’,
Plea of \Varranty of Charter. _D. acknowledged the premises to
be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs
of D. and his heirs, paying yearly at Easter Id. and doing for :1
scutage of 40s.,  and for more, more, and for less, less.
\Varrant_V by D. and his heirs. Q. gave 20s. [97_41.8w']

Malling. Quindene of the Holy Trinity [17 J uncjl Q. Walter
s. of John. D. (imp.)vVVilliam dc Middelton and w. Ann: 15 ac.
of land in Mallingcs. Plea of VVarranty of Charter. D. acknow-
ledged the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold
to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Ann, rendering yearly
at Easter 5 grains of pepper (g7'(m(t pipcris) and doing services to
the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of Ann. Q. gave
15 marks. [_();vL do/'.s'e.‘] Md. quad dc new (,7;/r’ rccepi ijs.

. [97.4l.7l3.]

Hunton? Same date. Q. Nicholas, Prior of the Holy
Trinity, Canterbury by John Pykenot his monk. D. Niel olas

‘ Above, 1). 188 [!lG.‘_’!).;”>l)3].
2 /’..\'.K., l6(l.

1257] KENT FEET OF FINES . 289

de Lenham ; concerning an annual rent of 6 li. due out of the
manor of Huntington. Plea of finis facti. D. granted for himself
and his heirs that for the future they will pay yearly to Q., his
successors and church 6 li. at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist
in the Treasury of Q. at Canterbury. For this Q. quitclaimed
for himself and his church all damages unto the day on which
this concord was made. Clause of distress if D., his heirs or

any one else in possession of the said manor should be in arrears.
[97.41.s14.]

Chaldane [in Canterburyl]. Morrow of St. John the Baptist
[25 June.] Q. William le Brazur. D. (imp.) Simon Derote and
w. lsolda; 4 ac. of land in Chaldene. Plea of VVarranty of
Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the
gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of
Isolda, paying yearly at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist 4d.
and doing royal service as much as belongs to so much land of
the same fee in the same vill for all secular service, suit of court,
custom and exaetion. Warranty by I). and the heirs of lsolda.

Q. gave 5 marks.
[97.41.s10.]

Patrixbourne. Same date. Q. VVilliam le Bra’/..ur. D. (imp.)
VValter (le Culverden and w. Blanche ; 6 ac. of land in Pa.terykes-
burn. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land
to he the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs
of 1). and the heirs of Blanche, paying yearly at Michaelmas 3d.
and doing royal service as much as belongs to so much land in
the same rill for all secular service, suit of court, custom and
exaction. Warranty by D. and the heirs of Blanche. Q. gave

24 marks. [97 41 812]

Tenterden. Three weeks from St. Michael [20 Oet.] Q.
Roger de Gatesden.2 l). Ralph de Corineote and W. Edith :
5 ae. of land and 3 ac. of wood in Tanterden [sic]. Plea of
Covenant. D. aelmowlcdged the said tenement, togetlier with

1  Arch. Cant, XIII, 320; XX, H39.‘

2 In the document itself the phrase referring to the parties runs thus :
inter Ifogermn dc (7atesclerL t/'1.4,crentem per Itaclulp/Lmn tie (.'0rmeoi‘e rt
E<1'L't/cam uacorem eius dcforeiantes. It could he that the name oi.‘tlI’c
attorney appearing for Roger has been omitted, or lhe name of ludilh s
husband or that there was no attorney and per should read at.

ll?


 

 

302 ’ KENT FEET OFJFINES r43 Hen. in.

chief lords. Warranty by D. and the heirs of Maud. Q. gave
5 marks.

[97.43.866.]

Canterbury, Suburb of. Same date. Q. Richard s. of Robert
de Viner. D. (imp.) Peter s. of John de Pukleston and w.
Cristiana ; a mess. in the suburbs of Canterbury. Plea of
Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the mess. to be the right
of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the
heirs of Cristiana, paying yearly at Christmas one half-penny
and doing services to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the

heirs of Cristiana. Q. gave 5 marks.
[97.43.s59.]

Orpington. Same date. Q. VVilliam de Hokynden. D.
(imp.) Walter de Hokynden and w. Maud ; a mess. and 24 ac.
of land in Orpinton. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknow-
ledged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold
to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Maud, paying yearly
5s. 6d., at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, Michaelmas and
Mid-Lent. Warranty by D. and the heirs of Maud. And for
this Q. at the instance of D. has granted the premises to Richard
s. of Roger de Hornum and W. Agnes to hold to them and the
heirs of the body of both Roger and Agnes of Q. and his heirs,
paying yearly (is. at Easter and Michaelmas. Reversion to Q.

and his heirs quit of the other heirs of the said Richard and Agnes.
[97.43.860.]

Bekesbourne} Same date. Q. William le Brewere. D.
(imp.) Alan de Bruere and W. Gunnora; 7 ac. of land in
Lyvingesburn.1 Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged
the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and
his heirs of D. and the heirs of Gunnora, paying yearly at
Michaelmas Id. and doing services to the chief lords. Warranty

by D. and the heirs of Gunnora. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
[97.4-3.861.]

Chislehurst; Cray, St. Pau1’s. Same date. Q. William de
Hokenden. D. (imp.) Thomas s. of John de Melinges ; a carucate
of land in Cheselhurst and Craye Paulin. Plea of Warranty of
Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the

1 P.N.K., 541.

 

1259] KENT FEET or FINES 303

gift of D. And for this Q. has granted it to D. and W. Alice,
to hold to them for both their lives of Q. and his heirs, paying
yearly at Easter 1 lb. of pepper and doing services to the chief
lords. Remainder to John s. of D. and the heirs of his body to
hold as above. If John die without such heirs in the life time
of his br. William, remainder to William and the heirs of his
body to hold as above, remainder to the other heirs of D. and
Alice to hold as above. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
[97.43.864.]

Margate. Same date. Q. Alan s. of Henry. D. (imp.)
Osbert le Teynterer and W. Godelefa ; 7 ac. of land in Mergate.
Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be
the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D.
and the heirs of Godelefa, paying yearly at Easter one half-penny
and doing services to the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the
heirs of Godelefa. Q. gave 10 marks.

[97.43.866.]

Sibertswold. Octave of the Holy Trinity [15 June.] Q.
Henry de Wengham. D. (imp.) Symon de Halle ; 120 ac. of
land in Sibertewald. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. has
acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D.
To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and his heirs, paying yearly at
Easter one half-penny and to the prior of St. Martin’s, Dover,
his successors and church for D. and his heirs 31s. 5d. yearly,
at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, St. Martin, the Purification
of the Blessed Mary and Mid-Lent. Warranty by D. and his

heirs. Q. gave 120 marks.
[97.42.s49.]

Cowden. Quindene of the Holy Trinity [22 J une.] Q.
Geoffrey de Engletere. D. (imp.) William de Serne; a mess.
and 2 virgatcs of land in Kudenne. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift
of D. and for this Q. granted them to D. To hold to D. for life
of Q. and his heirs paying yearly 2 marks, at Christmas and the
Nativity of St. John the Baptist. After the death of D. reversion
to Q. and h3s heirs quit of the heirs of D. to hold of the heirs of D.,
paying yearly at Easter Id. and doing services to the chief lords.

Warranty by the heirs of D.
- [97.42.s45.]

v-m.-.

. ..,»-.s...—u..« -=2


 

322 KENT FEET OF FINES [46 Hen. III

Minster [in Thanet]. Month from Easter [7 May 1262.]
Q. (pet.) Luke Harlewyne, Bartholomew Harlewyne and Godfrey
his b. by Bartholomew for the others. D. (ten.) Henry de la
Flete; 5 ac. of land in Menstre. Recognizance of the Grand
Assize. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. and
rendered it to him in court and quitclaimed from himself and

his heirs to Q. and their heirs. Q. gave 60s.
[97.45.9l9.]

Ham. Octave of the Holy Trinity [11 June.] Q. William
Cokyn. D. (imp.) Geoffrey de Hamme and w. Margery ; 6 ac.
of land in Hamme. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknow-
ledged the land to l)e the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold
to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Margery, paying yearly
Gd. (half at Michaelmas, and the feast of the Blessed Mary in
March). Warranty by D. and the heirs of Margery. Q. gave

a mark.
(97.4-5.917.]

Bridge. Same date. Q. Ralph s. of Gervase do Konewys.
burn. D. (imp.) VValter Troue and w. Blanche ; a mess., 6 ac.
of land, 4 ac. of wood, 13s. of rent and rent of 10 hens in Brigges.
Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the promises to
be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his l1eirs
of D. and the heirs of Blanche, paying yearly half pound of
cummin at Easter and (loing service to the chief lords. VVarranty

by D. and the heirs of Blanche. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
[97.45.922.]

Milsted. Quindene of the Holy Trinity [18 June] Q.
Bartholomew s. of Robert de Hegham and John and Robert
his bb. D. (i1np.) Thomas s. of Ricliard and w. Avice ; 16 ac.
of land, 6 ac. of wood, 4s. of rent and rent of 10 hens and fird of
a mess. in Milstede. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknow-
le(lged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To
hold to Q. and their heirs of D. and the heirs of Avico, paying
yearly Id. at Easter and doing service to the chief lords.
Warranty by D. and the heirs of Avice. Q. gave a sore sparrow

hawk.
[97.45.921.]

Doddington. Octave of St. John the Baptist [1 July._l
Q. Hugh Plot. D. (imp.) Adam le Seriaunt and w. Elena ; 3 ac.

 

1262] KENT FEET OF FINES 323

1 rod of land, a rod of wood and 2s. of rent in Dodington. Plea.
of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the premises to be
the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D.
and the heirs of Elena, paying yearly 1d. at Easter and doing
service to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the heirs of

Elena. Q. gave 20s.
[97.45.92o.]

Kingston. Quindene of St. John the Baptist [8 July.] Q.
John Dygges. D. (imp.) Henry s. of William de Crokserd and
w. Emma ; 20 ac. of land in Kyngeston.1 Plea of Warranty of
Charter. D. acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the
gift of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of
Emma, paying yearly at Michaelmas one farthing, and doing
service to the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of

Emma. Q. gave 10 marks.
[97.45.918.]

47 HEN. III. 1262-3

Canterbury. Canterbury. Octave of St. Martin [18 Nov.,
l262]. Q. Osbert de Elham and w. Cristiana. D. (imp.) Elyas le
(‘utiller and w. Loretta: a mess. in Canterbury. Plea of
\Varrant_v of Charter. D. acknowledged the mess. to be the
right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and their heirs of D.
and the heirs of Loretta, paying yearly at Easter ld. and doing
service to the chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of

Loretta. Q. gave half a mark.
. [u7..m.92n.1

Northfleet. Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.) John de
Evering and w. Eleanor. D. (ten.) Geoffrey de Saxinghurst,
a mess, 29 ac. of land and ll) ac. of pasture in Nortflete. Q.
acknowledged the premises to be the right.» of l). and quitclaimed
from themselves and the heirs of Eleanor to D. and his heirs.

1). gave 10 marks.
|_97.46.‘.)3o.]

Brenzett; Warehorne. Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.)
Thomas de Sumerfeld and w. Eglentina. D. (ton.) Nicholas de

1 This ixiay be the parish of Kingston, Kinghainford l*lun<.lre<l, but it
is uncertain, according to Dr. l”. \V. Harclman.


   

326 KENT FEET or FINES [47 gen, 11;

Popeshall, Newsole [in Coldred]. At Canterbury. Same date,
Q. (pet.) Thomas s. of Henry de Hugham and Bertram, Joseph
and John his brs. D. (ten.) William s. of William de Orlanston;
a mess. and 34 ac. of land in Popeshal. And -between Q. (pet.) the
same. D. the same, whom the abbot of Langedon vouched to
warranty and who warranted to him 78 ac. of land in Popeshal
and Newesole. Q. acknowledged the premises to be the right of D.
[0 hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and their heirs, paying yearly

at Easter ld. Warranty by Q. and their heirs. D. gave 22
marks.

[97.47.97l.]

Canterbury. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Master Robert
Scot and w. Dionisia. D. (imp.) Stephen s. of Normauny and
w. Eleanor ; a mess. in Canterbury. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the mess. to be the right of Q. of the gift of D.
To hold to Q. and their heirs of D. and their heirs, paying yearly
at Easter Id. and doing service to the chief lords. VVarranty by

D. and their heirs. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
[97.47.972.]

Lynsted ; Teynham. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Robert
s. of VVil1iam and Thomas s. of William de Scherstede. D. Walter
s. of William ; 5s. of arrears of an annual rent of 1()s. 22:1. which D.
owed to Q. D. granted for himself and his heirs that they would
henceforth pay yearly to Q. and their heirs 10s. 2%]. for all that
tenement which fell to D. of the inheritance of William de
Scherstede the father of D. and Q. who are his heirs in Linstede
and Tenham at four terms (Christmas, Nativity of St. John the
Baptist and Michaelmas 3()d., Easter 322d.) by their hand, or by
those who hereafter shall hold the premises. Clause of distress.
Q. quitclaimed from themselves and their heirs all the arrears and

damages unto the day on which this concord was made.
i97.47.973.]

Canterbury, Suburbs of. At Canterbury. Same date [25 Nov.].
Q. Simon Stantfast and W. Cecily ; D. (imp.) Alan s. of Gilbert le
Mazun and W. Cecily ; a mess. in the suburbs of Canterbury.
Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the mess. to be
the right of Q. of the gift of D. ’I‘o hold to Q. and their heirs of I).
and the heirs of Cecily, paying yearly at Michaelmas Id. and doing
service to the chief lords. VVarranty by I). and the heirs of Cecily.

Q. gave 100s.
[97.4s.«.>s9.3

 

 

 

1262] KENT FEET OF FINES 327

Capeness [in Snave]1. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.)
Nicholas de la Nasse. D. (ten.) Robert Paulin and W. Joan, by
Mathew de Horne for Joan ; a mess. and the moiety of 140 ac.
of land in Copenesse. Q. acknowledged the mess. and the moiety
of all the said land as well within the walls made against the
inundation of the sea as beyond, without any retainment, as the
right of D. and quitclaimed from himself and his heirs to D. and

their heirs. D. gave 20 marks.
[97.43.993.]

Sarre. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. (pet.) Alexander le
Marescal and W. Juliana. D. (ten.) Hugh s. of Simon de Cerres
and Estrilda his mother; a mess. in Cerres. Q. acknowledged the
mess. to be the right of D. and quitclaimed from themselves and

the heirs of Juliana to D. and their heirs. D. gave 4 marks.
[97.48.996.]

Bridge ; Canterbury, Suburbs of. At Canterbury. Same
date. Q. (pet.) Adam Snegg’. D. (ten.) William, Master of the
Hospital of Priests of St. Mary of Canterbury ; 16% ac. of land
in Brigge and the suburbs of Canterbury. Assize of Mort
d’Ancestor. Q. acknowledged the land to be the right of D., his
brethren and church of the blessed Mary of Canterbury and quit-
claimed from himself and his heirs to D., his successors, brethren,

and church. D. gave a mark.
[98.49.lO03.]

Penshurst ; Chiddingstone. At Canterbury. Three weeks
from St. Martin [2 Dec.]. Q. Robert de Werehorn. D. (imp)
William del Parkes and W. Isolda ; a mess. and 21 ac. of land in
Peneshurst and Chetingestonz. Plea of VVarranty of Charter. D.
acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D.
To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Isolda, paying
yearly 2d. at the Epiphany and doing services to the chief lords.

Warranty by D. and the heirs of Isolda. Q. gave 13 marks.
[97.46.931.]

Eastry. At Canterbury. Same date. Q. Samuel de
Estryh. D. (imp.) Roger s. of John le Chapeleyn and W. Hodierna;
1% rod of land in Estryh. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D.
acknowledged the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To
hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Hodierna, paying

‘ See above, p. 319, n.2,
’ P.N.K., 77.

 


390 KENT FEET OF FINES [55 H.,,,,_ m_

ali t - . _
Wh‘;nr:'b‘.:,°8f't1';::§¢:1(::l:;1lt¢:;,hseell or imtpoverish the aforesaid tenement
and his heirs. PTOPGI‘ y shall not revert wholly to Q,

[98.6l.l062.]

Ash [Hear Sandwich] At Rochester Same d
An ' . ate. Q- (P913)
D drew de Molaunde and W. Maud and Ydonea de la Forde.
of’ 13:3‘? Tgonflas de Sa'ndWY00 ; two parts of a mess. and 35} ac.
of D. 31:11 :0“;-ain?.da:knoWledged the premises to be the right
and Ydoneaqt D e .rom.themselves and the heirs of Maud

0 . and his heirs. D. gave 5 marks_
[98.5l.l063.]

C3'Pe1 near Hadlow . '

John s. of Richard de Sch]areIfiiteniiI.‘On]1;r](l3i(;ge,§;:]in: iageil 
Pek-ham; a mess. and 40 ac. of land in La Chapele Bl:a o(i"(r}1ove
:23“:-f :31-e30i1;10\f1"11:C.lged the premises, to wit, all that which D.
_ 8 0 ichard de Scharndenn, father of Q., to be the
right Of Q. and rendered it to him in court. And for this Q
granted to D. the mess. and half the land. To hold to D. and the
§‘.‘i‘.’Z.§’.‘§ :::.:°:.3.:.:3.a:: ’“:.—*‘:*r   at 
heirs Re _ 0 9 0.18 .0I‘dS. ‘ Warranty by Q. and his

' Verslon t0 Q. and his heirs quit of the other heirs of D.
[98.5l.lO70.]

Sflodland. At Rochester. Same date. Q. VVilliam l’otyn_
D. (1mp.) Robert s. of Benedict Hemer’ and w_ ]4j1ean0r . ,, mess
End hkac. ypfdland in Snodylond. Plea of VVarr-anty of Chm.te1.'
D- afr 11531: ged the premises. to be the right of Q. of the gift of

. . o o to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Eleanor,
Paying yearly 8d. (half at Michaelmas and Easter) and doinrr

. _ ,,
service to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the heirs of Eleanor.
Q. gave 5 marks.

[98.52.lO8l.]

Hacllow. At Tonbridge. Same date [8 July]. Q, Isabel d_
of William Le Bolur. D. William de Brampton - 2 mess, and 8 go
of land in Haudlou: Plea of Covenant. D. acknowledged the
premises to be the right of Q. To hold to Q. for her life of D.
3Jn_d 1115 113113, paying yearly 1d. at Michaelmas for all service,
iuit of court, custom an.d'exaction. Warranty by D. and his
Peirs. Remainder to William s. of VVilliam de Brampton and

3531'» John, Giles, Thomas and John ss. of Q. and their heirs,

‘ Melisenta in one instance.

 

 

 

 «~   

1271] KENT FEET OF FINES 391

to hold of D. and his heirs, paying yearly at Christmas 6 grains of
pepper. Warranty by D. and his heirs. And Q. shall not give,
sell, pledge or in any Way alienate nor make Waste, or impover-
ish the premises whereby after her death they shall not remain
wholly to the said William, Peter, John, Giles, Thomas, John

and their heirs. Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
[98.52.l088.]

Bridge. At Rochester. Same date. Q. (pet.) Nigel de
Thurkyng’ and w. Cristine. D. (ten.) Ralph de Brigg, clerk;
2 mess., 4 ac. of land and the moiety of a mill in Brigg. Q.
acknowledged the premises to be the right of D. and quitclaimed
them from themselves and the heirs of Cristine to D. and his heirs.

D. gave 20s.
[98.52.l099.]

Shipbourne.1 At Tonbridge. Same date. Q. Adam de
Bavent. D. John de Sey; concerning complaint by Q. that D.
Wasted the woods which he held by the law of England of the
inheritance of Q. in Schyburne to the disinheritance of Q. D.
granted that he would not make Waste, sell or impoverisli the
said Woods, saving only to himself the reasonable estovers as in
husebote and heybote and this by View of four honest and legal
men by the agreement of Q. and D. and the heirs of Q. to be
chosen from the vill of Schyburn. And for this Q. for himself
and his heirs quitolaimed to D. and his heirs all damages which
he said he had had in the premises unto the day on which this

concord was made.
[$98.53.] 101.]

Throwley. At Rochester. Same date. Q. Luke de la
Porte. D. Thomas de Schortewode; a mess., 35 ac. of land,
1 ac. of wood and 3s. 8d. of rent in Thriilegh. Plea of Covenant.
D. acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift of
D. and for this Q. granted them to D. and Mabel his wife. ['0
hold to them for their lives of Q. and his heirs, paying yearly at
Michaelmas a mark and 12d. for a candle upon the altar of the
blessed Mary in the church of Thrulegh for all service (etc.) and
doing service to the chief lords. Warranty by Q. and his heirs.
Reversion to Q. and his heirs quit of the heirs of Thomas and
Mabel. D. shall not give, sell, waste [&c.] whereby the premises
may not after their deaths revert wholly to Q. [08 V5 “M Q‘

., ..i . -In,

‘ I’.N.K., 154.

 


392 KENT FEET OF FINES [56 1-1en_ HL

B Warehome. At Rochester. Three weeks from St. John the
aptist [15 July.] Q. Roger de Leyburn. D. (imp.) Ralph de
fgrners andfHamo de Gatton ; the manor of Werehom and the
fvowson o the church of the said manor. Plea of Warranty
0 -Charter. D. acknowledged the premises with appurtenances
as in demesnes, services [etc.] to be the right of Q. of the gift of
D‘ T0 hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and their heirs, paying
yearly at the Nativity of St. John the Baptist a. rose for all service
[etc.] and doing service to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and

their heirs. Q. gave 350 marks. I
[98.55.ll58.]

56 HEN. III. 1271-2

Bridge Pit ; Blackmansbury ; Kenewesborne [all in Bridge.].1
Quindene of St. Martin 56 Hen. III [25 Nov. 1271.] Q. Roger,
Abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, by Richard de Karleton.
D. (imp.) Ralph le Clark of Bregg’, by Robert de Bosco ; 187 ac.
of land in Brigge Pitte, Blakemannesbir’ and Kynesburn’. Plea
of VVarranty of Charter. D. acknowledged the said land with
appurtenances as in demesnes, homages, services [&c.] to be the
right of Q. and his church of the gift of D. and for this Q. granted
it to D. To hold to D. for his life of Q., his successors and church,
paying yearly 12 marks (equally at the Nativity of St. John the
Baptist and Michaelmas). Reversion to Q., his successors and

church quit of the heirs of D.
[98.55.1l7l.]

Brasted. Same date. Q. Symon de Horne. D. (imp.)
Roger do Kane’ and w. Maud ; a mess. and 40 ac. of land in
Bradcstedc. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged
the promises to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q.
and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Maud, paying yearly at Easter
one halfpenny for all services (etc.) and doing service due to the
chief lords. VVarranty by D. and the heirs of Maud. Q. gave

4 marks.
[98.55.ll72.]

Stone. Octave oflSt. Hilary [20 Jan. 1271/2.] Q. Stephen
Everard. D. (imp.) Robert lc Peyntur and W. Agnes ; 15 ac. of
land in Stanes. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. acknowledged
the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to Q. and

1 P.N.l\'., 542 of also Hasted, III, 724.

 

1271-2] KENT FEET OF FINES 393

his heirs of D. and the heirs of Agnes, paying yearly 22§d. (equally
at Easter and Michaelmas) for all services (etc.). Warranty by D.

and the heirs of Agnes. Q. gave 20 li.
[98.55.ll63.]

Sevenoaks ; Otford. Same date. Q. Stephen de Yford. D.
(imp.) Walter de Bosco and w. Mabel ; a mess., 75 ac. of land,
3 ac. of meadow, 15 ac. of pasture, 12 ac. of wood, a mill and 25s.
of rent in Sevenak’ and Otteford. Plea of Warranty of Charter.
D. acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q. of the gift
of D. To hold to Q. and his heirs of D. and the heirs of Mabel,
paying yearly at Christmas ld. for all services (etc.) and doing
service due to the chief lords. Warranty by D. and the heirs of

Mabel. Q. gave 40 marks.
[98.55.ll70.]

Dartford. Quindene of St. Hilary [27 Jan.] Q. Laurence dc
Brock. D. (_imp.) Richard de Wyht and w. Pascasia ; 7 ac. of
land in Derteford. Plea of Warranty of Charter. D. ackn()u'»
ledged the land to be the right of Q. of the gift of D. To hold to
Q. and his heirs of the chief lords by the service belonging. Q.

gave 40s.
[98.55.l l62.]

Teynham ; Lynsted ; Tonge ; Doddington. Octave of the
Purification [9 Feb.] Q. Thomas de Frogenlialv. D. (impf)
Master Adam de Derteford s. of Geoffrey de l<‘rugcnlialo, by
Serlo de VVelcwes; a mess., 38 ac. of land and Illis. of rent in
Tenham, Lyndestetle, Tonges and Dodyngton. Plea of \\":1rr:mt,_\'
of Charter. D. acknowledged the premises to be the right of Q.
of the gift of D. and for this Q. granted them to D. To hold to
D. for his life of Q. and his heirs, paying yearly at Mic-haelmas :1
mark for all services (etc.) Reversion to Q. and his heirs quit of

the heirs of D. to hold of the chief lords by the service l)elonging_r.
[98.55.ll64.[

Milton [near _ Gravesend]. Same date. Q. Stephen do
Gravesendc, by Nicholas de St. lvo. D. VVilliam do Clovill, by
Walter de Somers' ; 120 ac. of land and 2 marks of rent in
Melton. Plea of Covenant. Q. acknowledged the premises to be
the right of D. and for this D. granted them to Q. To hold to Q.
and his heirs of D. and his heirs, paying yearly at Easter 6:1. and
doing service to the chief lords. VVari'a11t_\' by D. and his heirs.

Q. gave a sore sparrow hawk.
’ |szs.m3.1165.]