During the medieval period the religious life of
Nottinghamshire and Sherwood Forest was influenced by
the many religious houses and churches, spread throughout the landscape.
The church was intrinsic to everyday life, its festivals and
feast days followed the seasons of the year, its saint days were
used to document the meetings of the courts and administration of the land, and
the church protected and legitimised the role of the monarchy itself.
The church in England
was until the reformation of the 16th century part of the great
Catholic Church under the control of the papacy in Rome.
The leader of the church in medieval England
was the Archbishop of Canterbury, who held the office of St
Augustine, since the 6th century.
In the north of England
however it was the Archbishop of York who held sway over the lives and souls of
the people.
In Nottinghamshire the Archbishop held a great amount of
power both spiritually and temporally.
In Domesday he is listed as having full jurisdiction and
market rights and the King’s customary dues of two pence over his manors.
The Archbishop is the fifth landowner listed in Domesday for
Nottinghamshire behind the King and a small number of Counts and Earls.
The Domesday Posessions of the Archbishop include the Manors
of Cropwell (Bishop), Laneham, South Muskham, Blidworth,
Oxton, Norwell and Sutton with its outliers of Lound and Srooby, and in the great Manor of Southwell in central Nottinghamshire. The Archbishop
also held land in other places including Woodborough (Morris 1977).
Blidworth and Woodborough were both within the boundaries of Sherwood
Forest.
The rest of the Archbishops properties were outside the 13th
century boundary of Sherwood Forest, but the Archbishop was subject to forest law in many of his lands. His influence may even have affected the forest boundaries
over time.
Sutton, Scrooby and Lound in north Nottinghamshire were
granted by charter to the Archbishop, then called Oskytell, by King Edgar of
England in the year 958 (Davies T.GT. 1983).
Interestingly this charter mentions a ‘scirwuda’ (shire
wood) as part of the boundary perambulation of the estate. This is often cited
as the earliest reference to Sherwood Forest, but sadly
it cannot be directly linked to the Forest
of Sherwood, due to its location,
and a separation of nearly 300 years in the use of the name.
Scrooby was also incidentally later the home of William
Brewster a leader of the Pilgrim Fathers who sailed to America
on the Mayflower.
In a charter in 956 two years before Sutton, Lound and
Scrooby were granted to the Archbishop Oskytell, King Edgar's brother the preceeding
King Eadwig had granted the Manor of Southwell to the Archbishop.
Southwell became the heart of the Archbishop’s power in the
county.
With all its outliers the Manor of Southwell became an
incredibly well defined area of power belonging to the Archbishop .
At the centre of this estate was the Minster church
of Southwell.
Southwell Minster operated as a collegiate of secular
canons.
This was effectively a collection of religious brothers
similar to a monastery- the term secular means they were not tied to one of the
religious orders of the day.
Each of these canons provided religious service to
surrounding communities known as ‘Prebeneds’ in exchange for land and money.
By the 1290’s Southwell had acquired
16 Prebends in the surrounding area some of them in lands they had possessed
since Domesday and some aquired overtime.
These were at The Sacrists' prebend, Normanton, Woodborough, North Muskham,South Muskham, Dunham, Beckingham, Halloughton, Rampton, Eaton, and North Leverton, three Prebends at Norwell, and two at Oxton (Page 1910 Victoria County History).
These were at The Sacrists' prebend, Normanton, Woodborough, North Muskham,South Muskham, Dunham, Beckingham, Halloughton, Rampton, Eaton, and North Leverton, three Prebends at Norwell, and two at Oxton (Page 1910 Victoria County History).
The dominion and jurisdiction the
Archbishop had over the lands around Southwell resulted in it being known as
the ‘Southwell Peculiar’.
The above is a short introduction
to the relationship of the Archbishopric to the land and people of Nottinghamshire.
So what does this all have to do
with Sherwood Forest?
The Archbishop of York held the
manor of Blidworth, and the Prebend of Woodborough, both in Sherwood
Forest as defined by the 13th century perambulations.
At Blidworth he was confirmed in an
inquisition of 1155/6 as having the right to ‘hunt in his wood of Blidworth for
nine days a year, three each at Christmas, Easter and Pentecost. There he, his
canons and his men had all their easements without waste, their own foresters,
honey, eyries of sparrowhawks and hawks and pannage’ (Crook 1994).
Also as a leader of the church his lands were protected with regard to trespass against the forest law by threat of excommunication (see Mutilation and Damnation entry)
Also as a leader of the church his lands were protected with regard to trespass against the forest law by threat of excommunication (see Mutilation and Damnation entry)
In 1300 the forest boundary was
perambulated at the order of Edward I. The boundary was altered to allow the Archbishops
wood at Blidworth to be exempt from the forest law (Boulton 1964). This wood
was known as ‘ye Bischopes Wode’ in the 1400’s, and sat at the northern
boundary of Blidworth against the lordship of the Abbots of Rufford (see A journey through Sherwood Forest: Newstead Priory to King John's Palace).
The remainder of the Archbishop’s
lands were outside the boundary of Sherwood Forest at
this time.
There were however many issues regarding the Archbishop and the forest.
An inquest in 1155/6 at the start
of the reign of Henry II (1154-1189) into the rights of the Archbishop of York
in relation to the forest law in Nottinghamshire in the reign of his
grandfather Henry I (1100-1135) gives us our earliest known boundary of the
forest in Nottinghamshire (see Oldest known boundary entry).
This ‘Old
Forest’ as the inquest calls it, in
the time of Henry I, stretched all the way up the western half of
the county. The documents refer to this forest as the 'Forest
of Nottingham'.
The Archbishop’s lands were
exempt from the forest law to the east of this line in the time of Henry I
because they were outside of the forest.
In the reign of Henry I’s
grandson, Henry II (1154-1189), and his sons, Richard I (1189-1199) and King John (1199-1216)
all of Nottinghamshire north and west of the Trent
was subject to forest law.
This meant that all of the Archbishop’s
lands in the area to the east of the 'old forest' were subject to forest law.
As forest law gradually engulfed
all of Nottinghamshire north and west of the Trent
during the reign Henry II, Richard I and John, the area to the east of the Forest
of Nottingham came under forest
law. This area seems to have gone by the name ‘Forest
of Clay’
The boundary between the two
forests was defined by the boundary of the ‘Old
Forest’ of Henry I, and reflects
mainly the geology and soils of the region (see Forest
of Clay entry). But effectively the
crown administered this huge area as one forest.
The crown enforced forest law in
the Forest of Clay
as it did in the Forest of Nottingham
throughout the later 12th and early 13th century:
In 1167 the Canons of Southwell
and the collegiate church were fined by Henry II ‘the men of Norwell “of the
part of Master Viacrius’ paid half a mark as a result of the forest Eyre of
Alain de Neville”’ (Crook 1994)
This seems to relate to one of
the Prebends of Southwell in Norwell in the Forest
of Clay.
In 1185 Vicarius was ‘charged with
40s for waste of his wood and trespass against the assize, in the forest eyre
of Geoffrey Fitzpeter’ (ibid.) along with Andrew the canon charged 100s,
Geoffrey the canon 2 marks, and Master Gilbert 2 marks- most likely all canons
of Southwell.
‘Two years later, in another Eyre
by Geoffrey Fitzpeter, Andrew canon of Southwell was amerced the enormous sum
of 40 marks for receiving venison and removing it contrary to the assize. At
the same time Master Vicarius was again charged with 2 marks for trespass
against the assize, canons Gilbert and Laurence 40s each for the same offence
and for default…
...it was probably the 1187 forest eyre which led Hugh of Avalon,
the saintly bishop of Lincoln to excommunicate Geoffrey Fitzpeter for enforcing
the forest law’ against the Archbishops men (Crook 1994).
In the time of Richard I (1189-99)
it seemed that things had got better for the Archbishop, when in 1189 Richard
granted the Archbishop ‘disaforestment of all the lands of the church
of York in Nottinghamshire, both
those held in demesne and those in the prebends. They were quit of all wastes
and assarts and pleas of the forest, and of the regard, and no forester or
other bailiff was to interfere with them’ (Crook 1994).
However the archbishop's men still got fined or bought
their way out of fines in 1198 and 1209 at the forest eyres, suggesting that
the charter of Richard meant little.
The fact that they were being
directly fined for forest infringements suggests that royal forest law applied
over all of Nottinghamshire north and West of the Trent,
and the Archbishops land
at Southwell in the Forest of Clay.
When King John was in control of
Nottinghamshire as Count of Mortain between 1189 and 1194 he confirmed that
Maud de Caux was keeper of the Forests of Nottingham and Derbyshire (see Women Keepers of Sherwood Forest).
In 1222 Maud de Caux was referred
to as the keeper of the Forests of Nottingham and of Clay’ (Crook 1979).
Also Brian De Lisle as Chief
Justice of the Forest was ordered to allow Walter de
Evermue to take timber from Clay as well as Sherwood to repair his houses
(ibid).
This suggest that the crown
continued to have jurisdiction over the Forest
of Clay into the 13th
century, possibly up until the boundaries of the forest were finally agreed in
1227.
The crown seems then to have
maintained control over the forest of
Clay in the reigns of Henry II,
Richard I and John up until 1227 in the reign of Henry III, with the
Archbishop’s men being some of the victims of this policy.
The boundaries of the Sherwood
Forest were reduced following Magna Carta and the subsequent
Forest Charter.
This new area removed the Forest
of Clay from the equation, as the
forest retreated into an area that may or may not have been the original forest
(see Castles and Sherwood Forest entry), which may have
fallen within the jurisdiction of Nottingham
Castle.
This meant that the problems the Archbishop
of York had had regarding the
forest had been finally resolved.
As previously stated the
condition improved further when the boundary was altered by Edward I in 1300 to
allow his forest at Blidworth to be exempt too.
It could be that the area of
jurisdiction that the Archbishop of York had around Southwell was one of the
reasons for the strange shape of Sherwood Forest from
the 13th century when it retreated into a boundary from an earlier
time.
Perhaps the Doverbeck
River provided a natural boundary
between the jurisdiction of the castle
of Nottingham (and therefore the
original boundary of the forest) and the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of York
to the east of it.
It is not possible to know for sure if this was the case, with the evidence known at the moment.
But
it is clear that the Archbishop of York
was an important figure in the lives of the people of the time, and that he
held significant authority in the county. It is clear that the Archbishops'
faced the authority of the forest law as did everyone else- often despite their
exemptions from it. It seems that over time they eventually managed to remove
the majority of their lands from under forest law, and it is also possible that
their influence even helped shape the original boundary of Medieval Sherwood
Forest.
(More on Bishops, Archbishops the
church and everyday life and the church and the forest law soon).
No comments:
Post a Comment