Page images

even in the time of Domesday. And while there were then, as I have shown, many manors in which the building had not been erected, in which the site only had been indicated on which the new mill should stand, there were other places in which, as at Pontefract, such mills had already been established, and were in taxable working condition. Neither of those at Ackworth, Darrington, Little Smeaton or Roall (all named in Domesday), could ever have been anything but a windmill. At Ackworth the site was 175 ft. above sea level, at Darrington it was 225 ft., and at Little Smeaton 125 ft.; while although it was only half as high at Roall, in each it was on the highest ground in the neighbourhood, on the borders of adjoining townships, and (except at Little Smeaton, though even there the ascent is sharp and precipitous) far from any stream that could have turned a water-wheel, and where it would therefore have been impossible to obtain a supply of running water to work one.

Moreover, each of these mills is in a position which has so many characteristics common to all, that a common design is evidenced. In each instance, as I have pointed out to have been the case at Pontefract also, the mill is near the border of the township to which it belongs, and it is distant only a few rods from converging roads; but it is reached directly only from one of them, and that by a narrow way which passes along one side of the Miller's Garth. This last is in each case a quadrilateral slip of ground, within a broader and longer, whose breadth is increased by the pathway, and whose length is increased by the square grass plot above, to which the pathway leads, and which is occupied by the mill.

I need not labour the subject; if only one of these mills was on high ground where it could never have been turned by water; if only one of them was in a manor which had no stream, my case would be established. But in neither of the instances I have given can I think exception be taken to the assumption that the present sites of the mills are those on which the eleventh century mills were placed. Neither mills nor churches, once built, could be removed without leaving evidence behind them of the migration. If, however, one such migration of these Domesday mills could possibly have taken place, all could not; so that we are fairly entitled to consider (1) that in each case the mill we now

see is on its original site; (2) that that site could never have supported a water-mill; (3) that the mill itself dates from before Domesday; and (4) that therefore mills were of preDomesday introduction to England, and had been firmly established in the country not only previous to the return of a Crusader in possession of the knowledge of any peculiar Eastern art, but even long before the first Crusader set his eager face towards the Holy Land.


Inquisition, 35 H. 3 [1251] n° 29 [should have been 19].

DD [vol. 122] 63 John Talbot held lands in Kowicke & Snait in com Ebor.

67 The ancient ecclesiastical parish of Snaith comprised (beside the manor which gave its name to the whole) the subordinate manors of Airmyn, Balne, Carlton, Cowick, Goole, Gowdall, Heck, Hensall, Hook, Pollington and Rawcliffe. The extent of the whole was above 34,000 acres, or over 50 square miles, which incidentally shows how sparselypeopled the district was at the close of the twelfth century, when the manors were united into parishes; for it may be safely assumed that if either of these manors had had any large population it would have been provided with a church, in which case a parochial district would have been assigned to it, consisting of one or more manors. The contrast in this respect between the Eastern end of the wapentake and the western end, where, except in Pontefract itself, churches were numerous, is considerable. Chapels, that is places of worship without a full proportion of tithes or without a burying ground, were however early erected at Whitgift, Rawcliffe and Heck, though the latter soon fell into disuse, norexcept Carlton which was on the other side of the river, in Barkston Ash where the king had six carucates, and which some little time after the Survey was made was granted out to Robert de Bruis, as recorded in a sort of supplement to the Survey-was either of the manors in this extensive parish even named in Domesday. Though the manor thus appears to have escaped assessment, incidental references to it are made under the head of Birkin, Whitley, and an unidentified place called Edeshale, apparently a co-relative to Tateshale, the two being named after King

Edwin and his wife Ethelburga or Tate (Yorkshire Archæological Journal, III., 380). Edeshale has been supposed to be Hensall. Under Birkin, a report is made in a halting hesitating fashion that that manor is said to belong to Snaith, which seems to have been an incorrect assertion by whomsoever made; for had Birkin belonged to its eastern neighbour on the other side of the water, in another wapentake, full evidence of the connection would have cropped up, which it never did. Of Whitley and Edeshale, it was stated that each was in the soke of Esnoid, which might have been. And as these three notices serve at least to show that the place had an existence, it is not easy to account for the general omission in Domesday, of all the places which afterwards formed the parish of Snaith. The omission implied that there was even then some common bond which united them all; and the only suggestion that occurs to me is that in the mind of the officials who compiled that record there was some uncertainty as to the position to be allotted to the manors held by the large religious houses of York and Selby. For the former was at the time in the plenitude of its power, and the latter showed signs of obtaining equal influence, being in possession of a charter from the Conqueror himself which gave the monks of Selby equal privileges to those possessed by York (sicut melius habet ecclesia sancti Petri). Now in the original Table of Contents of the Yorkshire Domesday, which occurs at p. 298 (p. 2 of the photo-zincographic copy) the third place in order was allotted to the bishop of Durham and his tenants, the fourth to the Abbot of York, the

DD [vol. 122] 123

Clause, 28 H. 3 [1243] m. 6.

The King pdoned John Talbot & Gerrard his brother 100 yearly which was demanded of them sumon [of the issues (Dodsworth)] of the Mann' of Sneyth which the King comitted [to them (Dodsworth)] for the yearly fee of 30", vntill the full age of the heir 6 of John de Lacy, late Earle of Linc.®


[Another reference is F (vol. 125) 81.]

fifth to Earl Hugh (of Chester) and so on. But when the local returns were digested for the compilation itself, every posses sion of the Abbot of York was omitted (though some of his lands which he held as Abbot of Whitby were included in the Survey), and to Earl Hugh was assigned the fourth place, the numeration of all the Tables after that of Earl Hugh being varied accordingly. The original design of including the manors of the Abbot of York having thus been abandoned and a precedent established, it seems to have been followed with regard to the second great Yorkshire Abbey, that of Selby, when it came up for consideration in its turn, and no report was recorded on either of the manors of Selby, Snaith, Fryston, Whitgift, Flaxby or Rawcliffe and other places which were held by the Selby House. In the Poll Tax of 2 Richard 11. (1378), Snaith was, next to Pontefract, the manor most highly assessed in the king's books from the whole wapentake of Osgoldcross, Reedness, Rawcliffe and Fryston coming next with £2 13s. 6d., £3 8s. 8d., and £2 5s. 10d. respectively. Snaith was charged with £4 78. 8d. (totalled erroneously at £4 7s.) from a group of 187 householders, of whom 164 were assessed at 4d., 16 at 6d., three at 12d. one at 2s., and three at half a mark, or 6s. 8d. These three who paid 6s. 8d. were Richard de Snayth, an attorney, Thomas de Snayth, the sergeant, and Thomas Adam, a second attorney. The ratepayer of 28. was John Frere, a merchant; the three at 12d. were a tailor, an ostler, and a beast merchant. 16 artizans at 6d. were 8 smiths, 3 tailors, 2 coblers, and one each walker, webster and wright, the webster being a Margaret del Hook. Snaith itself contained rather less than 6,000 acres, but it became the head of an extensive parish comprising 34,146 acres, for which there was at one time but a single church, though a few chapels were erected during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and bitter contests seem to have occasionally raged between the incumbents of


[ocr errors]

the various places of worship. Ecclesiastically Snaith possessed a dean who was the presiding judge of a "peculiar court, before whom wills were proved, and by whom letters of administration were issued. Three sides of the churchyard wall were repaired at the expense of the twelve townships which constituted the parish, the fourth side, called the "priory wall," being built of freestone and repaired at the charge of the whole parish. The relative importance of the townships may be estimated from the extent of wall allotted to each to repair. Goole had 6 yards, Hook 17, Airmyn 18 yds. 2 ft., Rawcliffe 24, Snaith and Cowick 24, Balne and Pollington 20, Heck 27, Gowdall 24, Hensall 19, and Carleton 28 yards.

68 The heir to John de Lascy, earl of Lincoln, who died 22 July, 1240, was Edmund de Lascy, who, when he came of age succeeded to the lands, but not to the earldon, which his mother, Margaret, held for life, surviving her son. Legally, therefore, Edmund de Lascy was never earl, though conventionally and by courtesy he was frequently so styled. He became a ward of the king and was put into the care of Richard de Wirce, a Dominican Friar who had become Bishop of Chichester, who died in 1253, and who was shortly canonized. In his memory Edmund de Lascy founded a house of Friars Preachers at Pontefract, the only ecclesiastical establishment dedicated to St. Richard that I have been able to discover. See post, F F 75.

69"John Talbot and Gerard his brother," must have been systematically unfaithful trustees. As a consequence of this plea, an inquisition dated 35 H. 3 [1251], No. 19 was made, which has been recently published in the Record series (vol. xii., 241). Its object was to ascertain what damage they had occasioned to Edmund de Lascy, by waste, sale and removal. The jury specified the waste, and assessed the damage at £15 11s. 9d. It may be noted as an additional illustration of the carelessness with which the official Kalendar of 1806 was com

Pleas before the King, &c.

DD [vol. 122] 152 [Entered under GOLDALE, vol. xi. 43]. "Et term Mich. 52 H. 3 [1267] ro. 12" is here added.

Extract out of the Register of Wills, &c. (Alenger).

FF [vol. 126] 37


Entered under ELMESALL, Vol. I., 527, & SMEATON, (ante 74) with the additions named at the latter

Placita de Banco a die Pascha in 15 dies ao 34 H. 3 [1249] ro. 3. FF [vol. 126] 75 Edmund de Lascy opponit se against John Talbot in a Plea, wherefore he made waste in his [the (Dodsworth)] woods & lands which he had in custody of the Jnheritance of the said Edmund in Snaith.

Out of an Inq. 7 No. 12 H. 8 [1520].

LL [vol. 136] 5 [Already given under CARLETON in Balne, vol. x., 364]. [12 H. 8 added, as the date of livery to Henry


Inquisition taken at Sherburne 6 Sept. 8 Caroli 1632.

RR [vol. 146] 124 [Given under BALNE [vol. x. 350].

Escheats, 5 H. 5 [1417] [fo. 205 (Dodsworth)].

PPP [vol. 82] 88 Anthony Boston [Beston (Dodsworth)] held 2 acres of land in Snaith nere Carleton. Thomas de

Boston, Chaplaine, brother & heire.

Out of Melton's Register.

B[vol. 28] 96 A letter of Confirmation for the Church of Snaith wherein is confirmed to the said Church the p'ochial rights of & in the townes &c. of Usflete, Whitgift, Rednesse, Swyneflete, & Esketoft; & for receiveing all manner of tythes there; & allso tythes of 11 bovates of land in Folkurdby, & 13 bovates of land in Haldenby. The Abbot of Selby had the church of Snaith for his owne use 1304. The Abbot and monkes of Selby (allthough the said Abbot of Selby affirmed it not to be a pochiall Church of it selfe, but the Chappell of Selby antiently depending on the Church of Snaith), doe hold & enjoy the Churches of Snaith & of Athelingflet & the Church of Selby, &c. Dat. 21 pont [1335] fo. 215.

[Another reference is CCC 25 [vol. 34].

piled, that it treats the inquisition ad quod damnum as an inq. p. m. See also DD [vol. 122] 63 (vol. x. p. 370).

70 The volumes of Wills of the P.P.C.

are each known by the name of the testator whose will is entered first in the volume.

Fines, 2 H. 6 [1423].

XXX [vol. 106] 4 Between Thomas Dilcock Jun' & Jone his wife complts, and William Scargill Esq: disturber, of one Messuage and 4 Acres of Land with the appurtnances in Snaith, &c. William granted to the foresaid Thomas & Jone, & the heires of their bodies, &c. And if it happen that they die wthout issue of their bodies, then after their decease the foresaid Tenemt wth the appurtnances to remaine wholly to the right heires of the said Thomas.

Fines, 30 H. 6 [1451].

XXX [vol. 106] 71 This has already appeared under CowICK (vol. x. 371) and INCLESMORE (vol. xi. 67).

Charta, 35 H. 3 [1251] 3 m. 8.

C[vol. 120] 15 [Entered under CASTLEFORD (vol. x. 369).

In the

entry here the words "& in diuerse Lands in Linc." are added after "Yorke " [Manors in Leicestershire and Northampton are also named in Dodsworth].

Charta, 36 H. 3 [1251] m. 23.

C [vol. 120] 18 The King granted free warren to the Abbot of Seleby in all his demeasne lands of his Mann's of Seleby, Thorp, Brayton, Hamelthon, Friston, Hillom, Acaster, Chelleslowe, Holme, Snaith, Rouchclife [Rawcliff] & Estofte in the County of Yorke.

Inquisition taken at Snaith, 27 Ed. 3 [1353] π. 11.

[Partly entered under HENSALL (vol. x., 53).] The full entry is as follows:

C [vol. 120] 93 The Jurors say it is not to the Dammage of the lord the king if he grant that Henry Gramary, K., may giue to John Newton of Snaith & Jone his wife & William, son of the said John, 5 messuages, 5 bovates, & 50 acres of Land & 20 acres of Meadow, 200 acres of More, & 8 10 rent, with the appurtnances in Snaith, Goldhale, Hethensale, Balne-hecke, Litle Hecke, Whitley, Berley, & Burton upon Dime [Bolton-on-Dearne] which is held of the King in Capite as it is said, & which the said Henry Grammary holdeth of William Grammary who holdeth them of John de Creppings vnder the name of 9 5 rent with the appurtnances in the foresaid Towne of Snaith by the grant of E. late King of England grandfather of the now King; to John Newton of Snaith &Jone his wife & William sonne of the said John to hold for euer. And they say that the foresaid Messuages, Land, meadow, more & 8 10 rent &c. in all the townes aforesaid &c. are the same Tenements which the foresaid Henry Grammary & William Grammary purchased of the foresd John de Creppings, vnder the name of the whole Land & Tenemt in the foresaid Towne of Snaith. And which the foresaid John de Creppings, as son & heire of Robert de Crepings, after the

« PreviousContinue »