Page images
PDF
EPUB

Trade Privileges of Chester

465

EARLY IRISH TRADE WITH CHESTER

AND ROUEN1

HE eighth report of the Royal Commission on Histori

THE

[ocr errors]

cal Manuscripts speaks of the records of the city of Chester as "beginning with Henry the Second's writ of license to the citizens of Chester to trade in Durham [sic] as they were wont to do in the time of Henry the First (p. xv.). The records themselves are similarly described in the actual report on them (pp. 355-403) as "beginning with a curious writ, addressed by Henry the Second to his bailiffs of the city of Durham" [sic]. This, which is among those items spoken of as "especially interesting and important," figures thus at the head of the calendar :—

(1) Henry II. License to the burgesses of Chester to buy and sell at Durham [sic] as they were wont to do in the time of Henry I. -"Henricus Dei gratia Rex Anglie et Dux Normannie et Aquitanie et Comes Andegavie balluis [sic] de Dunelina [sic] salutem :Precipio quod Burgenses Cestrie possint emere et vendere ad detaillum [or doraillum] apud Dunelinam [sic] habendo et faciendo easdem consuetudines quas faciebant tempore Regis Henrici avi mei et easdem ibi habeant rectitudines et libertates et liberas consuetudines quas tempore illo habere solebant, teste, Willelmo filio Ald' dapifero Apud Wintoniam.

Durham is not only a most improbable place for such a writ to refer to, but is also an impossible rendering of the

1 The error as to the Chester writ was explained by me in a letter to the Academy (No. 734).

B.H.

нн

Latin name. The interest and importance of this "curious writ" has, in short, been obscured and lost through the ignorance of Mr. J. C. Jeaffreson, to whom the report was entrusted. The charters which follow the writ, and which are printed on the same page, refer to this writ as relating to Ireland; and the town, of course, to which it refers is not Durham but Dublin (Duuelina).

We have, therefore, in this writ an almost, if not quite, unique reference by Henry the Second to Dublin in the days of his grandfather, and a confirmation of the "libertates, etc., which the men of Chester had then enjoyed there, just as if his grandfather had been in his own position. Secondly, we have here record evidence, not merely of a recognised connection, but of what might be termed treaty relations between the traders of Chester and the Ostmen of Dublin, long previous to the Conquest of Ireland, thus confirming Mr. Green's observation, "the port of Chester depended on the trade with Ireland, which had sprung up since the settlement of the Northmen along the Irish Coasts. And this has, of course, a bearing on the question of “a Danish settlement" at Chester. Thirdly, we learn from this document that at the date of its issue Dublin was governed by bailiffs of the King (ballivi sui).

What, then, was its date? The clue, unfortunately, is slight; but it may not improbably belong to the close of 1175 or early part of 1176. This brings us to the interesting question, why was such a writ issued? Remembering that during his stay at Dublin (November, 1171-January, 1172) Henry II. had granted that city to his men of Bristol, we may hold it in accordance with the spirit of the time, and, indeed, a matter of virtual certainty, that Bristol would have striven on the strength of this grant to exclude "its rival port" (Conquest of England, p. 443) from the benefits of the Dublin trade. Chester would, therefore, appeal to the King on the strength of its antecedent rights,

Conquest of England, p. 440.

Trade Pivileges of Rouen

467

and would thus have obtained from him this writ, recognising and confirming their validity.

The Domesday customs of the city (i. 2626) contain a curious allusion to its Irish trade:

Si habentibus martrinas pelles juberet prepositus regis ut nulli venderet donec sibi prius ostensas compararet, qui hoc non observabat xl. solidis emendabat Hæc civitas tunc reddebat de

firma xlv. lib et iii. timbres pellium martrinium.

There is nothing to show where these marten skins came from, or why they are mentioned under Chester alone. But on turning to the customs of Rouen, as recorded in the charters of Duke Henry (1150-1) and King John (1199), we find they were imported from Ireland.

Quæcunque navis de Hibernia venerit, ex quo caput de Gernes [Guernsey] transierit, Rothomagum veniat, unde ego habeam de unaquâque nave unum tymbrium de martris aut decem libras Rothomagi, si ejusdem navis mercatores jurare poterint se ideo non mercatos fuisse illas martras ut auferrent consuetudinem ducis Normanniæ, et vicecomes Rothomagi de unaquaque habeat viginti solidos Rothomagi et Camerarius Tancarvillæ unam accipitrem aut sexdecim solidos Rothomagi.

Giraldus Cambrensis, it may be remembered, alludes to the abundance of martens in Ireland,' and describes how they were captured. We thus have evidence in Domesday of the Irish trade with Chester, even in the days of Edward the Confessor.

• "Martrinarum copia abundant hic silvestria" (Top. Hib., i. 24).

WALTER TIREL AND HIS WIFE

N his detailed examination of all the evidence bearing

Rufus, the late

carefully collected the few facts that are known relative to Walter Tirel. They are, however, so few that he could add nothing to what Lappenberg had set forth (ii. 207) in 1834. He was, however, less confident than his predecessor as to the identity of Walter Tirel with the Essex tenant of that name in Domesday. I hope now to establish the facts beyond dispute, to restore the identity of Walter Tirel, and also to show for the first time who his wife really was.

The three passages we have first to consider are these,— taking them in the same order as Mr. Freeman :

Adelidam filiam Ricardi de sublimi prosapia Gifardorum conjugem habuit, quæ Hugonem de Pice, strenuissimum militem, marito suo peperit (Ord. Vit.).

Laingaham tenet Walterus Tirelde R. quod tenuit Phin daous pro ii. hidis et dimidia et pro uno manerio (Domesday, ii. 41).

Adeliz uxor Walteri Tirelli reddit compotum de x. marcis argenti de eisdem placitis de La Wingeham (Rot. Pip., 31 Hen. I.).

Dealing first with the Domesday entry, which comes, as Mr. Freeman observed, "among the estates of Richard of Clare," I would point out that though Ellis (who misled Mr. Freemam) thought that "Tirelde" was the name, the right reading is "tenet Walterus Tirel de R[icardo]," two words (as is not unusual) being written as one. Turning next to the words of Orderic, we find that Lappenberg renders them "Adelaide, Tochter des Richard Giffard," and Mr. Freeman

The Clares and the Giffards

469

as "a wife Adelaide by name, of the great line of Giffard.” But there is no trace of a Richard Giffard, nor can "Adelida" herself be identified among the Giffards. The explanation of the mystery, I hold, is that she was the daughter, not of a Giffard, but of Richard de Clare, by his wife Rohese, daughter of Walter Giffard the elder. It is noteworthy that Orderic employs a precisely similar expression in the case of another Adeliza, the daughter of Robert de Grentmesnil. He terms her "soror Hugonis de Grentemaisnil de clara stirpe Geroianorum," though she was only descended from the famous Geroy through her mother. Richard's daughter was sufficiently described as "Adelida filia Ricardi," just as her brothers were known as "Gilbertus filius Ricardi," "Rogerus filius Ricardi," etc. The position of that mighty family was such that this description was enough, and they were even known collectively as the "Ricardi," or "Richardenses" (Mon. Ang., iv. 609), This is well illustrated by the passage in the Ely writer, describing Adeliza's brother Richard, Abbot of Ely, as parentum undique grege vallatus, quorum familiam ex Ricardis et Gifardis constare tota Anglia et novit et sensit. Ricardi enim et Gifardi, duæ scilicet ex propinquo venientes familiæ, virtutis fama et generis copia illustres effecerat.

The above forms are curious, but not without parallel. Thus the descendants of Urse d'Abetot are spoken of as "Ursini" in Heming's Cartulary. Ethelred of Rievaulx speaks of "Poncii" and "Morini" as present at the battle of the Standard; Gerald, in a well-known passage (v. 335), speaks of the "Giraldida" and "Stephanidæ," and Orderic, we have seen, of the "Geroiani."

The doubly influential character of this descent is well illustrated in this passage (quantum valeat) from the chronicle of St. John's Abbey, Colchester.

Parcebatur tamen Eudoni, propter genus uxoris ipsius Rohaisæ : erat enim hæc de genere nobilissimo Normannorum, filia scilicet Ricardi, qui fuit filius Gilberti Comitis, duxitque Rohaisam uxorem,

« PreviousContinue »