1072-5. Surdeval was one of the two great Yorkshire feudatories of Robert, Earl of Mortain and of Cornwall,1 under whom he held 121 carucates of land in the North Riding, 56 in the East, and 80 in the West, or 257 carucates in all. Among his North Riding manors was that of Skelton-in-Cleveland.2 He came from Sourdeval-le-Barre, near the town of Mortain (Manche). We know very little about him; his name does not appear as a benefactor to any monastic house, or even as a witness to a charter. He would appear to have become a tenant-in-capite after the Mortain rebellion of 1088.4 We have 1 Robert, Earl of Mortain and of Cornwall, the Comes Moritoniensis," of the Survey, was a younger son of Herleva, the mother of the Conqueror, by her husband, Herlwine de Conteville. He held, at the time of the Survey, some 215 manors in Yorkshire, 93 of which he gave, in subinfeudation, to Nigel Fossard (see Foss Castle), and 59 to Richard de Surdeval. This subinfeudation would appear to have taken place soon after 1071, possibly even in that year. The earl would seem to have possessed none of the energy and ability of his famous brother, Odo, bishop of Bayeux, but he was a noted castlebuilder. The remarkable keep at Pevensey-recently excavated by Mr. Harold Sands and Mr. D. H. Montgomerie-probably owes its origin to him. Mr. Wm. Farrer (Vic. Count. Hist. of Yorks., vol. ii, p. 155) says: "he was a dull and heavy man of little influence." He was, however, undoubtedly one of the most wealthy men in the kingdom. "The list of his possessions," says Freeman, in his beautifully worded book (vol. iv, pp. 169-170), "lands of Earl Harold, of the Sheriff Maerleswegen, and of a crowd of smaller victims, is simply endless. Hardly any other landowners appear to Cornwall, except the Crown and ecclesiastical bodies.. Thus arose that great earldom, and afterwards Duchy of Cornwall, which was deemed too powerful to be trusted in the hands of any but men closely akin to the royal house, and the remains of which have for ages formed the appendage of the heir-apparent to the crown." 2 Richard de Surdeval held the following manors in Cleveland under the Earl of Mortain at the time of the Survey, viz.:-Aislaby, Barnby, Little Broughton with its soke of Marske, Great and Little Moorsholm, Skelton, Seaton near Hinderwell, Seamer and Taunton near Stokesley, Stainton and Tocketts, aggregating 67 carucates and 3 bovates of land, Skelton being the most important manor. Skelton is thus described in the Survey: "In Schelton ad geldum xiii carucate et vii caruce possunt esse. Ibi Vctred habuit i manerium. Nunc habet Ricardus (de Surdeval) de Comite. In dominio i carucata et xii villani cum iii carucis et prati acre XX Silua pasturalis ii leucas longa et ii quarantenas lata. Totum manerium v leucas longum et ii latum. T.R.E. ualebat xl solidos, modo xvi solidos." 3 Robert de Surdeval, one of the barons who settled in Italy, was probably Richard's brother. Robert accompanied Bohemund, Prince of Tarentum, to the Holy Land in the first Crusade, 1096 (Ordericus Vit., ix, iv). Although Richard de Surdeval of Skelton would not appear to have had a son, the name of Surdeval is met with in England after his death, and it is obvious that he must have been accompanied to England by at least one kinsman. A certain Eudo de Surdeval was the second abbot of Furness in the reign of Henry I, and Peter and William de Surdeval who, as tenants of Walter Espec, witnessed the foundation charter of Rievaulx in 1131, may have been Richard's nephews. 4 Robert, Earl of Mortain and of Cornwall, was induced, in 1088, by his ambitious brother, Odo, bishop of Bayeux, to join in the conspiracy to depose Rufus, and to place Robert of Normandy on the English throne. The attempt being a failure, he was banished by Rufus, who confiscated his vast estates in England. He died two years later and, according to the obituary of that house, was interred in the abbey of Grestain (Eure), founded by his father, Herlwine de Conteville. Although his son, William, subsequent to his father's death, would appear to have recovered a portion of the English property, it seems very improbable that he ever regained the Yorkshire estates. The fact that there would not appear to exist any confirmation by this William of Nigel Fossard's lavish grant of lands, c. 1090, to St. Mary's, York, or of his gifts to Holy Trinity Priory, York, practically proves that Nigel- and therefore, of course, his co-feudatory, Richard de Surdeval-had become tenants-in-capite at the time of the confiscation of the Mortain property in apparently no means of ascertaining the exact date of his death, but it may have taken place c. 1090-5. That he left no son seems certain, and the division of his property is by no means clear. His son-in-law, Ralph Paynel, would seem to have inherited, in right of his wife, Matilda de Surdeval, lands in Adel, Arthington, Hooton Paynel, etc., but it seems probable that the king took possession of the greater part of his North Riding estates, including his castle of Skelton, retaining the latter in his own hands for the period-some five to fifteen years which appears to have intervened between Surdeval's death and the grant of the castle to Robert de Brus. Robert de Brus would not appear to have come to England until about 1091,3 if so early, and, apparently about 1091. was given extensive estates in the North Riding. That he would require a castle on his Cleveland property previous to Henry I giving him the Surdeval fortress of Skelton is certain, and we have already come to the conclusion that the stronghold of Castleton was his original Cleveland home. It is obvious that Brus came into possession of Skelton Castle between 1100 1088. Dr. Round, in his Cal Doc. of France, 437, tells us that, between 1103 and 1106, Ralph Paynel, Robert de Brus, and others. witnessed Count William's charter to Marmoutier, but the writer agrees with Mr. Wm. Farrer (Vic. Count. Hist. of Yorks, vol. ii, p. 155) that little or no importance need attach to the fact that they were witnesses. In his foundation charter of Guisborough Priory, 1119, Robert de Brus-Surdeval's successor at Skelton-states that he grants all the property to that house with all the liberties, free customs and privileges which we "i.e. himself, his wife Agnes, and Adam, his eldest son and heirpossessed in them by the gift and grant of Henry, king of England." 1 Ralph Paynel was Sheriff of Yorkshire in 1088. 2 Thos. Stapleton, Holy Trinity Priory, Royal Arch. Inst., York, Mem. (1846), P. 19. 3 It is, perhaps, needless to comment upon the absurd statement that he came over with the Conqueror, fought at Hastings, subdued the rebellion in the North, and that as a reward for his services the Conqueror bestowed upon him vast estates in Yorkshire (Ord, History of Cleveland, p. 247, and copied by others). This is all very clearly disproved by the Domesday Survey. It seems impossible to fix any definite date for the appearance of Robert de Brus in England. Mr. William Farrar, D.Litt. (Vict. County Hist. of Yorkshire, vol. ii, p. 186), says: "Robert de Bruis was a witness to the charter of Earl Hugh of Chester, giving the church of Flamborough to Prior Reinfrid and the convent of Whitby (Whitby Charlulary, 28). It was addressed to He. Vicecomite Eboraci,' and was further attested by Count Alan (of Brittany). It appears, therefore, to indicate that Robert de Bruis was one of the feudatories of the county before 1094, possibly before 1089." Unfortunately, however, this charter is of very doubtful authenticity-this is the opinion both of Mr. William Brown, F.S.A., and Mr. W. T. Lancaster, F.S.A.-and therefore cannot be taken as proof that Robert de Brus was in England either in 1094 or in 1089. The writer is, however, inclined to agree with Mr. Farrar (ibid.) that "he (Brus) obtained after the completion of the Survey, apparently from Rufus, a large estate in Cleveland and in the wapentake of Claro, besides other lands. Shortly afterwards he obtained Danby and part of Eskdale from the King in exchange possibly for Azerley and some other lands in "Borgescire wapentake." The writer has already expressed his opinion (p. 337) that the original fortress of Brus was at Castleton, and that this stronghold remained his seigneural residence until, some time between 1100 and 1119-it is impossible to be more definite-he received from Henry I the grant of the barony of Skelton. But it must not be overlooked that there is no definite proof that Brus owned any lands in Yorkshire, or indeed in England, previous to the year 1110. 4 See Castleton. and 1119 it would seem impossible to fix the exact date-and doubtless at once moved his caput to Skelton. He married Agnes, a daughter of Fulke Paynel. As nothing remains of Skelton Castle except the deep scarped ravines which surrounded the old Surdeval fortress, it is unnecessary to go into detail, in a work of this kind, with regard to its history. In 1119 Robert de Brus founded the famous and wealthy Priory of Guisborough, endowing it with truly regal prodigality, and in 1138, as a man well stricken in years, was one of the principal commanders of the Anglo-Norman army at the battle of the Standard. By his wife, Agnes Paynel, he had two sons, Adam, who inherited the barony of Skelton, and Robert, who inherited the Scottish property given to his father by David of Scotland, and who became the ancestor of the famous royal house of Scotland. 3 Adam Brus I was one of the adherents of Stephen against the Empress; and we have already noticed that Henry II compelled him to exchange his castle and lordship of Danby for lands in the West Riding. All historical inferences would tend to show that his son and heir, Adam II, in the last decade of the twelfth century, converted the old timber castle into a strong stone fortress with a rectangular keep. Adam II was succeeded by his son, Peter I, who, as we have already seen, repurchased his ancestral fortress at Castleton. He died in February, 1222, and was buried in Guisborough Priory. By his wife, Agnes, sister of William le Gros, Earl of Albemarle, and widow of William de Romara, Earl of Lincoln, he had, among other issue, a son Peter, who succeeded him. Peter was a man of very considerable power and influence, and one of the principal leaders of the baronial party against King John. On 31 January, 1216, John, in one of his rapid rushes to the North of England, came to Guisborough, where he spent a week, as the guest of the Prior, who was probably a somewhat unwilling host. From there he went to Skelton5 and received Brus' submission. On 12 February he went on went on to Scarborough.1 Practically all the North of England had been in arms against him, but all the North Riding barons submitted with the solitary exception of Robert de Roos, who held out defiantly in his great castle of Helmsley. Vesci of Malton appears to have been absent, and for this want of courtesy John ordered the destruction of his castle. Peter de Brus I would appear to have been the builder of the famous chapel within the castle of Skelton,3 which chapel would probably be in existence when he had the honour of entertaining, somewhat unwillingly no doubt, that very unpopular monarch, King John. By his wife, Helewise, one of the sisters and co-heiresses of Wm. de Lancaster, baron of Kendal, Peter II had, among other issue, a son Peter, who succeeded him. Peter III married Hillaria, eldest daughter of Peter de Mauley I, of Mulgrave Castle, and dying in 25 Henry III was interred at Guisborough. He was succeeded by his son, Peter,5 who died in 1272 without issue, when his vast estates were divided among his four sisters and co-heiresses, his eldest sister, Agnes, carrying Skelton Castle to her husband, Walter de Fauconberg. We may take it for granted that certain alterations would be made, previous to 1271, to the original stone castle erected c. 1190-1200 by Adam de Brus II. The Fauconbergs resided at Skelton Castle for a considerable period, and would, no doubt, make minor alterations to the structure. Finally Joan, daughter and heiress of Sir Thomas 1 Here William, Earl of Albemarle was probably in command. Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), i, 152. 2 Matt. Paris, Chron. Maj., Rolls Ser., ii, 642. The county of York was left under the control of three of John's favourites, Robert de Vipont, Brian de l'Isle, and Geoffrey de Lucy (ibid, ii, 643). The barons invoked the aid of Louis, the dauphin, and when he landed in England, the North Riding barons again rose in rebellion under Roos, Percy, and Brus (ibid., ii, 663). 3 In the latter part of the reign of King John, Peter de Brus, then lord of Skelton, is recorded to have delighted soe much in the beauty of the chapelle, that he gave certain landes unto Henry Percye, upon condition that every Christmasse day he should come to that castell, and leade his wife by the arme from her chamber to the chapell" (Cott. MS. Julius F.C., fo. 455, cited by Graves, History of Cleveland, p. 351). In 10 Henry III he was one of the justices itinerant in Northumberland. In 31 Henry III, on the partition of the lands of William de Lancaster, lord of Kendal, he had certain property assigned to him in right of his grandmother, Helewise, the wife of Peter II. In 42 Henry III he served in the Welsh campaign. In 52 Henry III he was one of the justices itinerant in Yorkshire; in 53 Henry III was constable of Scarborough Castle; and left four sisters, his co-heiresses. In his Inq. p. m. in 1271 (No. 32. mem. 4), it is stated that he held 1161 carucates of land. 7 See Yorkshire Inquisitions, i, 147. Walter de Fauconberg bore the arms: "Or, a fess azure, in chief three pallets gules," but subsequently assumed the Argent, a lion rampant azure of the Bruces of Skelton Castle. They lived at Skelton Castle for five generations. Walter, first Lord Fauconberg of Skelton Castle, died I Nov., 1304. He was succeeded by his son, Walter, second Lord Fauconberg (Chan. Ing. p.m., 32 Edw. I, No. 40)— who married Isabel, daughter of Robert, Lord de Roos of Helmsley Castle, and died in 1318 (ibid., 12 Edw. II, No. 51)— and who was succeeded by his son, John, third Lord Fauconberg. John, born 1290, High Sheriff of Yorkshire |
