Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T09:05:21.449Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Traces of Primitive Agricultural Organisation as Suggested by a Survey of the Manor of Martham, Norfolk (1101–1292.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

W. Hudson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Among the Surveys of the Manors of the Prior of Norwich contained in the volume known as Stow MS. 936 in the British Museum is one which has features of special and, it might even be said, of unique interest. It is the Survey of the Manor of Martham with which the series is concluded. The whole compilation, unfortunately, is in a defective condition. The first folio begins in the middle of a sentence under the heading ‘ham,’ the last syllable of the word ‘Hindringham,’ the beginning of which was on the preceding folio now lost. In other places also the record is abruptly broken off. The series was apparently commenced soon after the appointment of William de Kyrkeby to the Priory in 1272, and was continued at various dates, the survey of Martham being made in 4 Henry de Lakenham 1292.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 1 , December 1918 , pp. 28 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1918

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This is the sense in which ‘manor’ and ‘manorialise ’are used in this paper.

page 31 note 1 This and many other Rolls were kindly lent to the writer and Mr. H. W. Saunders for examination at the Public Record Office by the Dean and Chapter of Norwich.

page 32 note 1 For the great famine of this period cf. Rogers, , History of Prices, i. 198;Google ScholarBlomefield, , History of Norfolk, iii. 76.Google Scholar

page 33 note 1 The long hundred (D = 600, C = 120) is in frequent use in these Manorial documents.

page 34 note 1 He married Elizabeth daughter of Mathew Gunton, a large landowner in this neighbourhood, and must have been connected with the Sussex family of De Bavent, lords of the Manor of Wiston. (See Sussex Archological Collections, Vols. LIII and LIV.)

page 34 note 2 Rent.

page 34 note 3 Summa, horse-load = I quarter.

page 36 note 1 A list of the “former ”tenements with some details is given in the Appendix. Present difficulties have prevented its being set out in tabulated form, but it may serve to verify arid illustrate the statements in the text. Specimens are also given of some of the tenements as subdivided in 1292. A list of the turbaries is added.

page 36 note 2 M.S. Suam ? herciam.

page 37 note 1 Some word such as ‘assarto’ seems to be wanted.

page 38 note 1 The perch on the Martham Demesne contained 18½ feet, but on the tenants’ land 18 feet.

page 40 note 1 For the meaning of the tofts, see p. 47.

page 43 note 1 But see the case of Lawshall, Suffolk, p. 54.

page 44 note 1 Dugdale, , Monasticon, iv. 16;Google ScholarBlomefield, , Hist. Norf. xi. 163.Google Scholar

page 44 note 2 D.B. fol. 134; V.C.H., Norf. ii. 61.

page 44 note 3 D.B. fot. 195; V.C.H., Norf. ii. 118.

page 45 note 1 In these cases there is no mention in D.B. of any ‘feorm’ or food-rent.

page 51 note 1 Shipdham, 16 acres (Claudius C. XI, fol. 244); Bridgham, 48 acres (fol. 250).

page 51 note 2 Shipdham (fol. 244), Derham (fol. 227), etc.

page 51 note 3 Feltwell, 20 acres (lol. 255); Tyrington, 80 acres (fol. 183).

page 51 note 4 Ramsey Cartulary, iii. 285. For this reference I am indebted to Mr. W. J. Corbett, of King';s College, Cambridge.

page 51 note 5 Ibid. p. 287; Ringstead, p. 268.

page 51 note 6 Stow MS. 936, fol. 7d.

page 51 note 7 Ibid. fol. 14; Norwich fragment pen: D. and C. of Norwich.

page 52 note 1 Fol. 199, Claudius C. XI.

page 52 note 2 Fol. 193.

page 54 note 1 ‘Bailiffs Roll of Lawshall’ in 1393, by H. W. Saunders (Suffolk Arch. XIV, 117, 8).