text:
History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 8

Chapter VIII
OF THE CITY IN THE TIME OF KING STEPHEN.

In the year 1135, at the death of King Henry,

Stephen de Blais, or Blois, was crowned King of England,  who immediately confirmed

Hugh Bigot in the custody of this castle, the said Hugh being in great favour, (for he was one of the principal persons that advanced Stephen to the crown,) by coming directly from Normandy, where Henry I. died, and averring that he on his deathbed, upon some dislike to his daughter Maud, the Empress, did disinherit her, and appoint Stephen Earl of Boloign to be his heir.

The citizens therefore taking this opportunity, made what interest they could with the King, to have a new charter, and to be governed by coroners and bailiffs, instead of their provost or port-reeve, but the affair took a contrary turn to what they expected, for before the close of this year, the King fell into a lethargy, which occasioned a report that he was dead, upon which Hugh came to his castle here, and refused to render it up to any but the King only: the bottom of it was, he found that William de Blois, natural son to King Stephen, was about supplanting him, and getting the castle for himself, so that  instead of being able to carry the point for the citizens, who had an absolute refusal, he could not long hold out his own,  for under pretence of Hugh's holding it in this manner, he seized the castle, and all that belonged to it, and all the liberties of the city from the citizens, and took them into his own hands; and soon after he granted to his natural son,

William, for an appennage or increase of inheritance, the town and borough of the city of Norwich, in which there were 1238 burgesses, that held of the King in burgage tenure, and also the castle and burgh thereof, in which there were 123 burgesses, that held of the King in burgage, the whole rents of the city of Norwich were then 700l. per annum, (the rent of fee-farm of the citizens being included,) and also all the royal revenue of the whole county of Norfolk, unless what was granted to, and then belonged to, the bishoprick, religious houses, and other earls, and especially excepting the tertium denarium, or third penny, of the profits, by reason whereof Hugh Bigot was Earl.

Whence it appears, that to satisfy Hugh, the King made him Earl of the East-Angles or Norfolk, and granted the third part of the profits of the county to him in inheritance, and the two parts which always belonged to the Crown, to his son William and his heirs; this was done in 1140, the 6th of King Stephen.

During this time, namely in the 4th of King Stephen, A $o$ 1138, the citizens sued earnestly to the King for a regrant of their liberties, and neither William nor Hugh, both whose interest it then was to favour them, gainsaying it, they had their ancient liberties granted them, but were to be governed by a prevost or port-reve, as heretofore.

In 1139, the citizens paid into the hands of the sheriff 25l. as a composition aid to the King, for their pardon and restoration of their liberties.

In 1140, Baker in his Chronicle says, that "the King gave license to the city of Norwich to have coroners and bailiffs, before which time, they had only a serjeant for the King, to keep courts." But I know no authority for it, for the tenour of every thing that I have seen is against it; not so much as finding mention of any such office as a serjeant, but that the provosts always from their first establishment had the sole management of the affairs of the city; but they enjoyed their liberties a very little while, for Hugh Bigot, this very year, being much displeased with the loss of the castle, and not thinking his being made an earl was a sufficient recompense, declared for Maud the Empress; and upon his being summoned by the King to yield up his castle at Bungay, which he then kept in favour of her,  and absolutely refusing, the King came with his army and took it:   and upon this revolt the liberties of Norwich were seized again; but it is plain they were accorded soon after the taking of this castle, for Hugh Bigod, in 1141, was in the battle on the King's side, against the Empress,  in which the King was taken; and after that it seems he was one of those that deserted him; however, we find in 1145, he was reconciled again, being then witness to the King's laws,  and continued some time in favour, for in the 17th year of King Stephen, 1152, by his interest with the King, the citizens were restored to all their liberties, and had a new charter granted them, but I imagine had no enlargement of privileges, for they were now governed by a Provost as heretofore: and now the city flourished again so much, that Cambden says (fol. 387,) that Norwich was built anew, was a populous "town, and made a corporation." And in the following year, Hugh was so strenuous for Stephen, that he held the castle of Ipswich for him, against Henry Duke of Normandy, son to Maud the Empress, and afterwards King of England; but Stephen not sending him relief in time, he was forced to yield it up, and then he became one of Henry's party; but yet I do not find the city was affected by it, but that their provost paying the yearly fee-farm to the King, they peaceably enjoyed all their liberties to his death.

In this King's reign, the Jews, who dwelt here, upon Easter-Even  crucified a child named William, in this city: Weever, fo. 377, says, that "the Jews inhabiting within the prime cities of the kingdom, did use sometimes to steale away, circumcise, crown with thornes, whip, torture, and crucifie, some one of their neighbours male children, in mockery, dispite, scorn, and derision, of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, crucified by the Jews in Jerusalem." Most historians say, it was done in 1144, but the Saxon Chronicle, p. 240, places it in 1137, and gives us this account of it, "at this time the Jewes at Norwich, before Easter, bought a Christian child, and tormented him in the same manner our Lord was, and to shew what sort of love and respect they had for our Lord, on GoodFriday they hung him on the cross, and afterwards buried him, and hoped to conceal it, but our Lord declared that holy martyr, and the monks took him and buried him honourably in the precinct of their monastry, and by our Lord's grace, he works many great miracles, and is called St. William." He was about 12 years old, as I find in several kalendars, where the day of his passion is noted to be kept holy, which was the 24th of March. The mistake of historians as to the year seems to be this, he was martyred in 1137, according to the Saxon Chronicle, the author of which was alive at that time; in 1144 being found, he was removed into the cathedral churchyard, and, as Cotton the monk of Norwich says, in 1150 was translated from the churchyard into the choir, or chapterhouse.

In the New-Legend, printed at London 1516, fo. 309, we have the Life of St. William the Boy and Martyr, the substance of which (omitting the miraculous part of it) in English is, that he was son of Wenstan, and Elwina, daughter of Wlward the priest, who lived in the adjacent country, and was bound to a tanner at Norwich, and soon after, about Easter, the Jews that dwelt near him enticed him to their houses, and seizing him, gagged him, bound, mocked, and crucified him with great torment, wounding him on his left side; and on Easter-Day they put the body into a sack, and carried it to Thorp Wood to bury it, but as they entered the wood, Eilward, a burgess of Norwich, saw them, and went silently after them, out of curiosity to know what they had got, and coming near, he perceived it was a human body; but they discovering him and fearing they should be taken, fled into the thickest part of the wood, and there hung up the body on a tree; and returning home, took counsel with the rest of the Jews, and went to the sheriff, and promised him an hundred marks if he would free them from this danger; the sheriff immediately sent for Eilward, and forced him to swear, that as long as he or the sheriff lived, he would never accuse the Jews, or discover the fact, but above five years after, when he laid on his death-bed, affrighted with the imagination of seeing the boy, he discovered the whole matter; and the body being found in the wood, it was taken and buried in the churchyard of the monks, but many miracles being wrought by it there, it was in the year 1150 removed and enshrined in the church, and this boy-saint became so famous for the many miracles said to be wrought here, that Thomas, a monk of Monmouth,   who was by his abbot assigned to write history, pitched upon this fact, it being done in his own time, and accordingly he wrote seven books "about William the Boy and Martyr," and one about "the Miracles done by him," and dedicated them to William Turb Bishop of Norwich.

How the Jews came off as to this fact I cannot say, but many forfeited their fortunes, both money and houses, many of which, and some of the principal ones in this city, belonged to them, though I do not find they had any lands, and but very few were executed, they understanding how to buy peace of the King, by giving large sums of money for that purpose. John Bale, in his "Actes of English Votaryes," speaking of the injustice of the law which hindered the marriage of priests at that time, and to show that it was an innovation, priests being anciently allowed to marry, hath this that follows in proof of it, "Saint William of Norwyche a martyr, whych was ther  shryned in Christes Church Abbeye in the yeare of our lorde, a M. a. C. and xliiii. (1144,) was crucifyed of the Jewes, dwellyng than in a place called Abrahams-Hawle, (Abraham's-Hall,) Elwina thys S. Wyllyam's mother, had a prest to her father, whose name was called Wulwarde, whyche was a man famouse, the storye sayth, both in good lyfe and learnynge, plentuously havinge the gyft of expowning secrete misteryes, her other syster Livina, beynge also this prestes daughter, was joyned in lawful marryage to an other preste, called Godwin; this prest had a son called Alexandre, whych was a married deacon, and loked after the decease of his father to enjoy his benefyce, by inherytaunce: either must thys Legende of S. William, written of Thomas Monmouth, a monk of the same abbeye,  be a wycked thyage, for allowynge these two prestes marryages, eyther els that cytie of Norwyche hath had most wycked and tyrannouse rulers in thys our tyme, &c."

About the year 1150, the King sent William Martel, his sewer or steward, to Norwich, as his deputy and judge, who summoned the chief of the two counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, to come to him there, to discuss certain affairs, for the benefit of the kingdom; who came accordingly, and at the appointed day met in council in the Bishop's garden, the said William sitting as judge, William Turb Bishop of Norwich, Nigel Bishop of Ely, Ording Abbot of St. Edmund, Daniel Abbot of Holm, with most of the barons of the two counties, ''viz. Walter Fitz-Robert the King's Sewer, Rob. de Vere the King's Constable, Reginald de Warren, Fulk De'olly, Hugh son of Eudo, Will. de Chetney son of Robert, Henry de Rhye'', and others, being present. Upon which, Jordan de Blossevile, and ''Rich. de Waldar, two gentlemen of the court, introduced a certain youth called Herbert, and placed him in the midst of the assembly, telling them, that the youth there present had intimated to the King, that last year he was servant to Sir Robert Fitz-Gilbert, who, (as he says,) when the King went against his enemies that held Bedford castle against him, at the time he talked with his barons in a meadow near that city, was in the army there, and did then join with Sir Adam de Hornyngesherth, who was also in the said army, and held correspondence with Ralph de Alsted and Roger his brother, who were the King's enemies, and with them conspired to deliver up the King to his enemies, or murder him, and that the said Ralph and Roger came privately out of the city into the King's army, and changed horses, shields, and saddles, with the said Robert and Adam'', in order, under colour thereof, to come at any time into the King's army, to put in execution whatever should be agreed upon, and that this youth was there ready to prove it, for which reason the King had sent him down to hear the matter, that the two knights might be lawfully heard and judged by their country. As soon as the Abbot of St. Edmund heard this, he stood up, and made a speech; in which he told them, that these were two of his knights, that were men of the blessed martyr St. Edmund, and therefore could not be brought or made to answer in this place or city, the liberty of St. Edmund being such, that no man belonging to it could be forced to answer to any one, in any place, but in the court of St. Edmund at Bury, and for the truth of it, he appealed to all the bishops, abbots, barons, knights, and gentlemen, there present, for which reason he demanded respite of judgment, till he could talk with the King; which was granted, and the Abbot with his barons, monks, and friends, went directly to the King, and showed his Majesty their charters and privileges, upon which the King said, that all justice originally belonged to the county and court there, and therefore he sent them back again to the county and council they came from, and whatever they did, as to allowing the liberties or not, he would stand by it: returning therefore to Norwich, they produced their charters and liberties to the shire-mote of the county, or county-court, upon which, Sir Hervy de Glanvil rose and made a speech in the assembly, telling them he was a very old man, having constantly attended the county and hundred court, for above 50 years, with his father, before and after he was knighted, as they all knew, and he assured them, that in the time of King Henry (sc. I.) when justice and equity, peace and fidelity, flourished in England, though now, alas! war silenced justice and the law, he remembered that a question of the like nature, concerning the liberties of St. Edmund, and the eight hundreds and an half, arose then in the shiremote or county-court, and the Abbot had it then allowed, that all pleas, suits, and actions of what nature soever, concerning any person in the liberties of St. Edmund, except the pleas of murder, or treasure found, belonged to the court of St. Edmund, and were to be tried either by the Abbot, his steward, or other officer: upon which the bishops and barons present, with the consent of Roger Gulafer and Will. Frechnei, then sheriffs, and of Hervei son of Hervei, and Robert de Glanvil, and many others, of the honours of Warren, of Earl Hugh Bygod, and of Eye, presented the liberties to be good, and delivered their testimonies of it to William Martel, the King's justice, who notified it to the King, who immediately confirmed it, and ordered the Abbot's to appoint a day, that he might have justice done him in the Abbot's court, which the Abbot did: immediately after this, Walter Fitz-Robert, the King's sewer, came into the court, and demanded justice against William de Howe, who had entered his liberty of warren in his manor of Hemenhale, as he proved by producing the nets taken upon the men of the said William, in the manor; which cause the Abbot also claimed to belong to his court, for the same reason as before, and it was allowed him; and a very little while after, the King came to Bury, and there, by the mediation of the barons of the church, and the King's barons, the said knights and William de Howe were pardoned by the King, and so the matter ended: which is worth observation, as it shows us how speedily and well justice was administered even in those troublesome times, as well as the authority of the shire-motes, county and hundred courts, which were the fountains of all justice, and so much valued, that the King himself referred justice to them, the principal of the county, both spiritual and temporal, sitting there to do justice, the sheriff as judge, representing the King, pronounced the sentence the court gave.

title: History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 8


text:
History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 9

CHAPTER IX
OF THE CITY IN HENRY THE SECOND'S TIME.

As soon as Henry, son of Maud the Empress, was crowned, he began to set aside many that were relations, or had been friends to Stephen, and in the very first year of his reign, resumed into his hands, from William, the bastard son of King Stephen, Earl of Moreton and Warren, this city, castle, and liberties, but restored all those lands to him which his father held in the reign of King Henry I. as a recompense for it, and so it came into Henry the Second's hands, who this very year prevailed with Hugh Bigot to yield up all his castles to him which he did accordingly,  by which the whole right vested in the Crown, and the King governed the city by the sheriff for some time, who paid the profits and aids accruing from it, into the Exchequer; and this year, viz. 1155, William de Nova Villa, or Nevil, sheriff of Norfolk, paid 50 marks for the aid due from the city.

In 1158, the city gave the King 414l. 13s. 4d. for the second scutage of Wales; it is called a donum  or gift, and it appears they levied it among themselves, but paid it into the Exchequer by the hands of John, then sheriff of Norfolk; and in 1160, the sheriff accounted for 200l. for the tallage of the city for that year.

In 1163, Pope Alexander III. confirmed to Bernard the Prior, and monks of Horsham St. Faith's, all their lands and houses in Norwich and Yarmouth, which were given them in alms.

About this time, Hugh Bigod came again into favour with the King, by means of Henry the King's son, who did him what service he could, in order to draw him over to his party, whenever he should put in execution the design he had of wresting the crown from his father; yea so much was he in the King's good graces, that he advanced him anew to the dignity and title of Earl of Norfolk, as by his charter, dated at Northampton, appeareth, by which charter also he had a grant of the office of steward of the King's household, to hold and enjoy it in as ample a manner as Roger Bigod his father held the same in time of Henry I.; and at the same time he was made Constable of the castle of Norwich, and the city, being in the king's hands, he became sole governour of it, the sheriff from this time acting under him as to the city.

In 1165, the 26th day of January was a great earthquake here, and all over Norfolk, Suffolk, and Cambridgeshire, so that many could not keep themselves on their feet, and the bells rang in several steeples with the shock of it.

This year Willium de Norwich certified into the Exchequer, that he held a whole knight's fee of old feoffment in Suffolk, of Nigel Bishop of Ely, for which he now paid one mark to the fifth scutage, being the aid for marrying Maud, the King's eldest daughter, to Henry Duke of Saxony; and in 1171, he paid 20s. to the sixth scutage for the army in Ireland: which shews us that this ancient family, that took its surname from this city, was of good repute and estate in Henry the First's time, being then infeoffed in this fee in Suffolk.

In 1167, the burgesses of Norwich paid 200l. towards the aid (or portion) for marrying the King's daughter, and the mintmasters at Norwich paid 10 marks, according to the writ directed for that purpose.

In 1170, the desire of the King was such, that though he had caused all the kingdom to be twice sworn to his son Henry, he was not satisfied, but had him crowned with all usual solemnities, by Robert, Archbishop of York, on the 14th (or as Mat. Paris says, on the 18th) day of June: the generality of historians attribute this unprecedented example wholly to the great affection he had for his son;  but I think it might proceed from another motive: the King well knew he was a young man of a great spirit, and desirous of rule, and, I make no doubt, saw that many of the principal nobles of the land, as Bigot and others, were entirely at his command, and finding he should be busied in Normandy and other places beyond sea, where his lands lay, he invested him with the full regal authority, that he might not rebel, under hopes of getting it in his absence, but might exercise it at that time, to his own, and the nation's advantage, so that though it hath been looked upon as a foolish act, it might not be done so weakly as may at first sight be imagined; but yet so much is the desire of rule in some, as was seen by this young King's conduct, that they cannot bear a superiour, nor even an equal to themselves in power, for being with his father-in-law, the French King, in France, in 1172, it is thought he spirited him up against his father; for the next year he fled to him, and raised war in the King's dominions beyond sea, against him: Roger Mowbry, Hugh Bigot, and divers others of the young King's accomplices, for joining him against his father, took care to get under his seal, charters, confirmations, &c. of lands and revenues for their services, among which Hugh Bigot got this castle, city, honour of Eye, &c. confirmed to him and his heirs; all this was done at Paris, and immediately after, they waged war against the old King, and got the King of Scots to enter England, on behalf of the young King, at once to harass the father with foreign and domestic war.

In 1173, Robert de Bello-mont, surnamed Blanchmains, Earl of Leicester, who took part with the young King, assembled a great army at Leicester, but was immediately beaten by the old King's party, and forced to fly into France, and was present at the interview between the old King, and Lewis the French King, between Grisors and Trie, where the King made such large offers for peace sake, to his sons, that had it not been for this wicked Earl, (who then offered to strike his sovereign,) and such others like himself, there had been a final accord then made; but that not happening, the Earl of Leicester in a few days passed over into England with a great army of Flemings and others, to join Hugh Bygod, that they might, as well by force as fair means, bring the whole realm under the obedience of King Henry the son; on the 21st of September, he landed at Walton in Suffolk, and went to Framingham castle, where Hugh Bigot received him, and there they tarried till another fleet of Flemings came to their assistance, and then marched to Ipswich, and staid a few days, till they augmented their forces with some band of soldiers that belonged to Hugh Bigot, and thence went directly to the castle of Haghenet, (or Haughley in Suffolk,) which then belonged unto Ralph Broc, who adhered to the old King, which they took, spoiled, and burnt, and then returned to Framlingham, where hearing that the Countess of Leicester, his wife, was arrived at Oxford with another power of Flemings, having now a strong army, he took leave of Earl Bigot at Framlingham, and went to succour his friends in Leicestershire, but he was got no further in his march than a village called Fornham, near St. Edmund's Bury, before Sir Richard de Lucy and Humfry de Bohun came out of that town, and overcame him in a pitched battle, on the 27th of October, and took him and his Countess prisoners, and put to the sword above 10,000 Flemings;  after this, the nobles immediately sent the Earl of Leicester and his wife prisoners to the King in Normandy, and went directly against Earl Hugh, on purpose to abate his pride, and might have easily done it by taking him prisoner, but by reason of such sums of money as he bribed them with, peace was granted him till Whitsuntide following, and so his castle at Framlingham was not taken; soon after this, having gotten together 14,000 Flemings, he went through Essex to Dover, and so to France.

The next year, being 1174, Philip Earl of Flanders, on the behalf of King Henry the son, swore that he would enter England within 15 days after the Feast of St. John, upon trust of which the young King came down to Whitsand, the 14th day of July, that he might the more conveniently send his soldiers into England; but before this, the Earl of Flanders had sent over Ralf de La Haie, and 318 knights, or men of arms, who arrived at Orwell in Essex the 14th of June, and finding their associates dispersed, and for the more part subdued, they took with them Earl Hugh, and marched to Norwich, which the Earl thought would have willingly received him; but the citizens stood firm in their loyalty to the old King, and resisted him in the best manner they could: the Earl hasting thither with all speed, reached the city on the 18th of June, and not being immediately received into it as he expected, he assaulted it directly and won it, they having had no time to consult upon the best way of defending it, and being very wrath with the citizens for endeavouring to resist him, he burnt the city, got all the riches he could, took all the principal persons prisoners, and made them fine and ransome themselves at his pleasure;  and entering the castle, fortified it, by deepening the ditches in the strongest manner he could, and then received into it as many French and Flemings as it would contain; Holingshed, fo. 91, says, that ''Will. Parvus (or Petit) writeth "that the city of Norwich was taken by the Flemings that came over with the Earl of Leicester in the year last past, and that after he had taken that citie, being accompanied with Earl Bigot, he led those Flemings unto Dunwich, to win and sack that town also, but the inhabitants being better provided against the coming of their enemies than they of Norwich were, shewed such countenance of defence, that they preserved their town from that danger, so that the two Earles with the Flemings, were constrained to depart without atchieving their purpose; but whither this attempt against Dunwich was made by the Earl of Leicester, (before his taking ) in companie of Earl Bigot, I have not to avouch: but verelie for the winning of Norwich, William Parvus I suppose mistaketh the time, except we shall saie, that it was twise taken,  as first by the Earl of Leicester in the yeare 1173, for it is certain by consent of most writers, and especiallie those that have recorded particularlie the incidents that chaunced here in this land, during these troubles, betwixt the king and his son, that it was taken now this year 1174, by Earl Bigot''."

The king was advised how Earl Bigot and Roger Mowbray strengthened themselves against him, and began to prepare accordingly, but his party soon after prevailing, and taking the King of Scots prisoner, gave such a turn to affairs, that when Bigot heard the old King was mustering an army against him at Bury, he began to be afraid, and was more so when he found that he had taken his castle at Walton in Suffolk, and demolished it, and was coming to his other castles of Framlingham and Bungeye, wherein having no more than 500 soldiers, (many of which discerning their danger, fled away,) dispairing also of any further supply, he was forced to buy his peace of the King for 1000 marks, and yield up all his castles, having with difficulty obtained leave, that all the Flemings with him at Norwich, and elsewhere, upon taking an oath never to come into England as enemies again, might return into their own country, as well as all the soldiers that came with Ralf de La Haie: this agreement was made on July 25, and immediately the King ordered the castle of Bungeye to be demolished, and took this castle, city, and all that belonged to them, into his own hands; Earl Hugh going soon after into the Holy Land, where he died.

By this means the city was very much damaged, but the citizens were henceforward much valued by the King for withstanding his enemies, and showing their loyalty to him, upon which account to make them some amends, they were allotted to pay the King in the year 1175 only 16l. for the whole profits of their city.

Daniel, fo. 88, under the year 1176, says that the King in his parliament then assembled at Notingham, caused the kingdom to be divided into six parts, (now called circuits,) and constituted for every part three justices itinerants to try assizes of murder, theft, &c. But I find itinerant justices trying assizes here before this year; for in 1168, the Archdeacon of Poictou, Wido the Dean, and ''Will. Basset, were itinerant justices here: in 1173, Ralf de Glanvill and Hugh de Cressi, Robert Mancel, Adam de Gernemue, (or Yarmouth'',) &c. Hugh de Cressi, Walter Fitz-Robert, and Robert Mantel, were deputed for Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, and Hertfordshire; so that it seems the circuits only were now first fixed.

From this time the city began to recover itself by the King's clemency and encouragement, the whole being in his Majesty's hands till 1182, and then the citizens petitioned the King for their liberties to be restored, to which he consented for a fine of 80 marks, and granted them a charter of the same liberties as they enjoyed in the time of Henry I. his grandfather, and in the time of King Stephen.

The original Charter is now extant among the city evidences in the Gild-Hall at Norwich, and is very fair and clean, part of the seal still remaining; it is the oldest original Charter that I have seen, belonging to any corporation, and by much the oldest of any in this county, for which reason I shall give it you, word for word, as in the original:

Henricus Rex Anglie, et Dux Normannie, et Aquitanie, et Comes Andegavie, ombibus Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comitibus, Baronibus, Justiciarijs, Vicecomitibus, Ministris, et omnibus fidelibus suis Francis et Anglis, salutem. Sciatis me concessisse, et presenti carta confirmasse burgensibus meis de Norwico, omnes consuetudines et libertates et quietencias quas habebant tempore Henrici Regis avi mei, ita plene et honorifice et quiete sicut ipsi eas plenius et honorabilius et quietius habuerunt tempore Regis Henrici avi mei. Quare volo et firmiter precipio, quod omnes illas habeant, plene et honorifice sicut eas tunc habuerunt, tam consuetudines suas, quam etiam responsa sua, tempore meo, et temporibus heredum meorum, et si aliquis post mortem Regis Henrici avi mei, in tempore Regis Stephani, a consuetudinibus eorum et scottis se foras misit, precipio quod ad eorum societatem et consuetudinem revertatur, et scottum ipsorum sequatur, quia nullum ex eis inde quietum, clamo. Testibus, Willielmo fratre Regis, Henrico de Essexia, Constabulario. Ricardo de Humes, Constabulario, manasse Biset Dapifero, Warino filio Geroldi, Camerario; apud Westmonasterium.

Henry King of England, and Duke of Normandy and Acquitain, and Earl of Anjou, to all Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, Justices, Sheriffs, Officers, and other his faithful subjects, both French and English, greeting. Know ye that I have given, and by this present Charter confirmed to my burgesses of Norwich, all customs and liberties, and acquittances, which they had in the time of King Henry, my grandfather, as fully and honourably, and quietly, as they had them fully, and honourably, and quietly, in the time of King Henry, my grandfather; wherefore I will and firmly command, that they have them all, fully and honouraby as they then  had them, as well their own customs, as those they are answerable   for, in my time, and in the times of my heirs, and if any one after the death of Henry, my grandfather, in the time of King Stephen, hath absented (or withdrawn) himself from their customs and scots,  I command that he shall be forced to return to their society (or company) and custom, and shall be forced to pay the same scot as they do, because I claim no one of them free therefrom. These being witnesses, William the King's brother, Henry of Essex the Constable, Richard de Humes the Constable, Manasses Biset (Steward) or Sewer, Warine Fitz-Gerold the Chamberlain: (given) at Westminster.

There being no date, to show at what time this was granted, if the evidence before quoted had not helped us out, we should have been at a loss to have known it, as we now are, as to the precise time of the year, though by its being granted when the King was at Westminster, it must be about August time.

It is plain the citizens were much pleased with their regained liberties, and put them very exactly in execution; and indeed in 1184, they carried the matter too far, for when some citizens were warned to serve as jurymen, either at the views of frankpledge or court leets, belonging to the King's castle, or at the leets belonging to the others, though it was within the city, they refused serving, and pretended exemption from so doing, by this charter; but the affair being tried, they were cast, and paid a fine of 9 marks to the King, and were commanded to serve for the future, in that leet or view wherein they dwelt.

This King died in 1189, and was succeeded by Richard, his second son; Henry, his eldest, who was crowned King, dying long before him; and happy had it been for this city, if he had never been crowned at all.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 9


text:
History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 10

CHAPTER X
OF THE CITY IN RICHARD THE FIRST'S TIME.

Richard the First, sirnamed Cæur de Lion, or the Lion's Heart, from his great valour, was not only a valiant, but a wise, liberal, just, merciful, and religious prince; he was crowned at Westminster, September 3, 1189, and not having the same value for the Jews that his  predecessors had, gave strict commandment that no Jew, whether man or woman, should presume to be present at his coronation; notwithstanding which, the chief of them came to make him an honourable present, and declare their joy at his advancement, and to procure friendship to have the charters and liberties of his predecessors confirmed to them; but he commanded that none of them should enter the church during his coronation, nor the hall at dinner, which one of them attempting to do, was stricken by a Christian, and driven back, who declared he had the King's command for so doing, which was no sooner known by the populare, but they fell upon the Jews, and chased them to their houses, which they robbed and fired, burning and killing many of them; and though the King sent Ralf de Glanvil, his chief justice, to quell them, he could not do it till 2 o'clock the next day; and it being rumoured about the nation, that the King did not favour them, by this example, the populace of Bury, Linn, and Norwich, rose against them, and robbed and spoiled abundance of them.

On the 27th of November following, the King, by charter dated at Westminster, created Roger, son of Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, and Steward of his Household: who being in such favour as to be made Earl of the county, may be allowed to be constable of the castle, seeing history mention no other as constable at that time; earls in favour were mostly constables of the royal castles of their counties; and when they were not in favour, the sheriffs of the counties had the custody of such castles, along with their farm of the county; and by his means it was, he being always a great favourite of this King's, that the citizens afterwards obtained as ample a charter as the city of London then had: which city, upon his expedition for the Holy War, presented him with a large sum,  in requital of which, he granted them many privileges, and ordained that they should be ruled by two head officers, called Boiliffs, which they should choose among themselves every year; and in like manner, in 1193, being the 5th year of his reign, in consideration of 200 marks to be paid into the Exchequer by the citizens of Norwich the year following,  he granted the city in fee-farm to them and their heirs, paying into the Exchequer the fee-farm rent of 108l. a year, out of which, they had an annual discount of 25s. for lands and meadows in the suburbs, which King Stephen had granted to his nuns at Carrowe, and this fee-farm exceeded all profits that the Kings ever received annually from the city, by above 40l. a year; the tenour of which Charter here follows, as I transcribed it from the original in the gild-hall, which is very fair, and hath a perfect broad seal of red wax of this King's hanging to it.

Ricardus Dei gratia Rex Anglie, Dux Normanie, Aquitanie, Comes Andigavie, Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comitibus, Baronibus, Justiciarijs, Vicecomitibus, Ballivis, Ministris, et omnibus fidelibus suis Francis et Anglis, salutem. Sciatis nos concessisse civibus nostris Norwicensibus, quod nullus eorum placitet extra civitatem Norwicensem, de nullo placito preter placita de tenuris exterioribus, exceptis monetarijs et ministris nostris. Concessimus etiam eis quietanciam murdri, et gawitam infra civitatem, et quod nullus eorum faciat duellum, et quod de placitis ad coronam pertinentibus se possint disrationare, secundum consuetudinem civitatis Londonie, et quod infra civitatem illam nemo hospitetur, vel capiat quicquam per vim, hoc etiam eis concessimus, quod omnes cives Norwicenses sint quieti de thelonio et lastagio, per totam Angliam, et per portus maris, et quod nullus de miserecordia pecunie judicetur, nisi secundum legem quam habent cives nostri Londinenses, et quod in civitate illa in nullo placito sit meskenninga, et quod hustinga semel in ebdomada tantum teneatur, et quod terras suas, et tenuras, et vadia sua, et debita sua omnia juste habeant, quicunque eis debeat, et de terris suis, et tenuris que infra civitatem sunt, rectum eis teneatur, secundum consuetudinem civitatis, et de omnibus debitis suis que accomodata fuerint apud Norwicum, et de vadijs ibidem factis, placita apud Norwicum teneantur, et si quis in tota Anglia, theloneum vel consuetudinem ab homnibus Norwicensibus ceperit, postquam ipse a recto defecent, Prepositus Norwici namium inde apud Norwicum capiat, has predictas consuetudines eis concessimus, et omnes alias libertates et liberas consuetudines, quas habuerunt vel habent cives nostri Londinenses, quando meliores vel liberiores habuerunt, secundum libertates Londini, et leges civitatis Norwici. Quare Volumus et firmiter Precipimus, quod ipsi cives et heredes eorum hec omnia predicta cum civitate et pertinentijs ejus hereditarie habeant et teneant de nobis et de heredibas nostris, reddendo per annum centum et octo libras Esterlingorum, numero, de civitate Norwici, per manus Prepositi Norwici, ad Scaccarium nostrum, in termino Sancti Michaelis, et cives Norwici faciant Prepositos de se, per annum, qui sint idonei nobis et eis. Hijs testibus, ''Hen. Sar''. electo, W. de Sancte Ma. ecclesia, Decano Moreton. Magistro Eustach. Decano Sa. Magistro Ph. Comite ''W. Sa. Gauf''. filio ''Pet. Rob''. filio ''Rog. Rob. de Tregos, Dapifero, W. de Mallion, W. de Stagno''. Data apud Potesmutam, per manus W. de Longo-campo, Elyen. Episcopi, Cancellarij nostri, quinto die Maij, regni nostri anno quinto.

Richard by the grace of God King of England, Duke of Normandy, and Acquitain, and Earl of Anjou, to the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, Justices, Sheriffs, Bailiffs, and to all his faithful subjects, French and English, greeting. Know ye, that we have granted to our citizens of Norwich, that none of them shall be forced to answer to any plea (or action) out of Norwich, unless it be to pleas concerning foreign tenures, except the mintmasters,  and our own  officers; we have also granted them acquittance of murder,  and gavelet  within their city, and that none of them shall be forced to duel,  (or combat,) and that they may try all pleas of the Crown among themselves,  according to the custom of the city of London; and that nobody, (that is a stranger) shall lodge (or be received) into the city,   or take any thing by force;  we have also granted this to them, that all the citizens of Norwich shall be free from toll and lastage,   throughout all England, and in all the sea ports; and that no one of them shall be condemned or amerced in any sum of money, unless it be according to the law, that our citizens of London have; and that also in that city (of Norwich) there shall be no plea of mikenning,   and that they shall hold their husting  but once in a week, and that they shall justly have their lands and tenures, and their securities, and all their debts that any one shall owe them; and as to their lands and tenures, which are within the city, the writ of right shall be tried by them according to the custom of the city,  and as to all their debts which shall be lent at Norwich, and as to all securities there made, the pleas (or actions relating to them) shall be tried at Norwich: and if any one in all England shall take toll or custom from the men of Norwich, and afterwards that person shall desist (and not prosecute) his writ of right (for so doing) the Provost  of Norwich shall take out the writ of naam  (or withernam) for so doing, at Norwich: all these aforesaid customs we have granted them, and all other liberties and  free customs which our citizens of London have had, or now have, or others, if ever they had any better, or more free, according to the liberties of London, and the laws of the city of Norwich. Wherefore we will and firmly command, that the citizens themselves, and their heirs, all the aforesaid things, with the city and its appurtenances, shall have and hold of us and our heirs, to them and their heirs, paying yearly one hundred and eight pounds of esterlings, by tale, from (out of, or for,) the city of Norwich, by the hands of the Provost of Norwich, at our Exchequer, every Michaelmas day, and the citizens of Norwich shall yearly choose such Provosts out of themselves (or their own body) as shall be agreeable to us  and them; these being witnesses, Henry Bishop elect of Salisbury, William Dean of St. Marie's church at Moreton, Master Eustace Dean of Salisbury, Master Philip, William Earl of Salisbury, Jeffry Fitz-Peter, Robert FitzRoger, Robert de Tregos the Sewer, William de Mallion, William de Stagno, or De la Pool;  (dated or given) at Potesmouth, by the hands of William de Longchamp Bishop of Ely, our Chancellor, the fifth day of May in the fifth year of our reign.

In this King's reign it seems there were abundance of Danes and Irishmen settled here, if we may credit the following verses of this age:

Eboracum silvis, Excestria clara metallis, Norwicum Dacis, Hibernis, Caestria Gallis.

For Danes and Irish, Norwich much is fam'd, Chester for French, for mines Excester's nam'd, Yorkshire for woods, &c.

This King was killed with an arrow, April 6, 1199, and was succeeded by his brother, John.

title: History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 10


text:
History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 11

CHAPTER XI
OF THE CITY IN KING JOHN'S TIME.

John, after the death of his brother Richard, was proclaimed King of England, in April 1199, and was crowned in May following; and upon the French King's invading Normandy, he soon after went thither; but though he was out of the realm, the citizens found means to apply to him, by the interest of John de Grey, a Norfolk man born, who the year following was made Bishop of Norwich, who promising the King 300 marks to be paid by the citizens, which was accordingly performed the next year, obtained a confirmation of all their liberties, which charter is still extant in the gild-hall at Norwich,  with his broad seal of green wax still appendant thereto;  it bears date at Caen in Normandy, September 28, A $o$ Domini 1199, and was passed or sealed by the hands of Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, the King's Chancellor, Henry Bishop of Salisbury, Simon Archdeacon of Welles, John de Grey aforesaid, John de Brauncester, Ralph Earl of Chester, William Earl of Arundel, Robert Earl of Leicester, Philip Fitz-Robert, and ''Will. de Huntingfeld'', being witnesses. It is word for word the same as the charter of Richard I. only in the style, the King hath the additional title of "Lord of Irland," and in the direction, these words, "to all Provosts and Bailiffs," are added; and in the reservation of the fee-farm, instead of the words "esterlings by tale" it is, "sterling blanch," that is, white or silver money.

In 1202, the ordinance for the assize of bread was proclaimed throughout the whole realm, as most necessary and profitable for the commonwealth, which assize was approved and assessed by the baker of Jeffry Fitz-Peter, Lord Chief Justice of England. And all were to obey it, under penalty of the pillory.

In 1203, the citizens tried, convicted, and hung, several assayers   or triers of money, that were arrested in this city, under pretence of their charter; but it appearing, that all persons belonging to the mint, were excepted out of their jurisdiction by the very words of their charter, in 1205, the King seized all their liberties for this offence, by the hand of the sheriff of Norfolk.

In 1210, the Jews all over England were grievously taxed, and many, for want of payment thereof, vexed and imprisoned, but most of those of this city met with but little difficulty, they paying without any trouble.

In 1213, Alfrid of Norwich, clerk, one of a noble or good family, who pleaded and produced the Pope's bull in a certain cause in the Exchequer, was called to an account for that presumptuous action by the King, he having commanded the contrary, and was imprisoned for it at Notingham, and so loaded with fetters that he died.

In 1212, Roger Bigot Earl of Norfolk attended the King into Poictou; but afterwards, in 1215, he sided with the rebellious Barons, against their prince, upon which the castle was seized, and William  Marshall Earl of Pembrook, being then associated with John FitzRobert in the sheriffalty of Norfolk and Suffolk, were by patent made constables of the castles of Norwich and Orford in Suffolk, but were soon discharged of those trusts;  for on the 19th of July, in the same year, Hubert de Burgh,  a Norfolk man born,  and afterwards Earl of Kent, was made governour of the castles of Norwich and Orford: in this same year,  King John retiring from his Barons into the isle of Wight, dispatched the Bishops of Norwich and Worcester beyond sea, to raise him forces, and meet him about Michaelmas at Dover, which they did, with such forces as they had got out of Poictou and elsewhere, and had not Hugh de Boves (to whom the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk were allotted for services to be done) setting out from Calice with 40,000 more, (men, women, and children) been by a sudden tempest drowned in the sea, he had made a universal conquest of his kingdom, for with those he had, in half a year's time he recovered all his castles, which forced the Barons, in the year 1216, to solicit Lewis, the French King's son, to come and take upon him the crown of England, who landed at Sandwich in Kent, May 21, with 680 vessels, upon which, King John (who at first designed to give him battle) withdrew, and fled towards Gilford: Lewis went to Canterbury, which, with all Kent, submitted to him; thence he came to London, and was honourably received of the citizens, who did homage to him; then taking divers castles, he hasted to Winchester, to give the King battle, which when King John heard, he fled: the city submitted to Lewis, and there almost all the Earls and Barons of the realm met him; then taking the castle of Odiham, and the tower of London, he returned into Kent, and on the 22d of July, besieged Hubert de Burgh, till Oct. 14, in his castle of Dover, who being not able to abide the assault any longer, obtained truce to send to King John for succour, who all this while went about the land, wasting with fire and sword the possessions of his barons, and so marching through Norfolk and Suffolk, he came to Linn, where the townsmen received him with great joy, and honoured him with large gifts, and passing from thence over the marshes, he came to Swynested abbey, thence to Newark-Castle, where he died, Oct. 19, 1216. This King, to raise money, as also to gain the affections of his people of the principal places of his realm, granted a great number of charters of privileges, so that he made more corporations than any one of his predecessors or successours; he incorporated Linn, Eye, Dunwich, Ipswich, Yarmouth, &c. in Norfolk and Suffolk, and first granted the citizens of London to have a mayor.

In this King's time, the contest between the monks and citizens began, concerning their right of commoning, with the prior's tenants, on the lands between Eaton, Lakenham, Herford-Bridges, and Norwich, but at last the matter was adjusted by fine levied in the King's court.

title: History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 11


text:
History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 12

CHAPTER XII
OF THE CITY IN HENRY THE THIRD'S TIME.

King John being dead, Henry, his eldest son, was proclaimed King, and was crowned at Gloucester the 28th of October following. Lewis and the Barons in the mean time being not able to win Dover castle, removed their seige, and came to London the 6th of Nov. following, determining to subdue the smaller castles first; and accordingly they went to Hartford castle, and beseiged it Nov. 12, and it was yielded to them Dec. 6, in the mean time, Lewis's men had won all Ely Isle, except one fortress, in which the King's people were enclosed, and so went from place to place, conquering all as they went, till after Christmas, and then the said Lewis called all his favourers to a council at Cambridge, and no peace being made there, he made a great cavalcade or military progress into Essex, Suffolk, and Norfolk, and miserably wasted those counties, taking the castles of Heningham and Orford: as soon as Hubert de Burgh found he marched this way, he sent to Thomas de Burgh, his brother, who was chatelain or keeper of this castle under him, to defend it as well as he could, but he was not in a condition to resist, for want of forces, and therefore upon the approach of the Frenchmen to the city, he fled out, in hope to escape, but was taken prisoner, and put under safe keeping; and Lewis seizing the castle, put a garrison into it, and made William de Bellomont or Beaumont, his Marshal, constable thereof, plundered the citizens, and reduced the city to a poor condition. But being afterwards forced to quit the realm, in 1217, Hubert de Burgh, who was constable of the castle, and sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk from the first to the ninth year of his reign, took possession of the castle upon Lewis's departure to France, and the King being reconciled, Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, was then made constable thereof, and indeed the constables and lords of castles in the seignories or liberties thereto belonginging, exercised more arbitrary regality over their vassals, than the kings themselves, so that ''Mat. Paris and others say of them, "quot domini castellorum, tot tyranni, as many constables of castles as there were, there were so many tyrants''.

In this year the King talliated or taxed his royal demeans, and the citizens paid a hundred pounds towards it, Yarmouth burgesses 60 marks, Dunwich 100 marks, which shows that town to have been in a most flourishing condition, Ipswich 30, and Orford 15 marks.

In 1220, died Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, and constable of the castle, and

Hugh his son inherited all his lands and honours.

In 1221, Hubert de Burgh, the King's ''Chief Justice, Martin de Patteshul, Stephen de Segrave, Tho. de Heydon, Hugh Rufus or Rous, and Fulk Bainard'', were justices itinerants here. And this year died Hugh Bigod Earl of Norfolk, and constable of the castle, and the King appointed.

Hubert de Burgh his Chief Justice, to have the custody of all his castles, lands, and honours: he left

Hugh Bigod, his son, his heir.

In 1223, the government of this city, was changed into four Bailiffs, instead of a Provost, by the King's Approbation, upon suit made for that purpose by the citizens, but the charter or license, if there was any granted this year, I have not seen.

In 1224, the Earl of Chester, and all the earls and barons of his faction, were forced to surrender up all their royal castles they had in their custody, into the King's hands, and then Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, and constable of this castle, surrendered it up.

In 1226, the King sent his writ to Herbert de Alencun and ''Alex. de Bassingbourn, acquainting them, that though the tallage or tax of Norwich'', which was now granted on all ancient royal demeans, amounted to 460 marks, yet for the value he had for the citizens, he had pardoned it down to 200 marks.

In 1228, the citizens petitioned the King for a new charter, with confirmation of all their old privileges, and addition of new ones, and in particular to have the power of trying all writs of novel disseisin,  which was granted them for a fine of 80 marks,  and six palfreys,   paid to the King. This charter is still extant in the gild-hall, and hath a seal of green wax fixed to it; it is marked, Carta quarta, or the Fourth Charter, and is the same, word for word, as the preceeding charters of King Richard and King John, with this addition:

Concessimus etiam eisdem civibus, et precipimus, quod omnes hij qui residentiam habent in civitate Norwici, et qui communicaverint libertatibus, quas concessimus eisdem civibus Norwici, tallientur, et auxilium dent, sicut predicti cives Norwici, quando tallagia, et auxilia super eos posita fuerint. Concessimus etiam eis, pro nobis et heredibus nostris, quod si aliquis a consuetudinibus eorum, et scottis se foras miserit, ad eorum societatem et consuetudinem revertatur, et scottum ipsorum sequatur, ita quod nullus inde sit quietus. Hijs testibus, J. Bathoniensi, R. Dunolmensi, W. Karleol, Episcopis, Hugone de Burgo Comite Kancie, Justiciario ''Anglie, Stephano de Segrave, Phil. de Albaniaco, Nicholao, de Molis, Johanne filio Philippi, Ricardo filio Hugonis'', et alijs. Data per manum venerabilis patris R. Cicestrensis Episcopi, Cancellarij nostri, apud Westmonasterium, xiij $o$ die Februarij, anno regni nostri tertio decimo.

That is to say,

We have also granted to our said citizens, and do command, that all persons who dwell in the city of Norwich, and partake of the liberties which we have granted to the same citizens of Norwich, shall be talliated, (or taxed,) and shall pay aid, as the aforesaid citizens of Norwich do, when tollages and aids shall be laid upon them. We have also granted to them, for us and our heirs, that if any one hath withdrawn himself from (paying) their customs and scots, he shall be forced to return to their company and custom, and shall be obliged to pay the same scot (or portion of tax) as they do, so that no person shall be acquitted thereof. These being witnesses, Joceline (de Welles) Bishop of Bath, Richard (Poore) Bishop of Durham, Walter (Malclerk) Bishop of Carlisle, Hugh de Burgh Earl of Kent, Justice of England, Stephen de Segrave, Philip de Albany, Nicholas de Molis, John son of Philip, Richard Fitz Hugh, and others; dated at Westminster, by the hand of the venerable father Ralph (Nevile) Bishop of Chichester, our Chancellor, the 13th of February, in the 13th year of our reign.

In the 18th year of this King, viz. 1283, Benedict the Phisitian brough an appeal against James, a Jew of Norwich, setting forth, that whereas Odard, son of the said Benedict, a boy of five years old, went into the street to play, about four years before,  the said Jew took him, carried him to his house, and circumcised him in his member, and would have made him a Jew, keeping him a day and a night in his house, till it was common report that he was there, upon which the neighbours came in a body, and found him in the Jew's house, and immediately showed the boy to the Official, the Archdeacon, and Coroners, who were all present in court, and attested the same; and further, that they saw the boy was circumcised, his member being much swelled, and that he called him Jurnepin, all which he did maliciously, and feloniously, in disparagement of the cross and Christianity, &c. and he appealed several other Jews by name, of assisting and counselling the said James; and the boy then present, and of the age of 9 years, being asked how they circumcised him? answered, that some held him, and some shut his eyes, and another cut his member; and the coroners of the liberties of Norwich city, and 36 men of Norwich, were of the jury, and found that the boy was circumcised; and that all the Jews of Norwich were consenting thereto, except one, called Moses Ben Solomon, and the same was attested by Richard de Fressingfeld, constable of Norwich, and others; whereupon the King, and the major part of his council, viz. the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the major part of the Bishops, Earls, and Barons of England, because the like cause never happened before in the King's court, and because such a fact properly belonged to God and holy church, because circumcision and baptism belong to faith, and likewise for that there was no felony in the case, loss of member, maheme, mortal wound, or other laick felony, to damnify  a man, without the command of holy church, it was resolved by the court, that the fact should be first considered by holy church, and the Ordinary: and there being a mark of gold offered, that the boy might be seen by the justices, whether he was circumcised or not, it was accepted, and they saw the boy, and his mother uncovered of the skin at the head, and pronounced him circumcised, and the boy was delivered to his father, to show to the ecclesiastical judges, and the Jews were still to remain in prison.

This is the true record of this affair, which Rabbi Manasseh Ben Israel, in his Vindiciæ Judæorum, or Vindication of the Jews, printed in the Phenix, vol. ii. p. 396, would make us believe is a mere fiction, in these words, "Mathew Paris, p. 532 writes, that in the year 1240,  the Jews circumcised a Christian child at Norwich, and gave him the name of Jurnin, and reserved him to be crucified, for which cause many of them were most cruelly put to death, the truth of this story will evidently appear, upon the consideration of its circumstances. He was circumcised, and this perfectly constitutes him a Jew. Now for a Jew to embrace a Christian in his arms, and foster him in his bosom, is a testimony of great love and affection. But if it was intended that shortly after, this child should be crucified, to what end was he first circumcised? if it shall be said it was out of hatred to the Christians, it appears rather to the contrary, that it proceeded from detestation of the Jews, or of them who had newly become proselytes, to embrace the Jew's religion. Surely this supposed prank (storied to be done in Popish times) looks more like a piece of the real scene of the Popish Spaniards piety, who first baptized the poor Indians, and afterwards, out of cruel pity to their souls, inhumanly butchered them; than of strict law-observing Jews, who dare not make a sport of one of the seals of their covenant."

I fancy this rabbi never saw the record before quoted, and was as willing to pass by the foregoing example of St. William, who was not only circumcised, but crucified, and if we may judge by example, and the appearance of things, what reason could there be else for concealing this boy, after his circumcision.

Upon this, the King caused the sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk to make proclamation in the city of Norwich, that no Christian woman for the future should ever be servant to a Jew, either to nurse or take care of their children, or to serve them in any other capacity.

Fabian, in the seventh part of his Chronicle, fo. 43, says, that "in the xviij. yeare of Kynge Henrye, the Jewes dwellynge at Norwich were broughte before the Kynge at Westmynster, to answere to a complante made agayn them, by one called John Toly of the sayde towne of Norwyche, that they shuld stele a chyld, and it cyrcumcised of the age of a yere, and after kept the same chyld secret to the intent to crucyfye it, in dispyte of Christes relygion. But how the matter was folowed, or howso the Jewes acquyted themselves by their answer, truth it is, that they returned unpunished."

Holingshed, fo. 219, under the 19th of Henry III. 1235, says, that the King being at London, there was brought before him by one Tolie, a complaint exhibited against the Jews at Norwich, which had stolen a child being not past a twelve moneths old, and secretlie kept him an whole yeare togither, to the end that he might (when Easter came) crucifie him in dispite of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and the Christian religion, the matter as it happened, fell out well for the lad, for within a few daies before those cursed murtherers purposed to have shed this innocent's blood, they were accused, convicted, and punished, whereby he escaped their cruel hands."

Speed, fo. 532, tells us, that there were seven Jews brought before the King, &c. and relates the fact as before; and Stow, fo. 183, gives us the same account, and adds, that they designed to have crucified him at Easter, "as themselves confessed before the King, and were "convicted thereof, wherefore their bodies and goods were at the King's pleasure;" and in 1246, being still in prison, they were forced to give the King 100 marks for respite of judgment.

About this time, the animosities that had subsisted for many years between the monks and citizens now grew to a great height, the monks having charters of liberties older than the citizens, were uneasy with the liberties granted to the city by Richard the First, and his successours, they interfering with their ancient liberties, all which they stretched to the utmost, on their part, as well as the citizens theirs; so that both parties being resolute, the monks determining to stand out to the utmost, so far enraged the populace, that the commons of the city rose against them, entered the convent, robbed and burnt part of it; the King being then at Bromholm in Norfolk, hearing of it, sent the sheriff of Norfolk to take an inquisition of the burnings and depredations, but the burgesses would not suffer them so to do, nor make inqusition themselves, as they were bound to do; upon which, in the 19th year of his reign, A $o$ 1234, he seized all their liberties into his own hands; but upon their submission, released that seizure very soon; and in 1236, directed his writ to the sheriff of Norfolk, acquainting him, that according to their liberties, every one that merchandised in Norwich with the citizens should pay tollages, taxes, and aids, with them, and therefore, his tenants in the fee of his castle were obliged to pay with them, as citizens;  they having recovered that liberty against him and his tenants, in his own court.

In 1239, Ralf Abbot of Ramseye, William of York Provost of ''Beverley, Hen. de Bath, Roger Thirkelby, Jeremy de Caxton, and Gilbert de Preston, were itinerant justices here, to settle matters between the convent and city, but that not being done, the King himself came hither, for on the 21st of March, in the 26th year of his reign,  the King was at Norwich, for from hence he dated his writ to the sheriff of Cornwall, to command him to distrain all them who had 20l''. a year in land, or more, either held by knight's service or soccage, or a whole knight's fee in demean, to oblige them to be knighted.

It seems he made an agreement between the citizens and convent; for finding the original of the dispute was by reason of their liberties, the monks claiming to exercise all their liberties in their own jurisdiction and lands, and the citizens claiming to exercise their liberties in the site of the monastery, and lands of the monks, they being not excepted in the city charter; it being impossible that both could be exercised in the same place quietly, and it appearing plainly that the monks had their liberties before the citizens, and consequently the city charter had no occasion to except them, it not being in the King's power to grant any thing that was another's property, by his own and predecessor's grants before; he commanded that the citizens should use all their liberties in their own jurisdiction, but should not pretend to molest the monks in the lands or places belonging to their convent, but that they should in all such places use their own liberties as heretofore; and accordingly, in 1244, when the tallage was laid, the city of Norwich was talliated or taxed to raise 100l. but was pardoned their part; but the men or tenants of the Prior of Norwich, who dwelt in Norwich, and held of the King lands and tenements in Norwich, by reason they have and enjoy all the same liberties as the citizens do,  were now talliated at 20l. part of the said 100l. for the tax of the city, which they were forced to pay, so that though the Prior carried his point, the citizens carried theirs so far, as to make the Prior and his tenants pay the fifth part of the tax of the city, for enjoying the same liberties as they did. And thus the matter rested for some time, though this was the original of the rancour and malice that always subsisted between the convent and city.

In 1240, it was commanded, that the sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk should have the custody of the castles of Norwich and Orford; and that he should maintain them at his own charge: and accordingly the year after, the said counties and castles were committed to Hamon Passelew, during the King's pleasure, under the same form, and with the same authority, that Henry de Neckton, late sheriff, held them. About this time, the royal castles were frequently committed to the sheriff, who was always called the custos or keeper of the castle, but the earls, barons, &c. were always called constables of the castles, and exercised royal power within the jurisdiction of their castles, which the sheriffs did not, without special writ for so doing.

In 1247, the coin was so clipped, that it was thought convenient to change the same, and make it baser; whereupon new stamps were cut, and sent down to all the mints in different places in England, with a command to the mintmasters of those places, to use no other stamp than that of the mint of London, and all the old stamps were called in,

In 1249, the citizens sued the burgesses of Yarmouth for not permitting their ships (or keels) to come laden with their goods and merchandises to the city, as they always did in time past, and for detaining them there.

In the same year, the Prior of Norwich was sued for hindering the King's bailiffs from excecuting writs in his lands, and not suffering them to distrain any of his tenants, though they had warrants so to do, and though it was for the King's own debt, and in particular for suffering no officer but his own to enter his lands of Newgate, Pokethorp, Spitelond, (or St. Paul's parish, where Norman's spitel, or hospital, was,) and Holme-street in Norwich; and the steward of the Prior's lands, &c. appeared, and justified the action, by producing the King's charters for such liberties.

In this year also, Odo de Beccles was prosecuted and fined for encroaching on the King's ditch, belonging to his castle.

William Ribold, a felon, appealed William Noche of Norwich for harbouring thieves, receiving stolen goods, and killing a man named Joceline, in his presence, in his own house, which man when dead, the said Ribold carried out of the city, and laid him in Thorp-Wood, all which he offered to prove by duel, in case of appeal, body against body, according to the law of the land; upon which Noche appeared to justify himself, and pleaded that he was a citizen of Norwich, and not bound to the common law of the land, as to duel, but was ready to justify himself according to the custom of the city of London, which is, (that in case of suspicion of murder or man-slaughter,) there shall be 18 jurors returned from the part of Walbrook, and 18 more for the other part of the city, and then the party suspected shall come before the King's itinerant justices, and shall swear,  that the person whose death he is suspected to be accessary to, was never the further or nearer to death, any way by him or any of his accomplices, friends, or relations, by his knowledge; and then if the 36 men so warned, shall voluntarily swear, that they believe his oath to be true, he shall be acquitted, but if any one of them refuses voluntarily to swear that, he shall be condemned: this being allowed, he pleaded, that as a citizen of Norwich he had the same privilege, and it was granted him, and 18 jurors were accordingly summoned from the part of Norwich beyond the water, (or river,) and 18 more for the part on this side the water, and the said Noche came before the justices, with 36 jurors, and took his oath as aforesaid, and all the 36 did the same voluntarily, upon which he was acquitted of the death of the said Joceline, and then being asked how he would acquit himself of the felony in receiving stolen goods, and accompanying and harbouring thieves, he answered he would be tried by a common jury of 12 of the citizens, and was so; who not only acquitted him, but returned their verdict, that they found him guilty of no crime whatever: and so he was discharded.

At the same assizes, the Dean of Norwich city was prosecuted for taking haliday-toll of the citizens, viz. of all bakers and others, and he pleaded that it always was a custom in the city, and his predecessors immemorially enjoyed such toll, and therefore he was discharged.

At the same time also, the citizens of Norwich were prosecuted with the burgesses of Yarmouth, and the people of Acle, for selling in unsealed bushels, and the citizens for taking toll of every bushel of corn, which they never used to do, and were fined for so doing;  and the city liberties were seized, and Sir John de Lessington, Sir Betram de Crioyll, and Sir Robert Walerand, were deputed stewards of the King's liberties there; as is evident from several deeds inrolled before them in 1251, Master Hugh being then the common or town-clerk.

The city of Norwich also, according to the summons from the justices itinerant, appeared by their jury of 12 men, who were to try an assize, concerning one Gerard Godfolche, who was drowned in the city, in the river Wensum, by falling out of a boat, valued at 5s. which was to be answered to the King, and the jury being demanded, why their city coroner did not take an inquest at his death, answered, that the body was found within their city indeed, but on the fee of the Prior of Norwich, where their coroner could not enter, by reason of the Prior's liberty, which was exempt from the city; which being proved, the city was acquitted, and ''Will. de Hakeford, steward of the liberty, was called, who justified the exemption, and went so far as to say, that the Prior was not answerable for any thing, neither to the city nor to the King's justices itinerants themselves, neither could the city coroner enter the liberty upon any extraordinary case whatever: upon which, the justices demanded of him, whether the Prior's soc or liberty answered the King, with the hundreds they were in, or with the city''? the steward answered, with neither, but by himself, their steward: but it being found upon trial, that he had not answered the King, (his deodand,) neither by himself nor by the justices, nor by the city, nor by the hundred, all the soc and liberty was fined at the King's pleasure.

In 1251, the night after Christmas day, there was a very great tempest throughout all Norfolk and Suffolk, to the great wonder and astonishment of the people, both on account of its violence, as well as the season of the year: this was thought, says Holingshed, a token of some evil to follow.

In 1252, was an exceeding great drought, so that the grass was burnt up in the pastures, that the cattle were near starved, and this produced many diseases among the people; but in the harvest time there fell a great death and murrain amongst cattle, and especially in Norfolk, in the fens, and in other parts of the south. Such was the infection, that dogs and ravens, which fed on the dead carcasses, swelled and died; so that the people dared eat no beef: this also was noted not without great wonder, that young heifers and bullocks followed the cows, and sucked them as if they had been calves, and apple and pear trees, after their fruit was ripe, began to blossom again, as if it had been April: the cause of this murrain was thought to proceed from the abundance of grass the earth threw out after the drought, and the greediness of the half-starved cattle feeding thereon.

In this year, being the 37th of Henry III. the King granted his royal license to the citizens to enclose their city with a large ditch, they being then in possession of all their liberties.

In 1255, the King granted a second Charter to the citizens, the original of which is now in the gild-hall, with the broad seal of green wax, very fair: in this he grants

(Dilectis civibus de Norwico, quod ipsi et eorum heredes, in perpetuum habeant hanc libertatem, per totam terram et potestatem nostram, viz. quod ipsi, vel eorum bona quocunque locorum in potestate nostra inventa, non arrestentur pro aliquo debito, de quo fidejussores, aut principales debitores non extiterint; nisi forte ipsi debitores, de eorum sint communa, et potestate, habentes, unde de debitis suis, in toto, vel in parte, satisfacere possint, et dicti cives creditoribus eorundem debitorum in justicia defuerint et de hoc rationabiliter constare possit, et prohibemus super forisfacturam nostram decem librarum, ne quis eos contra libertatem predictam in aliquo injuste vexet, disturbet, vel inquietet. Hijs testibus venerabilibus pratribus Fulcone Londoniensi, Waltero Wygorniensi Episcopis, Johanne de Plessetis Comite Warrewyk, Johanne Maunsel Preposito Beverlaci, Henrico de Bathonio, Henrico de Bretton, Willielmo de Grey, Imberto Pogeis, Willielmo de Sancta Ermin: Petro Everard, et alijs, data per manum nostram apud Wodestok, tercio die Junij, anno regni nostri tricesimo nono.)

To his beloved citizens of Norwich, that they and their heirs, for ever, shall have this liberty (or privilege) throughout all his realm, and jurisdiction, viz. that neither they themselves nor their goods, in whatever place they be found in his jurisdiction, shall not be arrested (or seized) for any debt, which they shall not be bondsmen for, or principal debtors themselves, unless it happens that the debtors themselves be of their society (or company) and jurisdiction, and have sufficient to pay part or all their debts, and the aforesaid citizens shall neglect (or refuse) to do justice to the creditors of the said debtors, so that they can plainly prove it to be so, and we forbid, under penalty of ten pounds to be forfeited to us, any one unjustly to vex, disturb, or molest them in any case, contrary to the aforesaid liberty these being witnesses, the venerable fathers Fulk Bishop of London, and Walter Bishop of Worcester, John de Plesset Earl of Warwick, John Maunsel Provost of ''Berverley, Henry de Bath, Henry de Bretton, William de Grey, Imbert Pogeis, Will. Sanctermin, Peter Everard, and others: given by my own hand at Wodstock, the 3d day of June'', in the 39th year of our reign.

The next year his Majesty came to this city; for the charter of liberties by him granted to the port of Yarmouth is dated March 25, 1256, by the King at Norwich, being the same day that he granted his third Charter to this city which is now extant in the gild-hall, with the broad seal of green wax hanging thereto; by this charter he granted

(Quod ipsi in perpetuum habeant returnum omnium brevium nostrorum lam de summonicionibus Scaccarij nostri, quam de alijs, civitatem nostram de Norwico et libertatem ejusdem civitatis tangentibus, et quod ijdem cives respondeant ad Scaccarium nostrum par manus suas proprias, de omnibus debitis et demandis ipsos, cives contingentibus, et quod nullus vicecomes aut alius ballivus noster, de cetero intret civitatem predictam ad districtiones faciendas pro aliquibus debitis, nisi sit pro defectu civium predictorum, et quod nullus eorum compellatur ad placitandum extra civitatem predictam, pro aliquibus transgressionibus in civitate illa factis, contra tenorem cartarum suarum, et contra libertates suas, et quod singuli mercutores communicantes libertatibus suis et mercandisis, sint ad lottum et scottum eorundem civium, et ad auxilia prestanda ubicunque fecerint residentiam, sicut esse debent et solent, et quod nulla gilda de cetero teneatur in civitate predicta ad detrimentum ejusdem civitatis. Et prohibemus super forisfacturam nostram, ne quis contra hanc libertatem et concessionem nostram ipsos inquietare, molestare, vel gravare presumat. Hijs testibus, venerabili patre W. Norwicensi Episcopo, Guidone de Lesignijs et Willielmo de Valencia, fratribus nostris, Rogero de Thirkilby, Magistro Simone de Wonton, Willielmo de Grey, Guidone de Rocheford, Petro Everard, Bartholomeo le Bigot, Willielmo Gernun, et alijs; data per manum nostram apud Norwicum, vicesimo quinto die Martij, anno regni nostri quadragesimo.)

That they for ever should have the return of all our writs, as well of summons out of our Exchequer, as all other things, relating to our city of Norwich, and the liberty of the said city, and that the said citizens shall answer all debts and demands belonging to them, at our Exchequer, by their own hands, and that no sheriff, or other bailiff of ours for the future, shall enter the city aforesaid, to take distresses for any debts, unless it be for want (or neglect) of the city's doing it; (by their own officers;) and that none of them shall be forced to plead out of the aforesaid city, for any offences committed in that city, it being contrary to the tenour of their charters and liberties, and that all merchants enjoying their liberties and merchandising with them, shall pay to the lot, scot, and aids, of the aforesaid citizens, wherever they dwell, as they ought and used to do: and for the future, no gild (or fraternity of merchants) shall be held in the aforesaid city, to the damage of the said city. And we enjoin on pain of our forfeiture,  that no one presume to disturb, molest, or trouble them, contrary to this liberty and grant. These being witnesses, the venerable father Walter Bishop of Norwich, Guy de Lesiguian and ''Will. de Valence, our brothers; Roger de Thirkilby, Master Simon de Wanton, William de Grey, Guy de Rocheford, Peter Everard, Bartholomew le Bigot, Will. Gernun, and others; given by our hands at Norwich, the 25th day of March'', in the 40th year of our reign.

This same year, several goods belonging to the freemen were arrested and stopped for the debts of others that were not free, at Boston fair, as they had formerly been, but the city stood a trial and got it, by producing their charter, which they had lately obtained for this purpose.

At the same time, the citizens complained of the Prior, for taking of landgable of the citizens in the afternoon, when the bailiffs of the city had taken it in the morning: and this was the beginning of another insurrection between the commons and monks, for the Prior proving he took it only in Holm-street and other places exempt from the city, he recovered the action, which the citizens could not bear without much resentment.

This year it was proclaimed in this city, and throughout the realm, that every man of 15l. a year in land, held by knight's service, should either be made a knight, or pay the king a mark of gold every year.

At this time also, the bailiffs of the city were called upon to show how they dare enter the liberty of the King's castle at Norwich, but on submission were pardoned.

In 1261, Philip Marmion of Tamworth castle, whom the King had great confidence in, was made constable of Norwich and Orford castles.

In 1263, one ''Will. Cope was killed at Lakenham, in a gravel-pit; but the city coroners did not sit upon him, because of the approaching war, and fear of future danger: and being called upon by the justices, they assigned this is a reason, and were excused: and a good reason it was, for so tumultuous was the city, that I meet with many prosecutions of the citizens for firing one another's houses by night, cutting the bell-ropes off, that they should not ring when they had fired the houses, and such like: the whole being divided into various factions, one part sided with the King against the barons that were in arms against him, another with the barons; the bishop and clergy were for the barons, the city bailiffs and commons (with those of the castle-fee) were for the King; and in short, the old grudges between the monks and the citizens, that dwelt in their exempt jurisdiction, and those that dwelt in the King's jurisdiction belonging to his castle, and the bailiffs, and corporation, and their citizens'', were now renewed, and got to such a height, that it was a dangerous time to live in: many of the citizens were killed and found dead; if they were not of the city party, the monks and their party would not suffer the city coroners to take inquests; if they were of the monk's party, then the citizens would not suffer the Prior's coroner to take any inquests; and thus every thing was in confusion.

In 1265, Simon Mundford, and the barons his adherents, seized all the King's castles, and divided them amongst themselves, and the King being then in their power, they forced him to send circular letters or proclamations to the sheriffs of the several counties, and particulary to Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, and constable of the castle of Norwich, to hinder all attemps made against the provisions of Oxford, and the ordinances made at London, in his counties of Norfolk, and Suffolk. But the King's fortune being changed, after the overthrow of his barons at Evesham, he removed all the constables of the castles that Monford Earl of Leicester, and the confederate barons, had constituted, of which number Roger Bigod was one; and John de Vallibus, or Vaux, was made constable of this castle, and sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk; and there were so many things done without punishment, that non omittas writs were directed to the sheriff to authorise him to enter the city, notwithstanding their liberties.

In 1266, about the middle of December, the disinherited barons came from the Isle of Ely to sack Norwich, and the citizens prepared to resist them, but the barons be ng courageous and skilled in war, and men of judgment, presently took it, Sir John de Evile or Eyville being their leader, and entering the city, they killed very many, others they imprisoned, and all that day and night, till eleven o'clock the next day, robbed and plundered the town, and carried away captive with them many of the wealthiest citizens, to the isle, to which they returned in triumph.

Soon after, in this very year, there was a jury summoned out of the parishes of St. John of Burgh-street, and others, to try Thomas de Karleton, one of the constables for the King's peace, for the murder of Walter de Sterston, one of the city serjeants; but he was acquitted; it appearing that the constable being forewarned of the barons coming to sack the town, caused it be proclaimed through the whole city, that the citizens might be provided to defend themselves, and that by virtue of his office he desired the serjeant, according to his duty, to cite the citizens in his ward to join the constable to defend the city; which he not only refused, but gave him base language for his loyalty to his prince, and endeavours to save the city: upon which, the constable having a sword drawn in his hand, gave him a stroke under the breast with it, of which the serjeant died.

In 1267, the bailiffs were summoned to answer for the many murders and disorders committed in the city, but they contemptuously departed the court without license, for which the King seized the city, and kept it in his hands.

In 1271, a commission was issued directed to Hugh Peeche, to enquire the value of the citizens goods which were forfeited to the King for their contempt.

This year, on St. Peter and Paul's day, as the monks were were at prime, the lightning struck the cathedral steeple so violently, that it cast down certain large stones of two of the pillars, with such violence, that they sunk far into the ground, and all the monks fled for fear out of the quire, except three, one of which fell flat on the ground, and the other two held fast on the stalls, and so were saved; the quire being full of stench and smoak.

There was also a very great flood, which did much damage to the city and adjacent country.

In 1272, on the ninth day of August, the citizens assaulted the precinct of the monastery on all sides;  but William de Brunham or  Burnham, then Prior, with armed men, took upon him to keep it by force against them, upon which they fired the great gates with reed and dry wood, and burnt them down, with St. Albert's church, which stood near them, and all the books, &c. in it; at the same time they fired the great almonry and the church doors, and great tower, all which were presently burnt. Others got upon St. George's steeple, and threw fire with slings, and fired the great belfry beyond the quire, so that the whole church was burnt, all but the Virgin Mary's chapel, which was miraculously preserved; they burnt also the dormitory refectory, entertaining hall, and the infirmary, with the chapel belonging to it; and almost all the buildings in the court were quite consumed:  many of the monastery, some sub-deacons, others, clerks, and some laymen, were killed in the cloister and precinct of the monastery; others were carried out and killed in the city, and others imprisoned. After which, they entered the monastery, and plundered it of all the gold, silver, holy vessels, books, vestments, and whatever they found not consumed by the fire, all the monks except two or three, who were aged, being fled: not satisfied with this, they continued three days together, slaying, burning, and robbing the tenants and favourers of the church: the Prior himself fled to Yarmouth, and instead of endeavouring to settle the mischief he first began, got together a company of armed men, and came and entered Norwich, with trumpet blown, and sword in hand, and fell upon the citizens with fire and sword, wounding, killing, and destroying many of them and their houses: which things, when the King was by special messengers informed of, he was very wroth and much grieved, and immediately dispatched messengers to all his ports in England and France, commanding them, that if any Norwich men came thither they should seize and imprison them, till he gave further orders; at the same time also, he directed letters to all the bishops and nobles of England, commanding them to meet him, on St. Giles's day, at Bury, there to enter into council and advise him how to proceed against the citizens for these heinous transgressions.

At the same time also, Roger de Skerning Bishop of Norwich called together all his clergy, on the 30th day of August at Eye in Suffolk,  and there by joint consent, an excommunication was published against all that were concerned in these facts, in general, and several that were particularly named,  and the whole city was put under a general interdict.

On St. Giles's day the King held his parliament at Bury, and by their advice, came himself to Norwich, to inflict condign punishment for these crimes. He entered the city on the day of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, being Sept. 14, and at his request, the Bishop took off the interdict from the city, and the King's justices caused some of the offenders (34 in number, as the old roll says) to be drawn with horses about the streets till they died; others were carried to the gallows, and there hanged, drawn, and quartered, and their bodies afterwards burnt;  the woman that first set fire to the gates, was burnt alive, and others, to the number of 12 persons forfeited their goods to the King; which the rich men seeing, (as this monk says, who is not to be credited in the affair,) they bribed the justices, the freemen of the country, the King's counsel, and even a jury of 48 knignts, and so no more coporal judgment was inflicted on any; and all of them falsely and maliciously (as he says, but it was justly enough,) accused ''Will. de Brunham, then Prior'', of being in a great measure the occasion of things coming to this extremity, and proved it so much to the King's satisfaction, that he committed him to the Bishop's prison, and seized all the manors and whatever belonged to the priory into his own hands.

He then also seized the city and all the liberties that were ever granted to it, and assigned custoses or keepers, to keep the city in his own name.

Many of the citizens, at the King's coming, fled for fear, and returned after he was gone: but what was most surprising, (says the monk,) was, that many of the country and city clergy were on the citizens side, which is a plain argument of the arrogant oppression of the monks, both to them and the citizens; he wonders much that the jury of knights should return, that the church might be burnt by fire not well taken care of, though at the same time he acknowledges, that as to the fact their verdict was true, for they said, that the citizens attacked and fired the gates and other places of the monastery.

The King, after the seizure, made the Prior of Binham custos of all the manors, lands, goods and revenues belonging to the convent, commanding him to find the convent all necessaries, and keep the overplus without waste, till he had further orders from him; but the revenues of the officers of the monastery were not seized from any of them.

On 27th of Sept. the King left Norwich, and the day after, William de Brunham the Prior voluntarily and freely resigned the priory into the Bishop's hands, who was then ill at Thorp by Norwich: which shows as if he was sensible enough of his ill management, and ''Will. de Kirkeby was elected in his place the 1st of Oct''. and confirmed at Thorp, and installed Oct. 2, who immediately applied to the King, and had the revenues and goods of his monastery delivered to him.

Notwithstanding the Bishop's illness, which came probably from these vexatious affairs, great part of which seems to be owing to his own haughty spirit; yet on the 18th day of the same month, the citizens having refused to pay the sum demanded of them for damages, he interdicted the city again; and on the 16th day of November, in the same year, the King died at Westminster, in the 66th year of his age, and 57th year of his reign; being then in possession of the castle, city, and all its liberties.

''Holinshed, Fabian, Mat. Paris, and Mat''. of Westminster, all of them mention this affair particularly, and from them Nevile, Bishop Godwin,  and the records I have seen, compared together, we may find the truth of the matter, which is not to be had from the foregoing account of Cotton's; which seems to lay the fault upon the citizens, when in truth it was owing to the Prior and convent, who "was well inough borne out and defended by the Bishop of Norwich, named Roger, who (as it is likelie) was the maister of the mischeefe, though hands were not laid upon him, nor his adherents; perhaps for feare, peradventure for favour: and no marvell though the lesse faultie lost their lives as most guiltie:"  for no less than 30 young men of the city were condemned, hanged, and burnt, to the great grief of the other citizens, who thought the Prior was the occasion of all the mischief, by getting together armed men, and taking upon him to keep the belfry and church by force of arms.

Speed, fo. 550, says, that when the King heard it, he first dispatched away, "Sir Thomas Trivet, his justice, (before whom a great multitude were found guilty, and were condemned to be drawn and hanged,) the King himself having in his company one Bishop, and the Earl of Gloucester, followed, where beholding the deformed ruins, he could hardly refrain from tears; the Bishop of Rochester therefore excommunicated the nocent, and the King condemned the town in 3000 marks, towards the re-edification of that church, as also to pay one hundreth pounds for a cup weighing ten pounds in gold." But the city not complying to pay these fines, caused things to be carried still on to a great height, between them and the Bishop.

But in order to find the first aggressors, we must look into the beginning of this fray, which was occasioned in this manner:

At a fair, which was then kept on Tombland, before the monastery gates, there arose a quarrel, between the servants of the monastery, and citizens, which coming to blows, the servants killed some of the citizens, upon which, the city coroner comes and takes an inquest, and finds them guilty, and issues out warrants to take the murderers wherever they should be found; this was fact, and the whole that could appear to the historians, that have given us the account of it; but it appears by the evidences both of the church and city, that the servants of the monastery, and the populace of the city, really fought their master's old cause. This fair was held on Tombland, and being granted to the church by charter, the monks said the citizens had nothing to do there, and that Tombland, Holmstreet, and Spitelond, in Norwich, were exempt jurisdisctions from the city magistrates; the citizens, on the other hand, insisted that the whole city was in their jurisdiction, no part whatever being exempted out of their charter,  which contradiction the monks would not bear, and so took upon them to be the first aggressors, their servants beginning the fray, which does not seem to be accidental, the Prior having provided a sufficient posse (as he thought) of armed men to guard him and his monastery; but the coroner of the city taking an inquisition in their exempt jurisdiction, where they said their own coroner only had power to do it, so enraged them, that they first excommunicated the citizens, and endeavoured to do what damage they could to the city, and shutting up their gates, not only prepared to defend themselves, but began to offend others, and having got more weapons and strength, they began to shoot first at the citizens as they went by the gates, and wounded several: but on Sunday before St. Laurence's day, they issued out of their gates as enemies, with a great noise, and all that day and night went in a raging manner about the city, committing many extravagant insolences, killing several merchants and citizens, and plundering their houses; at last breaking into a tavern kept by one Hugh de Bromholm, they drank up what wine they could, and let all the rest out of the casks; the citizens perceiving these things, and seeing no speedy end likely to ensue, the magistrates assembled, and immediately sent letters to his Majesty, to acquaint him with it, complaining much of the prior and monks, and in the mean time prepared to defend their city, by ordering the citizens to assemble in the marketplace at 10 of the clock the next day, at which time so great a multitude appeared, that it looked like a large army: but in this the magistrates were deceived, and so undesignedly occasioned the mischief that followed, for the populace in the utmost rage, (as they  well might, at such treatment as they had met with,) contrary to their will and inclination, went to the priory gates, fired them and the monastery in divers places, and committed all those exorbitant outrages before mentioned.

Provosts of Norwich

 * 1216, Joceline Rocelin.
 * 1217, William de Norwico or Norwich.
 * 1218, Theobald D'escois, L'escois, or the Scot.
 * 1219, Robert Ascolf.
 * 1220, Herbert de Alencun.
 * 1221, Alexander de Bassingbourn.
 * 1222.

Bailiffs Of Norwich

 * 1223, Henry Fitz-Eustace. R. le Munk. W. Sermonsuche. Ralph L'estrencie or L'esturmy.
 * 1224.
 * 1225.
 * 1226, Alured de Hemlington. Nic. de Campania or Campain. Henry de Senges. Eustace de Hethill.
 * 1227, Adam de Tofts. Nic. de Ely. Roger de Swerdeston, or Swarston. Nic. de Eaton.
 * 1228.
 * 1229.
 * 1230, Roger le Resh or Rash. Herbert le Chapter. John de Lenn. Richer de Refham.
 * 1231.
 * 1232, Nigel le Wimer. Will le Waller. John de Sibton. Ivo de Gadbi, Gavier, Gavij, or Gayter.
 * 1233.
 * 1234.
 * 1235, Walter Gamage. Adam le Graunt. Tho. de Senges.
 * 1235, Rich. le Calue.
 * 1236.
 * 1237, Alan Fitz-Benedict, Benedicite, or Bennet. Adam de Frechenei. Edm. le Tonder. Henry Gust.
 * 1238, The same as in 1235.
 * 1239, Aug. Argentein. Gervase Lorimarius, or Sadler. Frederick Alward. Ralf le Pecimer.
 * 1240, The same as in 1237.
 * 1241.
 * 1242.
 * 1243, Isaac de Catton. Godwin Aurifaber, or Goldsmith. Roger de Berwick. Nic. de Chapele or Chapter.
 * 1244.
 * 1245, Andrew Minny. Will. de Depeham. Ralf le Pecimer. Tho. de Limer.
 * 1246, Odo de Beccles. Will. le Clerk. James de Colchester. Seaman Wrinell.
 * 1247, Jvo de Gavier. Hugh de Swathfield. John de Sibton. Nic. le Chapelle.
 * 1248, Rog. de Berwick. Simon de Metingham. Hervy de Vallibus or Vaux. Henry de Gust.
 * 1249, Henry de Senges. Tho. Paine. John de Attlebridge. Ivo le Gavij or Gayter.
 * 1250, Peter Civis, or the Citizen. Rob. de Catton. Otto le Texter, or the Weaver. Hugh de Swathfield.
 * 1251, Ric. Lindernell. Adam de Alby. James Colchester. Nic. Costinoble.

[Sir John de Lessington, Sir Bertram de Crioyll, Sir Robert Walerand, were stewards for the King in this city; and master Hugh was town-clerk.]
 * 1252, John de Sibton. Andrew Matt. Hugh Wrincle. Rob. le Plomer.
 * 1253, Hugh le Clerke. Walter le Clerke. John le Graunt. Simon Nicholas.
 * 1254, Hervy de Erlham. Peter Bois or de Bosco. John de Hildolfeston or Hilderston. Tho. Limer.
 * 1255, Will. Warrin. Henry de Catton. Warine de Hethill. Tho. de Turkelee.
 * 1256, Will. de Lyncolne. Rob. de Smallburgh. Will. Tunder. Leonard Lesson.
 * 1257, Rob. de Bosco or Bois. Reginald Fitz-Roberts. Reinald de Elingham. Will. Fillerstone.
 * 1258, Will. de Refham. Walter Knot. Paul de Pagrave. Roger de Tudenham.
 * 1259, Tho. de Carleton.
 * 1259, Adam le Spicer. Will. de Pessenhall. Nic. le Gris or Grice.
 * 1260, Roger de Tudenham. Will. Butts. Ric. de Felmingham. Tho. de Heningham.
 * 1261, Hugh le Clerke. Peter Butt. Henry de Heylesden. Roger de Swerdeston.
 * 1262, Alex. de Refham. Hubert le Taverner. Jeffry Verlie. John Naids.
 * 1263, John de Newbrigge. Walter le Clerk. Nic. de Hacford. Gerard Knot.
 * 1264, Nic. Clement. Walter Knot. Ethelbert Chesse. Simon de Berestrete.
 * 1265, Adam le Clerk. Ralf de Newbrigge. Adam le Taverner. John de Catton.
 * 1266, Roger de Morley. Roger de Tudenham. William de Redeham. Walter Knott.
 * 1267, Adam de Toftes. Rog. de Swerdeston. Nic. de Ely. Nic. de Eaton. [Will. le Cunte was the King's bailiff, when the liberties were seized.]
 * 1268, Hugh Clerke. Peter But. Roger de Swerdeston. Peter Heylesden.
 * 1269, Peter Butt. Nic. de Ely. Nic. de Ingham. Walt. Gurdon.
 * 1270, Nic. de Ely. Will. Paine. Will. Cauz. Adam de Toftes;
 * 1271, Henry Clerk. Adam le Spicer.
 * 1271, Will. Paine. Roger de Swerdeston.
 * 1272, Nic. de Ely. Rog. de Swerdeston. Will. de Dunwich. Adam le Spicer.

[The liberties were seized by the King, who nominated custoses or keepers of the city, viz.

Hugh Peche. Adam de Toftes. Henry de Hellesden. Herman de Stanhow.

title: History of Norfolk/Volume 3/Chapter 12