| Description | Three documents sewn together concerning a trial by combat in Mottram in Longdendale.
Two small skins (original sealed letter and attached copy):
1. Richard II
2. John Lovell of Tychemersch and Mathilda his wife
Writ from 1 to 2 to commanding him to do full right without delay to Robert de Staveley regarding forty acres of land, twenty acres of meadow and thirty acres of woodland with appurtenances in Staveley. Robert de Staveley claims to hold the property from John Lovell by free service of one penny a year for all services, but that John de Oldum, priest, Richard de Morton and Thomas Gerbage are witholding it from him.
Dated at Chester 27 of February 1 Richard II [27 Feb 1377/8]
Larger skin:
This document contains three items: (a) a copy of John Lovell's letters patent dated 2 March 1377/8; (b) Plea held at Mottram-in-Longdendale dated 3 March 1377/8; (c) Plea held at Mottram-in-Longdendale dated 24 Mar 1377/8.
(a)
1. John Lovell of Tychemersch
2. Henry le Mereschall, priest and steward of the manor of Mottram in Longdendale
Letters patent of John Lovell appointing Henry le Mereschall to hear and determine in his name a certain undecided plea by means of a writ of the Lord King of right patent in the court of his manor in Longdendale between Robert de Stavelegh, plaintiff, and John de Oldum priest, Richard de Morton and Thomas Gerberge, defendants.
Dated London, Tuesday in the feast of St Chad the Bishop 1 Richard II [2 Mar 1377/8]
(b)
1. Henry, steward John Lovell
2. Robert de Stavelegh
3. John de Oldum, Richard [Morton] and Thomas [Gerberge]
Record of the presentation of the writ patent of Richard II [see (a)] by Robert de Stavelegh to the court. By the writ, Robert de Staveley summonds John de Oldum, Richard and Thomas to appear at the next court to be held on Wednesday in the vigil of the annunciation of the Virgin Mary to answer the plea.
Dated Wednesday the day after the feast of St Chad the Bishop, 1 Richard II
(c)
1. Henry le Mareshcall, steward to John Lovell
2. Robert de Stavelegh and his son Ralph
3. John de Oldum, Richard de Morton and Thomas Gerberge
Claim of 2 against 3 of 40 acres of land, 20 acres of meadow and 30 acres of woodland with appurtenances in Stavelegh, his property and inheritence by means of a writ of right from the king. Robert de Stavelegh inherited the property from his grandfather to whom the property was tenanted in his desmesne as fief. John de Oldum, John de Morton through his attorney Robert de Longedene forester of Longdene and Thomas Gerberge through his attorney William de Leghs of Longedene challenged this claim and sought to defend the property by the means of the body of a certain freeman of theirs, Robert de Longedene. Robert was to act to prove title by the body of a certain freeman of his, who was named as his son Ralph. The court ordered the parties to attend the next court which would be held on the Wednesday next before the feat of Easter then next in the future to carry out the battle. The parties were instructed to have their champions in place. However, because John and Richard did not come, the custom of the manor dictated that the petitioner Robert de Stavelegh recovered his possession of the 40 acres of land, 20 acres of meadow and 30 acres of woodland with appurtenances in Stavelegh to him an his heirs peacefully from John de Oldum, Richard de Morton and Thomas Gerberge.
Note of money - 12d - in margin.
Dated Wednesday in the vigil of the anunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary [24/5 March] 1 Richard II
Later endorsement in Secretary hand (possibly Elizabethan) to say that this is a record showing that there should have been a trial by battle for the lands in Staveley between Robert Staveley and John de Oldham. In Latin.
Dated 1 Richard II
Vellum, three skins and one brown seal. |
| AdminHistory | Before the Norman Conquest, guilt or innocence in legal disputes were decided by compurgation , where a party would summon a number of ‘oath helpers’ to swear to the reliability of his oath, or especially in cases of ‘criminal’ accusation by one of the ordeals, fire, cold water, hot water, or accursed morsel. To these methods the Normans, with their strong militaristic tradition, added trial by battle. The parties, or champions on their behalf, would fight in formal single combat and the winner would be deemed to be the successful party in the case. It was not abolished until 1819 , after the accused was challenged to combat in the case of Ashford v. Thornton (from A Dictionary of British History. Ed. John Cannon. Oxford University Press, 2000). |
