• Home
• Project Information
• Fine Rolls
• Style Book
• Commentary
  • Introduction to Reign
  • Introduction to Rolls
  • Originalia Rolls
  • Technical Introduction
  • Heads and Headings
• News
• Help
• Fine of the Month
• Book Publication
• Blog
• Conference
• Podcasts
• Related Papers

1. Beyond respite: a case study in local power and authority during the minority of Henry III

Here Colin Veach, who has recently completed his doctoral studies at Trinity College Dublin into the de Lacy family and their landholdings in England, Ireland and Normandy, examines how placing an apparently mundane entry in the Fine Rolls in its context can reveal more about the texture and the workings of local power and authority during the minority period.

1.1. Introduction: Johnʼs Reign

⁋1On 21 July 1219, Henry III’s minority government issued a mandate granting Walter de Lacy respite from rendering his account for the county of Herefordshire until Michaelmas 1219 (CFR, 1218–19, no. 344). At first glance, this would appear to be a rather unspectacular piece of Exchequer administration, granting the sheriff of Herefordshire two months respite on his shrieval account. When one delves a bit deeper, however, the circumstances in which the order was granted illustrate the justiciar, Hubert de Burgh’s rising star in the minority government, the crown’s persistent weakness in the localities, and the incessant negotiations which consequently dogged royal initiatives. More particularly, the episode also reveals a longstanding rivalry between the families of de Burgh, de Braose and de Lacy, and shows how, during the minority, interbaronial politics could shape (and hamper) royal initiatives.

⁋2In his study of the minority of Henry III, David Carpenter linked the respite of Walter de Lacy’s Exchequer account to Hubert de Burgh’s attempts to induce Walter, as sheriff of Herefordshire, to transfer seisin of the castles of Grosmont (Monmouthshire), Skenfrith (Monmouthshire) and Llantilio (Whitecastle, Monmouthshire), collectively known as the Three Castles, from Reginald de Braose to Hubert. ¹ It is therefore with the Three Castles that an analysis of the selected entry on the Fine Roll should begin. King John granted custody of the Three Castles to Hubert de Burgh ‘for his maintenance in our service’ in July 1201. ² This seems to have been part of an attempt on John’s part at a transmarine balance of power in the marches of Wales and Ireland. From late 1200 to early 1201, King John effectively used the two families of de Burgh and de Braose as blocks against one another in their respective strongholds. The early days of John’s reign had seen the king elevate William de Braose in the Welsh marches, and de Braose’s pragmatic diplomacy stood him secure in his position. ³ One alliance that proved particularly fruitful for William was the marriage of his daughter Margery to the future sheriff of Herefordshire, Walter de Lacy. De Lacy’s English lands were concentrated in Herefordshire and southern Shropshire, and he held the marcher lordship of Ewyas Lacy in Wales. Walter was also lord of the large lordship of Meath in Ireland, and held lands in Normandy, some of which bordered de Braose’s own. ⁴ At about the same time as the marriage alliance, in October 1200, King John replaced William de Braose as sheriff of Herefordshire with Hubert de Burgh. ⁵ The following May (1201) John’s departure for France saw the situation along the Welsh marches amended. The king further entrusted Hubert de Burgh with the office of warden of the marches, giving him a force of one hundred knights to aid in his increased responsibilities. ⁶ The use of a royal administrator for this office, rather than a local magnate, seems to have been a conscious decision aimed at preventing local power becoming entrenched along the marches. ⁷ When Hubert was granted the Three Castles in July 1201, driving a wedge between the de Braose lordship of Abergavenny and de Lacy’s lordship of Ewias Lacy, the prospect of a de Braose/de Lacy power bloc consolidating itself in the central march was greatly diminished.

⁋3This was not the whole story, however. While Hubert de Burgh was placed between de Braose and de Lacy in the Welsh marches, William de Braose was intruded into the de Burgh ambit in south-western Ireland. In the 1190s John had promoted Hubert’s elder brother William de Burgh to a position of great authority and influence in Munster. De Burgh had himself done much to consolidate that power through a number of diplomatic ties with the native Irish of the region, the Ua Briain kings of Thomond in particular. On 12 January 1201, King John granted William de Braose of the honour of Limerick in Ireland (i.e. that part of Thomond no longer in Irish hands). ⁸ Although Limerick was granted excepting de Burgh’s territories, the endowment insinuated a royal favourite into the politics of Munster with the territorial prestige, if not the regional familiarity, to match William de Burgh. This immediately upset the socio-political nexus of the region which de Burgh had manipulated to his advantage. ⁹

⁋4This arrangement, with Hubert de Burgh checking de Braose and de Lacy along the Welsh marches, and William de Braose doing the same to William de Burgh in Munster, ostensibly remained in place until 1205, when Hubert was captured by French forces at Chinon. ¹⁰ King John took the opportunity of Hubert’s imprisonment, which was to last until 1207, to grant the Three Castles in hereditary fee to William de Braose in December 1205. ¹¹ The choice to make a permanent grant of the castles to William de Braose, rather than deliver custody to another royal administrator, is indicative of a characteristic change of heart on the part of King John. Far from using the families of de Braose/de Lacy and de Burgh to counterbalance one another, by 1205 John had chosen a side. The first cracks had come in 1203, while Hubert de Burgh was defending the king’s position in Normandy. In that year, Hubert’s brother William de Burgh fell foul of the Dublin administration, and as a result saw his stronghold on the Shannon, the city of Limerick (which was separate from William de Braose’s honour of Limerick), taken from him and granted to William de Braose during pleasure. ¹² De Braose’s son-in-law Walter de Lacy then joined the Irish justiciar in removing de Burgh from the city, and was appointed to a committee to adjudicate the case against him. Although William de Burgh probably died before a verdict was reached, the removal of royal favour seems clear.

⁋5It is perhaps important to note that at precisely the same time that Walter de Lacy was proceeding against William de Burgh in Munster, his brother Hugh de Lacy was fighting the lord of Ulster, John de Courcy. ¹³ As in Munster, Walter was eventually appointed to a committee which heard the case brought against de Courcy. The result of that case saw de Courcy removed from Ulster, and Hugh de Lacy eventually belted earl of Ulster in his stead. ¹⁴ It may not be a coincidence that de Burgh and de Courcy faced similar official threats at the same time. The death and imprisonment of the de Burgh brothers may therefore have helped along King John’s plans for them. By accident or by design, by the end of 1205 the de Burghs were wiped off the Angevin Empire’s western frontiers in favour of the ascendant de Braose/de Lacy alliance.

1.2. The Three Castles: The Early Minority of Henry III, 1216-1218

⁋1Hubert de Burgh was able to regain royal favour and acquire extensive lands after his release from captivity in 1207, but he did not immediately regain the Three Castles. Hubert does not seem to have pressed any claim to the castles while King John lived, due perhaps to the numerous royal appointments that kept him away from court for long periods of time. However, once John was dead and the 1215-1217 civil war had ended (liberating de Burgh from his defence of Dover Castle), Hubert was free to pursue his own interests. Unfortunately, his chance came too late.

⁋2Since King John’s death in October 1216, the minority government under William Marshal had been negotiating with several prominent rebels, including William de Braose’s son Reginald de Braose. Although negotiations dragged while the outcome of the war was still uncertain, reconciliation quickly followed the decisive battle of Lincoln in May 1217. On 23 June, all of the lands that William de Braose had held in England, Wales and Ireland were restored to Reginald. ¹⁵ This at once reversed the break-up of magnate authority in the marches of Wales and Ireland that King John had achieved from 1208 to 1211, and closed the door to Hubert de Burgh’s resumption of the Three Castles. One need only glance at the composition of the minority government in 1217 to understand this policy. The government was led by the regent, William Marshal, who, as earl of Pembroke and lord of Leinster, was one whose authority had been circumscribed by King John. Reginald de Braose’s brother-in-law, Walter de Lacy, was also a prominent member of the early council, as were other lords of the Welsh marches and Ireland. Throughout the civil war, the ranks of the royalist barons had had a heavy marcher contingent, and it should come as little surprise that the early minority government sought the active promotion of their interests.

⁋3This did not stop Hubert from attempting to recover the Three Castles. He brought a plaint before the justices in Herefordshire in 1217, where he echoed the new language of Magna Carta, declaring that King John had disseised him of the castles of his own volition, without judgement. ¹⁶ The precise merit of this claim is unclear, for as we have seen, what evidence exists shows that the Three Castles were committed to Hubert for his maintenance (ad se sustentandum), rather than in hereditary fee (as they had been to William de Braose in 1205). ¹⁷ Whatever the legality of Hubert’s declaration, Reginald de Braose seems to have ignored the court action, and, at a special session of the king’s council, was adjudged to have lost the suit by default. Consequently, on 8 December 1218, the sheriff of Herefordshire, Walter de Lacy, was notified of the court’s decision and ordered to deliver Hubert seisin of the Three Castles. ¹⁸ This was apparently easier said than done, for a month and a half later, on 26 January 1219, armed intervention was deemed necessary. Walter was reinforced by his fellow Welsh marcher lords, Hugh and Robert de Mortimer, Walter III and Roger Clifford, John of Monmouth, and others of the county, and once again ordered to deliver Hubert seisin. ¹⁹ It seems, however, that de Lacy was either reluctant to proceed militarily against his brother-in-law, unwilling to facilitate Hubert’s re-entry into the region, or determined to profit from the transaction, for he once again failed to deliver seisin.

⁋4That Walter de Lacy might refuse to carry out several royal mandates was down to the frailty of the crown’s position in the localities. During the civil war, in 1216, King John had elevated de Lacy to what one historian has described as the ‘virtual military governor of Herefordshire’ ²⁰ when the shrievalty and royal castle of Hereford, as well as the temporalities of the vacant see of Hereford, were added to de Lacy’s already significant holdings in the region. ²¹ While these offices may have been short term expedients aimed at securing the central march of Wales in the midst of combined Welsh and baronial aggression, King John’s unexpected death later that year, and the extended minority of his heir, King Henry III, crystallised de Lacy’s position in Herefordshire.

⁋5Of course, de Lacy’s position was not unique. All over England, men who had been installed in the shires as military governors when it looked as though the king’s grip on the kingdom might slip away remained in their posts long after the security of the realm no longer required their presence. Supported by the belief that the minority government could not overturn King John’s appointments, Walter and his fellow royalist sheriffs also continued the wartime practice of spending the fixed dues, proceeds of the county and hundred courts, and issues of the royal demesne manors within their shires as they saw fit, without first accounting for them at the Exchequer. ²² This was a crippling practice for the royal government, which was thereby denied the regular revenue from the localities upon which it largely depended. The situation was such that by 1220, Pope Honorius III wrote that the great men of England were ‘revelling on the royal goods while the king begs.’ ²³

⁋6Buoyed by his irrevocable commission as sheriff of Herefordshire, and his consolidation of power within the region, Walter de Lacy was able to negotiate with Hubert and the minority government from a position of strength. The latter was still in the unenviable position of having to bestow patronage on its loyal followers, while dealing with virtually untouchable administrators and inalienable royal demesne. What consequently ensued was a period of extensive negotiation and compromise.

⁋7For almost two years, Hubert de Burgh was forced to stand by as Walter de Lacy failed to deliver him seisin of the Three Castles. Hubert, titular justiciar since June 1215, had been overshadowed in the minority government by the regent William Marshal, who was plainly unwilling to press the matter with de Lacy or de Braose. Hubert’s political impuissance was to end in April 1219, however, when illness forced the Marshal to relinquish his hold on the government. ²⁴ Less than two weeks later, Hubert was handed the responsibility for attesting royal letters by a great council at Oxford, and although his authority was briefly circumscribed by the Marshal’s successor in the regency, the papal legate Pandulf, from mid June de Burgh was in possession of the great seal and essentially responsible for the day-to-day running of the royal government. It is also from this point that Hubert took on the dual financial and judicial roles of the justiciar, presiding over some sessions of the bench from 16 June 1219, and over the English Exchequer from Michaelmas 1219. ²⁵

⁋8Hubert quickly used his own position to influence matters. No sooner had de Burgh come into his own in the government, than the king’s council met in de Lacy’s bailiwick at Hereford from 28 June to 3 July 1219. This gave Hubert his chance to press the matter of the Three Castles. According to a letter that Walter de Lacy wrote to Hubert later that month, while at Hereford, Walter had complained to Hubert that he would be unable to render his shrieval account until Michaelmas. Hubert then gave Walter ‘good hope’ that the account would be respited. ²⁶ This, it seems, was the genesis of the Fine Roll entry of 21 July 1219, and it is likely that the Hereford council was the site of some negotiation between the two men.

⁋9The first sign of affiliation to come from their meeting was not the mandate for respite, however. On 4 July 1219, immediately after the Hereford council adjourned, Hubert de Burgh issued a royal letter granting Walter’s wife Margery de Braose 100 oaks for her religious foundation at Aconbury. ²⁷ In the last days of his life King John had granted Margery three carucates of land in the royal forest of Aconbury, to be assarted for the construction of a religious house for the souls of her father, mother and brother, whom John had hounded, and in the latter two cases actually starved to death. ²⁸ If Hubert de Burgh’s specific favour to Margery can be seen as a further inducement to assist Hubert in realising his claim to the Three Castles, it might indicate that family ties had played a part in Walter’s failure to wrest them from Margery’s brother Reginald de Braose earlier that year.

⁋10The matter did not end there, however. On the same day that Margery was granted her oaks, Hubert and the bishop of Winchester, Peter des Roches, appointed local knights and barons to act as commissioners in each county in order to inquire into unauthorised assarts made since Henry III’s coronation in all woods, royal or otherwise. All such assarts (and their proceeds) were to be taken into the king’s hand, and those responsible were to appear before justiciar and council on 16 August to show by what right they had made them. ²⁹ De Burgh then received a letter from one of the commissioners, Michael of Wales: ʻMichael Wallensis to Hubert de Burgh, justiciar of England. Informs Hubert that he has carried out his instructions concerning the assarts of Lady Margery de Lacy and concerning the woods of the monks of Dore. ³⁰ But they say that they wish to carry away the crops of the aforesaid assart, and the monks on their part wish to make their profit from their wood. Walter de Lacy has set footmen and horsemen in the bailiwick to oppose the justiciar and Michael so far as they can. Informs Hubert that Lady Margery de Lacy has sold the hundred oaks which Hubert had given to her…. Also reports that the aforesaid Lady Margery claims 33 oaks in Acornbir [Aconbury, Herefordshire] sold by John Marshal, and no one will buy them in the face of her prohibition. … Michael asks for instructions by letter concerning all these matters.ʼ ³¹ Hubert responded on 14 August saying that Margery ought to have peace touching the assarts of three carucates of land which King John had granted her, but that anything outside those three carucates ought to be seized and held until further orders. ³² Nothing more is heard of the matter of Walter’s armed intervention or of Margery’s misconduct over the oaks, but the fact that the de Lacys were willing to proceed thus in Walter’s bailiwick shows the degree of independence Walter must have felt.

⁋11It was thus while Walter openly opposed the justiciar’s commissioners in Herefordshire that Hubert issued the mandate to respite his shrieval account. As mentioned above, Walter wrote to the justiciar at some point in July, reminding him of their discussions at Hereford. ³³ On 21 July 1219, Hubert issued the desired order, ³⁴ which he followed up on 20 September with another letter to the same effect. ³⁵ Walter duly thanked the justiciar for his kindness, notified him that he was sending a clerk to account at the Exchequer, and asked for respite on several other royal debts that he owed. ³⁶

⁋12Despite the justiciar’s actions on his behalf, Walter still seems to have been unable, or unwilling, to prise the Three Castles from Reginald de Braose. In the same letter in which he had complained of Walter and Margery de Lacy, Hubert’s commissioner, Michael of Wales, wrote that ‘Reginald de Braose is selling and destroying the Wood of Scenfrid and Grosmund.’ ³⁷ The fact that Reginald de Braose was intensively exploiting at least two of the Three Castles despite a standing order for their transference to de Burgh, while Walter de Lacy, the man charged with that transference, set an armed force against the justiciar’s officials rather than de Braose shows just how little authority the minority government had in Herefordshire, and how much Hubert needed de Lacy’s support.

⁋13Unfortunately for Hubert, his attempts to win over Walter de Lacy were unsuccessful. Walter was again ordered to deliver seisin of the Three Castles to Hubert on 8 December, and once again declined to act. ³⁸ Notwithstanding his failure to deliver on their summer arrangement, a situation developed which brought de Lacy even closer to the justiciar. This had to do with the forest inquiries that Walter and others had openly resisted that summer. On 28 October 1219, the date assigned for those having made illegal assarts to come before the king’s council, ready to pay the price for the corn sown and to answer for their crimes, a large group of angry men instead laid complaints before Hubert and the council about the whole forest administration. In Carpenter’s words, ‘the initiative over assarts thus collapsed and was replaced by an impressive measure of appeasement.’ ³⁹ On 8 Nov 1219 Hubert wrote to the forest officials ordering them to behave amicably towards those within the forest so that ‘they no longer, through the oppressions of you and yours, have grounds for complaint.’ ⁴⁰ When faced with concerted resistance, Hubert thus went from chastising the barons as those in breach of forest law, to championing their cause against the very men whom he had sent after them in the first place. As a result, Walter de Lacy went from a possible disturber of the peace, to a victim of the unjust forest administration. Hubert accordingly ‘set things right’ by appointing Walter de Lacy to the forest administration of Gloucestershire. That order came on 13 December, five days after the final unsuccessful order for the delivery of the Three Castles to de Burgh. ⁴¹

⁋14Walter’s continued failure to deliver seisin prompted de Burgh to negotiate directly with Reginald de Braose. A compromise was eventually reached by which Hubert was to hold the castles of Reginald for a minimal service. ⁴² In light of the terms of each grant, David Carpenter is likely correct that Hubert recognised Reginald’s claim to be the stronger. ⁴³ Reginald certainly gained considerably from his compromise. He thereafter got the justiciar’s support in the case being brought against him by his nephew John de Braose, the son of Reginald’s elder brother William, who thought the de Braose inheritance rightly his. The precise intricacies of primogenital inheritance had yet to be thrashed out, meaning that John de Braose’s claim was potentially as strong as Reginald’s. As soon as January 1220, Hubert guided the king’s council to find in favour of Reginald. ⁴⁴

⁋15The 21 July 1219 respite to Walter de Lacy’s shrieval account was but one step in Hubert de Burgh’s campaign to secure seisin of the Three Castles of Grosmont, Skenfrith and Llantilio for himself. In this regard, the order was a bit of a damp squib. However, by placing the entry on the Fine Roll in context, it is hoped that something of the texture of local power and authority during the early minority of Henry III has been uncovered. Hubert de Burgh’s interest in the Three Castles was not merely the result of a random flexing of muscles as justiciar. His determination to obtain seisin bespeaks a personal interest. Similarly, the man charged with delivering Hubert the castles, the sheriff of Herefordshire, Walter de Lacy, was no disinterested royal administrator. Hubert de Burgh’s initial custody of the Three Castles had been used as a wedge between Walter and his wife’s family, the de Braoses, at the point of their alliance in 1201. The de Braose/de Lacy alliance nevertheless remained strong, until it was finally smashed by King John in 1210. Once the family of de Braose had been restored to prominence in the Welsh marches and Ireland in 1217, it is perhaps unsurprising that Walter de Lacy was reluctant to once again abridge their influence in the region by ousting his brother-in-law, Reginald de Braose, from the Three Castles.

⁋16Unfortunately for the justiciar, while he may have been able to procure a favourable court verdict in 1218, and several royal mandates thereafter, Walter de Lacy held the power in Herefordshire and the central march of Wales. Hubert’s grants to de Lacy were met with inaction, even open hostility if Michael of Wales be believed, which forced the justiciar to admit defeat and negotiate directly with Reginald de Braose. It is unsurprising that Hubert de Burgh remained a driving force behind the call for the resumption of royal lands and castles, which would have given him the ability to dismiss entrenched local officials like de Lacy. Hubert finally achieved this aim in the autumn of 1223, when the provision was published that the king should have legal age regarding the free disposition of his castles, lands and wardships. ⁴⁵ Walter de Lacy was the first sheriff to be removed. ⁴⁶

1.2.1. C 60/42, Fine Roll 3 Henry III (28 October 1218–27 October 1219), membrane 4

1.2.1.1. 344

⁋1 Concerning collecting an aid to the king’s use. Order to the barons of the Exchequer that since the king has granted Walter de Lacy respite, until Michaelmas in the third year, from rendering his account for the county of Herefordshire, they are to cause him to have peace in the meantime. Witness H. de Burgh, justiciar. By the same and the bishop of Winchester. Westminster, 21 July [1219].