THE ANTIQUARY’S BOOKS
GENERAL EDITOR: J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.
THE ROYAL FORESTS OF ENGLAND
[Illustration: THE GREENDALE OAK
(1720)]
THE ROYAL FORESTS
OF ENGLAND
BY
J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.
WITH FIFTY-THREE ILLUSTRATIONS
METHUEN & CO.
36 ESSEX STREET W.C.
LONDON
_First Published in 1905_
THIS ATTEMPT TO DELINEATE SOME OF THE MAIN FEATURES OF THE ROYAL FORESTS
OF ENGLAND
IS DEDICATED
WITH MUCH ADMIRATION AND RESPECT TO
RICHARD HISCO WHITWORTH
CHAPLAIN OF NEWSTEAD PRIORY AND FOR FORTY YEARS VICAR OF BLIDWORTH
IN RECOGNITION OF THE REMARKABLE GRIP THAT HE HAS OBTAINED OVER THE
FOREST-LORE OF SHERWOOD AND OF HIS SKILL AS A MODERN BALLAD-WRITER ON THE
OLD ROMANTIC LINES
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. EARLY FORESTS 1
II. THE FOREST COURTS 10
III. THE FOREST OFFICERS 17
IV. THE BEASTS OF THE FOREST 25
V. THE FOREST AGISTMENTS 41
VI. HOUNDS AND HUNTING 47
VII. THE TREES OF THE FOREST 68
VIII. LATER FOREST HISTORY 76
IX. THE FORESTS OF NORTHUMBERLAND,
CUMBERLAND, WESTMORELAND, AND
DURHAM 87
X. THE FORESTS OF LANCASHIRE 98
XI. THE FORESTS OF YORKSHIRE—PICKERING
AND GALTRES 107
XII. THE FORESTS OF CHESHIRE 131
XIII. THE FORESTS OF STAFFORDSHIRE 137
XIV. THE FOREST OF THE HIGH PEAK 150
XV. DUFFIELD FRITH 181
XVI. SHERWOOD FOREST 204
XVII. THE FORESTS OF SHROPSHIRE,
WORCESTER, WARWICK, AND HEREFORD 223
XVIII. THE FORESTS OF LEICESTERSHIRE AND
RUTLAND 231
XIX. THE FOREST OF ROCKINGHAM 237
XX. THE FOREST OF OXFORDSHIRE 257
XXI. THE FORESTS OF BERKSHIRE,
BUCKINGHAMSHIRE, AND
HUNTINGDONSHIRE 266
XXII. THE FOREST OF DEAN 274
XXIII. THE FOREST OF ESSEX 283
XXIV. THE FOREST OF WINDSOR 287
XXV. THE FORESTS OF SUSSEX 301
XXVI. THE FORESTS OF HAMPSHIRE 304
XXVII. THE FORESTS OF WILTS 313
XXVIII. THE FORESTS OF DORSETSHIRE 330
XXIX. THE FORESTS OF SOMERSETSHIRE 333
XXX. THE FOREST OF DARTMOOR 340
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
PAGE
Verderer’s Slab, Bakewell 17
J. Charles Wall.
Verderer’s Slab, Chelmorton 18
J. Charles Wall.
Forester’s Slab, Wirksworth 18
J. Charles Wall.
Forester’s Slab, Bakewell 19
J. Charles Wall.
Forester’s Slab, Hope 19
J. Charles Wall.
Forester’s Slab, Hope 21
J. Charles Wall.
Forester’s Slab, Papplewick 21
J. Charles Wall.
Woodward’s Slab, Newcastle-on-Tyne 23
J. Charles Wall.
Woodward’s Slab, Papplewick 23
J. Charles Wall.
Hunting Dogs 51
Berners or Harbourers 55
Wyrall Effigy 66
Wyrall Effigy 67
Deer Hunters of Cranborne Chase 83
V. M. M. Cox.
Hunting Costume, Seventeenth Century 89
Chief Forester’s Slab, Durham 97
J. Charles Wall.
Hunting Costume, Thirteenth Century 182
Letters in Centre of Oak 221
Hunting Costume, Fourteenth Century 238
Cattle Brands, Essex Forest 285
The Hart (Turbervile) 298
King and Queen Oaks, New Forest 308
M. E. Purser.
The Hare (Turbervile) 334
LIST OF PLATES
The Greendale Oak _Frontispiece_
From Strutt’s _Sylva Britannica_, 1826.
I. The King Hunting (1) _To face page_ 4
Brit. Mus. MSS., Royal 10 E. iv., ff. 253-4.
II. The King Hunting (2) ” 8
Brit. Mus. MSS., Royal 10 E. iv., ff. 255-6.
III. Head of Attachment Court Roll ” 14
Accounts Exch. Q. R., 134/16, _temp._ Edw. II.
IV. Red Deer ” 26
From Gilpin’s _Forest Scenery_, 1791.
V. Wild Boars ” 30
Brit. Mus. MSS., Add. 27, 699.
VI. Wolf and Sheepfold and Wild Goats ” 32
Brit. Mus. MSS., Royal 12 C. xix., ff. 14, 19.
VII. Pigs of the New Forest ” 42
From Gilpin’s _Forest Scenery_, 1791.
VIII. Netting in Woods and Streams ” 58
Brit. Mus. MSS., Cott., Tib. A. vii., f. 51.
IX. The Four Beasts of Venery ” 60
X. The Four Beasts of Chase ” 62
XI. The Four Beasts of Sport ” 64
Plates IX., X., and XI., are from Cott. MSS.,
Vesp. B. xii., ff. 1, 2.
XII. Maple Tree, Boldre Churchyard ” 72
From Strutt’s _Sylva Britannica_, 1826.
XIII. Straw Helmets and Swindgel of the Deer-hunters
of Cranborne Chase ” 84
V. M. M. Cox.
XIV. Deer Stalking ” 102
Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 27, 699, ff. 108-9.
XV. Forest Hermit ” 108
Brit. Mus. MSS., Royal 19 E. iii., f. 133.
XVI. Berner and Limehound, and Crossbow Shooting ” 122
XVII. Dog Leeching and Rewarding the Hounds ” 140
XVIII. Foxes, Deer in Forest, and Wolves ” 164
Plates XVI., XVII., and XVIII. are from Add.
MSS., 27, 699, ff. 6, 20, 23, 28, 50, 58, 109.
XIX. Sherwood Forester of Fee, Skegby Church ” 204
Photograph from the Rev. H. J. Stamper.
XX. Monument of Thomas Leake, Blidworth Church ” 216
Photograph from the Rev. R. H. Whitworth.
XXI. Haywood Oaks, Blidworth ” 222
Photographs from Rev. R. H. Whitworth.
XXII. Ladies Rabbiting ” 304
Brit. Mus. MSS., Royal 10 E. iv.
XXIII. The Hill Woods, Lyndhurst ” 316
From “The New Forest,” Horace G. Hutchinson.
XXIV. A Deer Leap, Wolseley Park ” 330
W. Salt, _Arch. Soc._, vol. v.
PREFACE
County historians have, as a rule, with but rare exceptions, either
entirely ignored the story of the royal forests within their confines,
or have treated the subject after the most meagre fashion. Nevertheless,
there is abundant and most interesting material for their history at the
Public Record Office in a mass of documents which are but very rarely
consulted. Occasionally, too, much can be gleaned from manuscripts at the
British Museum, Cambridge University Library, Guildhall, or Lincoln’s
Inn, and in a few cases from rolls or books of forest proceedings in
private hands.
If references had been given to every document cited, almost every page
would have bristled with footnotes, involving a considerable curtailment
of the rest of the letterpress. Not a single statement, however, is
made—where no author is cited—save on the authority of original and
contemporary records.
It may be helpful to some to state the chief classes of documents whence
forest lore is to be obtained in the vast national depository in Chancery
Lane.
(1) Placitæ Foresta, or Forest Proceedings, Chancery—John to Charles
I.—consisting of presentments, claims, perambulations, etc., before the
Justices in Eyre of the Forests. They are contained in 156 bundles, and
an inventory of their contents will be found in the Dep.-Master of Rolls
Reports, v., App. ii., 46-56.
(2) Swainmote Court Rolls of Windsor, 2 Edw. VI. to 14 Charles I.
Inventory in Report, v., App. ii., 57-9.
(3) Forest Proceedings, Exchequer, Treasury of Receipt, Henry III. to
Charles II. To these documents there are three volumes of MS. Calendars.
(4) Miscellaneous Books of Exchequer, Treasury of Receipt, vol. 75,
Edw. I.; assarts and wastes in diverse forests, vol. 76; pleas and
presentments of Sherwood, Hen. III. to Edw. III.; vol. 77, game in all
forests north of the Trent, 30 Hen. VIII.
(5) A Book of Orders concerning Royal Forests, 1637-1648. State Papers,
Domestic, Charles I., vol. 384.
(6) Records of Duchy of Lancaster. A great variety of forest
presentments, attachments, perambulations, pleas, etc., Hen. III. to
James I., pertain to Lancashire, Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire,
etc. A printed list of all the Duchy Records was issued in 1901; those
relating to forests are on pp. 39-47. Among the maps and plans (pp.
76-80) are many relating to the Forest of the High Peak.
(7) Lists of Minister Accounts, with thorough indexes, were issued in
1899; much royal forest information occurs in many of these accounts.
(8) Occasionally Court Rolls of Manors, etc., yield information; these
also have printed lists and indexes, issued in 1896.
(9) Both Close and Patent Rolls for the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries abound in royal forest incidents; they have been well
calendered (printed) for the greater part of this period.
As to these records, I have a large number of references and brief
extracts—far more than are used in the following pages—for the different
counties, and I would gladly on application save trouble, if I could, to
any genuine worker as to a particular forest or forests.
With regard to printed books that bear on the subject, references to
the more important will be found in each of the chapters; but there are
three of such real value on this little studied subject that they demand
special mention.
In 1887, Mr. W. R. Fisher published a 4to volume on _The Forest of Essex:
its History, Laws, Administration, and Ancient Customs, and the Wild Deer
which lived in it_. The book owed its origin to the spirited action of
the Corporation of the City of London, in rescuing much of the illegally
enclosed land of Epping Forest; it is based throughout on documentary
evidence, and illustrates, in many ways, forest law and procedure in
other counties besides Essex.
The documents relative to the Yorkshire _Forest of Pickering_ are
exceptionally voluminous and interesting. They sufficed to fill four
volumes of the new series of the North Riding Record Society, and were
put forth by Mr. R. B. Turton between 1894-7. I had obtained transcripts
of many of these documents in 1890, and made considerable extracts from
others in 1902-3 before I was acquainted with these books. They are not
well arranged, but both transcripts and introductions are of the greatest
value to the forest student, particularly of the fourteenth century.
In 1901 the Selden Society issued Mr. G. J. Turner’s _Select Pleas of
the Forest_, the one masterly work on English forest law and procedure,
more especially of the thirteenth century. To this admirable volume these
pages are much indebted, and from it not infrequent quotations have
by leave been taken. I desire also here to gratefully acknowledge the
help I have received from Mr. Turner, outside his published work, and
particularly for his reading the proof of the earlier chapters, though it
is not to be understood that he is responsible for any statements. It is
much to be hoped that Mr. Turner will ere long produce another book on
the later Forest Pleas in the time of their decadence.
Passing long periods of my earlier life within the bounds of two old
royal forests, Exmoor, Somerset, and Duffield Frith, Derbyshire, and
living subsequently close to the confines of the Staffordshire forests
of Kinver, Cannock, and Needwood, the subject treated of in these pages
has always had for me a particular fascination. Accidentally meeting in
early life with a copy of that very rare little work, Dryden’s edition
of _L’Art de Venerie_ (1843), by William Twici, huntsman to Edward
II., which is described in chapter vi., made me desire to know more
about the subject. Thirty years later I had the good fortune to make
the acquaintance of that rare old antiquary and sportsman, the late Sir
Henry Dryden, Bart. Various discussions and correspondence on England’s
forest law and early hunting led to his desiring me to bring out a new
and extended edition of his valuable little treatise. The project got
deferred, but this book, in which his drawings of hunting costumes and
hounds are reproduced, to some extent fulfils his wishes.
No one is better aware of the deficiencies of these pages than the
writer. It would have been easy enough to have found original material
sufficient to fill a volume of this size for almost each of the forests
named therein; in some cases, such as the Peak Forest, Rockingham, and
more especially Sherwood, it seemed almost sinful to be content with
such brief summaries of a few of the more important facts. Nevertheless,
it seemed best on the whole to condense the entire matter within the
limits (kindly made more elastic in this case) assigned to the series
of “Antiquary’s Books.” In doing this, certain sections that had been
prepared on such subjects as the Clergy and Forest Pleas, Historic Trees,
Place and Personal Names in Forest Districts, and a Glossary of Terms had
to be abandoned. In the heartless work of cutting down, by more than one
half, the material prepared for the press, as well as in other ways, I
had the timely assistance of my son, Mr. Cuthbert Machell Cox.
It might be well for the reader interested in any particular forest or
shire to recollect that illustrations of any special topic treated of in
the opening chapters are not, as a rule, repeated subsequently; reference
to the index will often supplement information given under the chapter
on a definite shire. It is hoped, too, that the index will serve as a
glossary, as each forest term used is explained once or oftener in the
text.
The absence of any reference to the counties of Bedford, Cambridge,
Cornwall, Hertford, Lincoln, Middlesex, Monmouth, Norfolk, and Suffolk,
arises from the fact that there is practically no information with
regard to any royal forests within their confines.
If these pages arouse greater interest in the much neglected story of
England’s royal forests, it will be an abundant reward for no small
amount of time and trouble expended on record searching and on general
reading in the pursuit of a subject that was at one time so widely
developed, and had so great an influence on our social and economic life.
J. CHARLES COX
ST. ALBANS, SYDENHAM
_July, 1905_
THE ROYAL FORESTS OF ENGLAND
CHAPTER I
EARLY FORESTS
“A forest,” according to the last edition of the _Encyclopædia
Britannica_, “is a tract of country covered with trees, of one or
several species, or with trees and underwood.” This has become the
popularly accepted meaning of the term for several generations, but it is
historically false; and so far as this volume is concerned, we have to go
back to Manwood’s definition as expressed in his _Lawes of the Forest_
(1598), wherein he describes a forest as “a certen territorie of wooddy
grounds and fruitfull pastures, priviledged for wild beasts and foules of
forrest, chase, and warren, to rest and abide in, in the safe protection
of the king, for his princely delight and pleasure.”
But even Manwood, and others who have followed him, are not correct in
assuming that the term originally, or of necessity, implied woody grounds
or natural woodland. Dr. Wedgwood seems to be right in considering
“forest” as a modified form of the Welsh _gores_, _gorest_, waste, waste
ground; whence the English word _gorse_, furze, the growth of waste land.
Others consider its derivation to be from the Latin _foris_, out of
doors, the unenclosed open land. From the fact that so many wastes were
covered with wood or undergrowth, it gradually came about that the term
“forest” was applied to a great wood.
Perhaps the following definition is as accurate a one as can be given in
a few words, of what used to be understood by the English term “forest”
in Norman, Plantagenet, and early Tudor days. A forest was a portion of
territory consisting of extensive waste lands, and including a certain
amount of both woodland and pasture, circumscribed by defined metes and
bounds, within which the right of hunting was reserved exclusively to the
king, and which was subject to a special code of laws administered by
local as well as central ministers.
Had the true meaning of the old term “forest” been grasped, much waste
of learning, and of vain strivings to prove that such barren tracts as
by far the greater part of the forests of Dartmoor, of Exmoor, and of
the High Peak, or even of the larger portion of the New Forest were
wood-covered in historic times, might have been spared.
A chase was, like a forest, unenclosed and only defined by metes and
bounds, but could be held by a subject. Offences committed therein were,
as a rule, punishable by the Common Law and not by forest jurisdiction,
though swainmotes were sometimes held therein, proving that they had
originally been royal forests. The terms “chase” and “forest” were
occasionally used interchangeably, owing to a chase having been secured
by the Crown, or the Crown having granted a royal forest to a subject.
A park was an enclosure, fenced off by pales or a wall. In certain
forests there were various parks, as in Duffield Frith, and Needwood,
and Sherwood; and in most, at least one or two; but many parks were held
throughout the country by subjects under Crown licence, altogether apart
from forests. Forest law prevailed in parks within a forest, but not in
those outside such limits. An Elizabethan estimate, of doubtful value,
states that the old royal forests were sixty-nine in number, and that
there were in addition thirteen chases and more than seven hundred parks.
The term “warren” also requires brief discussion. The public had a right
to hunt wild animals in any unenclosed land outside forest limits,
unless such right had been restricted by some special royal grant. The
word “warren”—the subject is ably treated by Mr. Turner (_Forest Pleas_,
cxxiii.-cxxxiv.)—was used to denote either the exclusive right of hunting
and taking certain beasts (_feræ naturæ_) in a particular place, or the
land over which such right existed. Grants of free-warren over demesne
lands outside forests, so frequently made by our earlier kings both
to religious foundations and to private individuals, prevented anyone
entering on such lands to hunt or to take anything belonging to the
warren without the owner’s licence, under the great penalty of £10. No
one might, therefore, follow the hunt of a hare or of a fox or other
vermin into warrenable land; but following the hunt of deer into such
land was held to be no trespass, as deer were not beasts of the warren.
Lords of warrens had the power of impounding the greyhounds or other
dogs, and the nets and snares of trespassers.
In the consideration of England’s old forests, it is well to remember
that subjects from time to time, in different shires, were seized of
lands within forest bounds; but, when that was the case, they were not
allowed on such lands the right of hunting, or of cutting trees, or of
high fence making, or of doing anything which could be interpreted as
detrimental to the deer, save by special grant from the Crown.
It has been pointed out by Mr. Turner that the history of English forests
divides itself into three periods, namely, from the earliest times up to
1217, when the Charter of the Forest of Henry III. was granted; from that
date up to 1301, when large tracts were disafforested by Edward I.; and
thirdly, from 1301 up to the present day.
As to the story of the forests in the first of these periods, it must
largely partake of the nature of conjecture based upon subsequent
knowledge.
As the Romans gradually made themselves masters of England, they must
have destroyed much of the vast extent of woods that gave shelter to the
British tribes. This work of destruction—begun in the later prehistoric
stage—was accelerated by two other causes, apart from military reasons;
wooded districts were cleared in order to use the richer tracts for
tillage and pasturage; whilst the greater attention paid to iron and lead
smelting led to a steady diminution in timber through the demands for
fuel.
The Saxons made further development of iron smelting works. This gradual
clearance of the natural woods, coupled with enclosures of land round
homesteads and settlements, drove back the deer and other game into the
depths of the woods and the more desolate districts.
These wilder tracts were used as common hunting grounds; but in course
of time the chieftains and more powerful local men usurped the rights
hitherto exercised by all. Eventually, as the Saxon overlords or kings
gained greater power, they claimed, as part of their royal prerogative,
the right to reserve the chase, or at all events the higher chase of
the deer, in selected areas chosen for their nearness to favourite
residences, or for the exceptional predominance of game. The royal
hunting grounds (_silva regis_) as well as the king’s lands or royal
demesnes (_terra regis_) were gradually formed out of the original
folkland held by the common people under their thegn; so that when
Egbert, in the ninth century, became the first king of all England, he
found himself possessed of many royal hunting grounds in most parts of
his kingdom.
During the later Saxon and Danish period the chase became more and more
restricted. The freeholder still had the right to kill the big game on
his own land, but might not follow it into or upon the king’s woods. The
lesser game could, however, be then followed even in the king’s woods by
the holder of the land, up to the time of the Conquest.
In this, as in so many other respects, the mention of forests or woods in
Domesday Survey is merely incidental. The name of swainmote, as applied
to a minor forest court of local administration, which so long survived
and was of such general use, is in itself sufficient to establish the
fact that there was a pre-Norman customary forest law. The question as to
the first introduction of a body of written forest law in this country
depends largely upon the genuineness of the code usually attributed to
Canute, and termed _Constitutiones de Foresta_. This Latin code, in
thirty-four brief chapters, purports to have been drawn up by Canute
both for the English and the Danes. Although its authenticity was long
ago doubted by Coke, it has been quoted by many able writers, such as
Palgrave and Kemble, without the expression of any doubt as to it being
a genuine historic document; but Professor Freeman and Bishop Stubbs
subsequently adduced such weighty reasons for considering this code a
forgery, or at all events containing so many interpolations as to be
valueless, that present-day scholars are almost unanimous in rejecting
it. The best defence of it is to be found in Mr. Fisher’s _Forest of
Essex_. On the whole, it seems probable that this Latin code has a
certain value in showing the general drift and tendency of Anglo-Danish
forest law; but that its worth has been vitiated by being dressed up
at the hands of some Norman scribe, with the object of lessening the
hostility to the severity of the forest laws introduced by the Conqueror.
[Illustration: _PLATE I_
THE KING HUNTING (1) (FIFTEENTH CENTURY)]
The Conqueror acquired, by right of conquest, not only the demesne
lands of the Confessor and of the nobles who had opposed him, but also
all the rights of the chase over great woodland or open stretches of
both cultivated and uncultivated ground, where royal hunting rights had
previously been exercised by Saxon or Danish kings. With William and
his immediate successors the chase was a passion, and hence a code of
singularly harsh and burdensome “forest” laws soon came into operation.
The Conqueror took advantage of the autocratic position secured to him
and his followers by their military success, to carry out “afforestation”
not only over the restricted areas that had been the hunting grounds of
his predecessors on the throne, but over almost all the old folkland that
remained unenclosed. The term “forest,” that had been long in like use
on parts of the Continent, was then introduced into England, and made to
embrace vast districts, which included woodlands and wild wastes of moor,
as well as patches of cultivated land. Within these afforested tracts,
he decreed that the right of hunting was vested solely in the Crown,
and could only be exercised by the king, or by those who were specially
privileged under royal licence to share in it. The feudal idea about all
wild animals, however monstrous and harsh in operation, possessed a rough
logical basis. It was argued that all such animals were _bona vacantia_,
or ownerless property, and hence pertained to the king; that hunting
was essentially the pastime or “game” of kings; and that therefore the
right of exercising the chase, or taking all kinds of beasts of venery,
belonged solely to the king.
The subsequent Norman kings added more or less largely to the “forest”
districts of England, making even whole counties subject to this
exceptional jurisdiction—as, for instance, Essex and Surrey. The
complaints of the hardships caused by this autocratic proceeding
gradually gained strength. Certain disafforestations were made even
by Henry II.; but in 1215 John was compelled to agree, by one of the
articles of Magna Charta, to the disafforesting of all the great tracts
of country which had been made forest during his own reign.
Soon after this, in 1217, the child-king Henry was made to issue the
Charter of the Forest, in consideration of a grant of one-fifteenth of
all movables of the whole kingdom. By this instrument it was provided
that all forests, which Henry II. had afforested, should be viewed by
good and lawful men; and that all that had been made forest, other than
his own royal demesne, was forthwith to be disafforested.
In accordance with this charter special perambulations were ordered to be
made before March, 1224-5, by twelve knights elected for the purpose.
There is much confusion among both national and local historians as to
the number and extent of England’s forests at this period; and certain
of our State documents appear to be somewhat contradictory. Fortunately,
however, a great gale, that affected almost the whole of England towards
the close of the year 1222, was the incidental cause of furnishing the
longest extant list, of an early date, of England’s royal forests. The
windfall was so considerable, that Henry III. issued orders to the forest
officials not to interfere with any of the prostrate trees or broken
branches until further orders, and at once to proceed to draw up a
careful valuation of their worth. Letters to this effect were despatched
to—
_Viridariis et forestariis de feodo de foresta_ de Dene, Nova Foresta,
Brikestok, Braden, Rokingham, Lye, Brehull (Bucks), Galteriz, Windlesore,
inter Usam et Derewentem, Huntindonie, Shirewud, Rotelande, Clive
(Northants), Brunningemor (Berks), Cumberland, Penber (Hants), comitatus
Leicestrie, Clay (Salop), Lya (Salop), Melkesham and Chipeham, Cet,
Savernac (Wilts), Northumberland, Lancastria, Salopa, Kenefer, Canoc,
Alrewas, Hopwas, Kenillewurth (_haia et parco_), Selewud, Nerechirch
(Somerset), Graveling, Gillingeham, Pikering, Porcestre, Essexie,
Wichewud, Axisholt, Notingham, and Periton (_parco_).
At the same time, like injunctions were forwarded to the keepers of each
of these forests. On 30th January, 1223, the king instructed the sheriffs
of all the counties containing forests to place the money accruing
from the sale of the windfall in some religious house within their
jurisdiction, there to await further orders, and to place with it a roll
giving full particulars of the sales, drawn up by a specially appointed
clerk named in the letters patent.
The heading to these instructions on the Patent and Close Rolls of Henry
III. is _De Cableicio_. The term _cableicium_, or _cablicium_ signifies
windfallen trees, and corresponds to the old French word _chablis_, which
had a like meaning. It is quite clear that the term “cablish” (to use the
English form), strictly speaking, implies uprooted trees, as distinct
from mere branches. The forest officials, after the great gale, were
ordered to remove nothing, _nec de cableicio illo neque de branchura per
impulsionem venti prostrata_. Nevertheless, the word was occasionally
given a wider meaning—as, for instance, in 1223, when _cableicium_ was
applied to twelve great branches that had fallen in Windsor forest. But
in this case the wood was sufficiently substantial to be reserved for the
repair of the king’s houses. Cablish seems never to have been applied
to such windstrewn wood as would be used for fuel. We have met with the
word in several forest rolls or records in Northamptonshire, Rutland,
Hampshire, and Derbyshire as late as the time of Henry VII.; though at
that period the English word _rotefallen_, or _rootefaler_, was more
usual as descriptive of the tree uprooted by the wind, and was used in
distinction to the mere _wyndfallen_ wood of smaller dimensions.
Other forests that occur in the Patent and Close Rolls of the earlier
years of Henry III., which are not specifically named in the great storm
order of 1222, are: Alnwick, Northumberland; Easingwold and Wakefield,
Yorks; Clipston and Silverston, Northants; Acornbury and Kilpeck,
Hereford; Peak Forest and Horston, Derbyshire; Alveston, Furches,
Keynsham, and Horewood, Gloucester; Feckenham, Worcester; Cheddar and
Selwood, Somerset; Freemantle, Hants; Buckholt, Clarendon, Ifwood,
Sugrave, and Weybridge, Wilts; Poorstock, Dorset; Finmere and Woodstock,
Oxon; and Havering, Essex.
Edward I. in some cases broke the Forest Charter under legal quibbles;
but he did not, in general, desire that the boundaries of the forest as
settled by his father, should be disturbed. Towards the end of his reign,
however, strong political pressure induced him to consent to further
disafforesting. The Forest Charter was confirmed in 1297, but further
perambulations were undertaken between that date and 1301, by which large
reductions were made in the forest area.
It would have caused general disturbance to the industries of the
country, if the pursuit of special occupations pertaining to the soil
had been prohibited within the very wide areas of the forests. Such
industries were allowed to be followed under particular restrictions, and
were worked, as a rule, for the profit of the crown. The most important
of these was the question of iron smelting, particularly as the forges
consumed so large an amount of wood or charcoal. Grants were made from
the crown for permission to have itinerant forges. Such forges abounded
in the Forest of Dean, and were also met with in the forests of Sussex,
Duffield, Sherwood, Pickering, etc.
Henry III., in 1231, granted this liberty (_forgia itinerans_) to Mabel
de Cantilupe for life in Dean Forest. The grant states this was in
accordance with a custom sanctioned by John and other of the king’s royal
ancestors. Another grant of the following year provided that the lady
might have an oak on each of any fifteen days she chose, every year as
long as she lived, for the support of this forge.
The symbol of a man who was entitled to use an itinerant forge seems to
have been a pair of bellows. This symbol is to be found on two early
incised slabs in the church of Papplewick, Sherwood Forest.
In some cases there were permanent forges of some size, belonging to the
crown, within the forest bounds; of this there were two instances in
Duffield Frith.
[Illustration: _PLATE II_
THE KING HUNTING (2) (FIFTEENTH CENTURY)]
In the Belper ward of Duffield Frith there was considerable surface
coal mining; on Dartmoor and Exmoor there were particular regulations
affecting the procuring of peat; whilst in other forests the quarrying of
stone for building purposes, for millstones and for tombstones, as well
as the burning of lime and digging of marl were pursued, but in all cases
with due regard for the non-disturbance of the deer. Such callings were
confined to particular sites, as far as possible on the fringes of the
forest.
The following of trades that were obviously detrimental to the deer,
through odour or otherwise, such as the tanning of hides, were rigorously
prohibited within forest bounds.
“Purlieu,” strictly speaking, was all that ground near any forest which
had originally been forest by perambulation of Henry II., Richard I.,
or John, but had been severed by the Forest Charter of Henry III. Round
some forests the purlieus were of considerable extent. As a rule, the
purlieu man had certain forest agistment and other rights, but of
considerable less value than the actual forest tenant; in return for
this he was subject to a modified form of forest law, the chief of which
was the non-disturbance of deer that he might find among his crops. The
tenants on the outskirts of Galtres forest, Yorks, and of Duffield Frith,
Derbyshire, were termed “bounderers”; they had certain privileges as well
as obligations.
The purlieu custom varied much in different districts and passed under
various local terms. Such were the _Wynlands_, or _Wydelands_, of the
Peak, and the _Venville_ of Dartmoor. Cranborne Chase, which was nearly
identical with a forest, had its well-defined _Inbounds_ and _Outbounds_.
The old name of _Outwoods_ is not infrequently to be found in the
vicinity of an old forest, as at Duffield, Clarendon, and Kinver; its use
denotes that the place so called was formerly within the forest purlieus.
The forest of Clarendon had its _Inlodges_ and _Outlodges_.