Malpas
A history of medieval Malpas and
its deeper roots
|
Return to the Home Page of the Bakers Family part of the website |
The Bakers of Highfields Story
The Story of the Dods and Bakers and of Highfields,
Fenton House and Hasfield Court. A journey through the history of Cheshire and
Staffordshire, an Anglo-Saxon nobleman who retained his lands after the
Conquest, pottery at Stoke on Trent, an encounter with Elgar, and the history
of an Elizabethan manor house at Audlem |
The family tree of the Bakers of Highfields |
The Family Tree of the Dods, predecessors to the
Bakers of Highfields |
The Bakers of
Fenton House and Hasfield Court
The Family Tree of the pottery Bakers of Stoke on Trent |
The Family Tree of the Bellyse Family |
The main part
of this website tells the story of the Farndale family from Yorkshire Descendants of Arthur Baker, the story of the
Farndale ancestry is told through the main part of this website You can also return to the Farndale
website home page |
The genealogy of the family of James Hall, linked to
the Baker family through marriage to Arthur Baker |
Headlines of are
in brown.
Dates are in red.
Hyperlinks to
other pages are in dark
blue.
References and
citations are in turquoise.
Context and local
history are in purple.
Roman
40 to
50 CE
Discovered by a metal detectorist on 9 January 2014, the Malpas
Hoard is a collection of 35 ancient coins buried around 40 to 50 CE. The
find includes 28 Roman denarii struck during the Roman Republic and
early Empire, alongside 7 Iron Age British coins minted by the Western (Dobunni) and Southern (Atrebates)
tribes.
The latest coin in the stash features the Emperor Tiberius (14 to
37 CE). Because the coins show minimal wear, historians believe the hoard was buried
within a decade of the Roman invasion of Britain in 43 CE, likely shortly
before Roman troops pushed further north into Cheshire.
The presence of early Roman denarii buried alongside
regional Iron Age currencies suggests that the area was a site of cultural
integration and wealth accumulation. The hoard was likely buried for
safekeeping around due to the instability caused by the advancing Roman army.
100 CE
Malpas was positioned directly along a vital Roman transportation route.
A known Roman road ran right through the village, linking the major legionary
fortress of Deva Victrix (modern-day Chester) with the Roman settlements
at Bovium (Tilston) and Mediolanum
(Whitchurch).
103 CE
The Roman Malpas Tabula, commonly known as the Malpas Diploma,
is a remarkably well-preserved Roman military discharge diploma dating to 19
January 103 CE. Discovered in 1812 in Bickley, near Malpas, Cheshire, the
document is inscribed on two joining copper-alloy (bronze) plates and currently
resides in the British Museum (British Museum 1813,1211.2).
It is celebrated as one of the most complete Roman diplomas ever found in
Britain (see also Watkin, W Thompson (1886,
reprinted 1974), Roman
Cheshire : A Description of Roman Remains in the
County of Cheshire pages
286 to 291).
The document was officially issued by the Emperor Trajan to Reburrus, a Spanish decurion, a junior cavalry officer, who
served in the 1st Pannonian cavalry regiment (Ala I Pannoniorum
Tampiana) stationed in Britannia. Having
completed 25 years of honourable auxiliary service, Reburrus
was officially granted Roman citizenship and the connubium, the right to
form a legally recognized marriage. Because Roman diplomas replicated an imperial
decree listing entire regional deployments, the text names four cavalry units (alae)
and eleven infantry units (cohortes) active in
Britain at the start of the second century CE. This provides historians with a
snapshot of the exact composition and strength of the Roman army occupying
Britain at the time.
Anglo-Saxon
The Anglo-Saxons inherited a site of established value. The
settlement sat directly along an important Roman road running south from the
Roman fortress city of Chester.
During the Anglo-Saxon period, the settlement today known as
Malpas was an important administrative, religious, and defensive hub along the
turbulent border between the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of Mercia and Wales.
The town’s long-standing connection to St. Oswald, the patron
saint of the local church, strongly points to its Anglo-Saxon roots. Mercian
rulers actively promoted the cult of St. Oswald along the Welsh Marches to
foster religious solidarity and political identity among the local populace.
c 900
CE
Historians suggest that Malpas may have functioned as a Saxon burh,
a fortified town. During the late ninth and early tenth centuries, rulers like Æthelræd II and Æthelflæd, Lady
of the Mercians, heavily fortified the western borders to defend against Welsh
raids.
1050 CE
Prior to the Conquest, Malpas was part of the significant
landholdings of Earl Edwin. Earl Edwin of Mercia was one of the most powerful
Anglo-Saxon magnates in England on the eve of the 1066 Norman Conquest. As the head
of the historic House of Mercia, he ruled an immense territory stretching from
Gloucester up into Yorkshire. Edwin was the son of Earl Ælfgar
and the grandson of Earl Leofric and Lady Godiva. He inherited the Earldom of
Mercia in 1062. Alongside his younger brother Morcar, the Earl of Northumbria,
Edwin controlled the entire northern and western halves of the English kingdom.
Cheshire was the epicentre of Edwin’s absolute regional dominance. Edwin was by
far the greatest landowner in Cheshire. Uniquely, the English King held no
personal estates in Cheshire under his direct control; all comital power and
standard royal revenues belonged effectively to Edwin.
Edwin had financial interests in Cheshire's salt production
industry, the Wiches, such as Nantwich and
Northwich, controlling the tolls, pits, and trade routes that generated
substantial wealth.
1066
For Edwin, Cheshire was a critical military buffer zone. The House
of Mercia operated its own independent foreign policy, frequently negotiating,
clashing, or forming alliances with the Welsh princes across the border.
Though he and his brother successfully repelled early Viking
raids, Edwin and Morcar were defeated by Harald
Hardrada at the Battle of Fulford in September 1066. Due to the fallout from
this battle, Edwin arrived too late to assist King Harold Godwinson at the
Battle of Hastings. Following Harold's death, Edwin initially submitted to William
the Conqueror. However, after realising the oppressive nature of Norman rule,
and after William reneged on a promise to let Edwin marry his daughter, Edwin
launched multiple rebellions. In 1071, while trying to flee to Scotland, he was
betrayed by members of his own retinue and killed by the Normans.
Following the Battle of Hastings, Anglo-Saxon lands were seized.
Due to its strategic position on an elevated ridge overlooking the Dee Valley and
the Welsh mountains, the area around Malpas became a vital frontier zone on the Welsh Marches.
1069
Because Cheshire was a primary stronghold of Edwin and his
loyalists, it became a fierce centre of anti-Norman resistance. After crushing
a major Western uprising in the winter of 1069–1070, William the Conqueror
brutally retaliated. As part of the Harrying of the North,
Norman armies systematically laid waste to Cheshire, burning crops, destroying
villages, and slaughtering livestock. Edwin's extensive lands were entirely
confiscated and used by William to create the Honor of Chester, a highly
independent County Palatine given to the King's ruthless nephew, Hugh Lupus. By
the time the Domesday Survey was compiled in 1086, vast swathes of Edwin's
formerly fertile Cheshire estates were grimly marked with a single Latin word wasta,
wasteland.
Norman and Medieval
c 1070
William the Conqueror created the Earldom of Chester. To secure
the western border against Welsh raids, a concentrated line of defensive
fortifications was established. Malpas and its surrounding lands were granted
to Robert FitzHugh, who became the first Norman Baron
of Malpas.
From this circumstance of local strength,
produced partly by the yielding nature of the soil, and partly by the
inequality of surface, but more particularly from its position on the enemies
frontier, Malpas was selected by the first Norman earl as the site of one of
the numerous fortresses, with which, at regular intervals, he strengthened his
Welsh border, and was bestowed by him on Robert Fitz Hugh, supposed to have
been one of his bastard issue, whose possessions are recited in Domesday,
immediately subsequent to those of the earl himself. (Ormerod, George (1882 revision) History of the County
Palatine and City of Chester, Volume 2, page
328).
1075 to
the 1080s
Robert FitzHugh oversaw the construction
of Malpas Castle, a timber motte-and-bailey fortification. Built on the highest
knoll, it served as the administrative and military head of the prestigious
Barony of Malpas.
1086
The settlement was surveyed and recorded in the Domesday Book
under its original Old English name, Depenbech,
meaning deep brook. The estate was confirmed as a holding of Robert FitzHugh. Malpas was a settlement in Domesday Book, in
the Hundred
of Duddeston and the county of Cheshire. It had a recorded population of 8
households in 1086, putting it in the smallest 40% of settlements recorded in
Domesday. (Powell-Smith, Anna, Malpas, Open Domesday).
Robert, son of Hugh, also called Robert FitzHugh,
was a prominent Norman baron and the first Baron of Malpas in Cheshire. Robert
was recorded holding roughly 30 to 43 townships and manors in Cheshire and
along the Welsh border (mostly cantered in the Hundred
of Duddeston), including Malpas, Christleton,
Tilston, Cholmondeley, Burwardsley, and Beeston.
1121
The name Malpas, derived from the Old French Mal-pas,
meaning bad or difficult passage was recorded around this year. The name
emphasised the hazardous, wild terrain and its vulnerability to Welsh
cross-border raids. Around this time, a planned town began to develop in the
bailey directly outside the castle walls.
1252
David de Malpas
In the mid thirteenth century, the Barony of Malpas
became a legal and genealogical tangle involving illegitimate succession,
strategic marriages, and divided estates.
David de Malpas, David the Bastard, was the
natural but illegitimate son of Sir William de Malpas and Beatrix de Montalt. Upon his father's death around 1252, David
successfully intruded himself into a moiety, a 50% share,
of the Barony of Malpas. He did this to the exclusion of the rightful heirs in
law, such as his uncle Philip Goch de Egerton. He married Constance,
daughter of Owain Cyfeiliog, Prince of Powys. David
served as the Sheriff of Cheshire in 1252 but died shortly thereafter, around 1255
to 1260. Because his possession of the estate was legally precarious, his death
triggered the formal splitting of his lands.
1257
The collection of tolls
On 20 September 1257 a grant was given to the
bailiffs and good men of Wyz Maupas,
in consideration of the frequent passage through that town and the losses and
hindrance suffered by passengers through default of repair of the bridges
thereof, of pontage for five years from Michaelmas, to
wit, on every cartload of brushwood or other goods for sale brought to the town
¼ d, a week, and on every horseload of the like, 1d a
week. (Patent Rolls of the reign of Henry
III, 1247
to 1258, page 579).
Wyz or Wich was the Anglo-Saxon suffix used to denote a
place associated with salt production or a brine spring. In Cheshire, the famous
salt-producing towns were referred to as the Wiches
(such as Nantwich, Northwich and Middlewich). The Norman name, Maupas, or
Malpas was derived from the Norman-French Malus Passus meaning bad
pass or difficult crossing. The Barony of Malpas held an
administrative share of Nantwich during the medieval period, leading
contemporary royal clerks to record the town as Wich
Malpas, rendered in Anglo-Norman French as Wyz
Maupas, to distinguish it from the other salt
towns.
The 1250 grant mentioned was a temporary right to collect
tollages, or a variant of pontage or murage,
specifically intended to help the townspeople maintain and repair its crucial
river bridges, which were heavily burdened by travellers and merchants crossing
the region.
1260
Because David de Malpas died without legitimate male heirs, his
seized moiety of the Malpas estate was partitioned around 1255–1260 between his
two daughters and co-heiresses: Beatrice and her sister, Idonea. Beatrice inherited
a one-fourth share of the Barony of Malpas. Beatrice first married William
Patrick, son of Robert Patrick, who already held an ancestral claim to a
portion of the barony. This marriage consolidated their regional power. William
died around 1279 in Shocklach,
Cheshire. Beatrice later married Rhodri ap Gruffudd,
the younger brother of Llywelyn the Last, the Prince of Wales. As a daughter of David de Malpas, her marriage brought land
and property in Cheshire, including portions of Malpas, into the possession of
Rhodri. Rhodri held her Cheshire estates jure uxoris, by right of
his wife, until her death.
William Patrick and Beatrice had a daughter, Isabel
Patrick.
Late
thirteenth century
The Barons of Malpas were granted extensive legal powers,
exercising capital jurisdiction within the limits of the barony. They held the
hereditary office of serjeant of the peace for nearly the entire palatinate of Cheshire.
Under local custom, capital punishment was carried out by decapitation, and the
severed heads of felons were routinely presented at Chester Castle.
It appears that the barons of Malpas possessed
at that period a capital jurisdiction within the limits of their barony, and also that their punishment, contrary to what has been
usually stated, was inflicted by the gallows. The
beheading, called in old documents the custom of Cheshire, was part of another jurisdiction,
possessed indeed by the Suttons and St. Pierres, but possessed by them not as
barons of Malpas, but serjeants of the peace of Cheshire in fee. (Ormerod, George (1882 revision) History of the County
Palatine and City of Chester, Volume 2, page
330).
1281
Malpas experienced an economic boom. It was granted a Royal Market
Charter allowing the town to hold a weekly market and an annual fair. The marketplace
established itself around the town cross. To accommodate expansion, nearby
agricultural strips were converted into burgage plots for local craftsmen and
traders to rent.
On 18 July 1281 at Westminster there was a Grant to
Philip Burnel and Isabel, his wife, and their heirs, of a weekly market on
Monday at their manor of Maupas, co. Chester, and of a yearly fair there on the
vigil, the feast and the morrow of St. Oswald the king (Calendar of Charter Rolls, Volume 2,
Henry III to Edward I, 1257 to 1300, page 254).
As the westernmost hundreds of Cheshire were politically detached
to form parts of Wales, Malpas increased in strategic value. It became the most
critical and prominent settlement in the southern half of the Broxton Hundred.
1282
The manor of a certain William
Gerberd was part of the honour of Malpas. An honour in medieval England
was a massive estate or cluster of manors held by a major tenant-in-chief. On
10 August 1282, in the Inquisition on William Gerberd the Younger of Burewardescote, the manor held of William
Gereberd his father, rendering 20 marks yearly to him, and 6 marks to Ealph de Wile … for the life of the said William, who held
part of the manor of the said Ralph, and the rest of the Lady Isabel Patrich,
who held of Isabel late the wife of Philip Burnel, of the honour of Malpas
(Malo Passu), and she held of the king in chief. (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2, (Edward I, 1272 to 1291),
Folio 453). The entry shows how local families
like the Gerberds were connected through a web of
landlords (Patrich and Burnel) to the great barons of Malpas, who
answered directly to the Crown.
On 15 November 1282 at Rhuddlan,
there was an order Commitment during pleasure to Robert de Cestre, chaplain,
of the keeping of the lands late of Philip Burnel, deceased, in Maupas and Cristelton. Order to
all tenants to be intendant to him. (Fine Rolls of the reign of Edward I, 1272 to 1307 page 173). On 15 November 1282, Edward I was operating his court from Rhuddlan, a
strategic base in northeast Wales at the height of the Second Welsh War
(1282–1283). In March 1282, a surprise nationalist rebellion led by Dafydd ap
Gruffudd sparked a full-scale war. Edward I responded
by invading Wales with a massive army to permanently dismantle Welsh
independence. The order itself dealt with the death
of Philip Burnel. Under feudal law, when a tenant-in-chief (someone who held
land directly from the Crown) died, their estates immediately reverted to the
King, a process known as escheat. Because the
Crown could not manage thousands of individual estates directly, the King would
commit the keeping (temporary management and collection of revenues) of
those lands to a trusted official or loyal subject during pleasure
(meaning until the King decided otherwise). Robert de Cestre (Robert of Chester), a chaplain, was appointed as the
temporary custodian. Chaplains and clerks were frequently used by the
Plantagenet bureaucracy as reliable administrators. Securing stable, loyal administrative control over borderlands like
Malpas was critical for Edward I in November 1282, as Cheshire served as the
vital supply line and staging ground for his armies fighting just a few miles
away in Wales.
1283
Roger de Cestria, chaplain, of Maupas, acknowledges that he owes to the bishop 26s 8d; to be
levied, in default of payment, of his lands and chattels in co. Chester (Close Rolls of the reign of Edward I, 1279
to 1288, page 232).
1289
The split Manor
Beatrice died in 1289.
In the Inquisition on Beatrice, late the wife of Roderick son of Griffin on 10 June 1289 (a legal inquiry held
after the death of the wealthy landowner, Beatrice, to establish what lands she
held, what they were worth, and who the rightful heir was), her estate included
at Malpas (Malo Passu), a fourth part of the manor, with a moiety of the
serjeanty and a fourth part of the advowson of the church. (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2, (Edward I, 1272 to 1291),
Folio 749). Beatrice held one-quarter of the
manor of Malpas. During this period, the great barony of Malpas had become
split among different co-heiresses. This entry confirms that Beatrice's estate
retained her quarter-share.
By this time the massive Barony of
Malpas was split among co-heiresses. Idonea de Malpas had married the elder
Urian de St. Pierre. Her marriage brought a quarter of the Malpas barony into
the St. Pierre family.
When her mother Beatrice died it was
legally established that Isabel, then aged 30 and married to Richard de Sutton,
was Beatrice's next rightful heir. Through Isabel, the Sutton family, later the
Barons Dudley, acquired massive holdings in Cheshire.
In the Inquisition on Hugh de Pulford on 8 February 1289 on the
complaint of Robert son and heir of the said Hugh, that the escheator at the
procuration of certain rivals of his, asserting that they were held of the king
in chief, had taken into the king's hand lands, &c. it was recorded
that Both held of the heirs of William Patrik by service of 1/8th
knight's fee, doing suit at the court of Malpas (de malu
passu), drink for the Serjeants of the said heirs, and work at their castle and
mill. (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2, (Edward I, 1272 to 1291), Folios 782).
There was a conflict regarding
who truly controlled Hugh's lands, the King of England or the local lords of
Malpas, and outlined the medieval obligations owed to the Malpas estate.
This entry is significant for
Malpas because it explicitly details the feudal rights, power, and
infrastructure of the Barony of Malpas at the end of the thirteenth century.
The inquiry legally confirmed
that Hugh de Pulford's lands were not held directly from the King (in chief).
Instead, they were held under the heirs of William Patrik, who was one of the
historical barons of Malpas. The tenants of these lands were legally required to do suit,
attend and participate, at the manorial court of Malpas. This reinforced Malpas
as the central seat of legal and administrative power for the surrounding area.
The entry also evidences the existence and the active upkeep of
two important medieval structures in the town, Malpas Castle and the local mill.
The tenants were bound by feudal law to provide physical labour to maintain
them.
The requirement to provide drink for the Serjeants refers
to puture, a customary feudal obligation where
local tenants had to provide food, drink, or lodging to the bailiffs or law
enforcement officers, Serjeants, of the peace guild, maintaining the
security apparatus of the Malpas barony.
From medieval times until
1885, Malpas was famous for being one of the very few parishes in England to
have a double living, meaning it had two fully titled, joint rectors
operating at the same time (known as the Higher and Lower Rectors). This
division likely occurred in the early medieval period when the vast baronial
inheritance of Malpas was split between two co-heiresses, resulting in the
patronage and the church's tithe income being permanently divided into two
parts. Local legend has a more colourful explanation. It claims a king,
variously named as King John or King James I, visited a local pub incognito.
The wealthy parson refused to buy him a drink, but the impoverished curate did.
In retaliation, the king split the parish in half, elevating the curate to be a
joint rector so they had to share the income equally.
1294
In the Inquisition on Urian de Sancto Petro, he was recorded to
hold two burgages, and two saltpits in Fulwich, held in free socage of Richard de Sutton by
service of 21d. and a pair of gloves (sorothecnrum)
yearly at Malpas. It was also recorded that Urian, son of John de Sancto
Petro son of Urian aforesaid and heir of the aforesaid Idonea, aged 16 at the
feast of St. Dunstan last, is next heir of Urian aforesaid (Calendar of Inquisitions Post
Mortem, Volume
3,
(Edward I, 1291 to 1300), Folios 281,
see also 376).
The entry mentions two saltpits in Fulwich. Salt production at the wich
towns was the economic engine of medieval Cheshire. Having saltpits
tied directly to the Malpas burgages emphasized how crucial the salt trade was
to the wealth and localised economy of the Malpas lords.
The requirement of a pair of gloves, sorothecarum,
as part of the annual service at Malpas was a nominal or quit-rent
customary in free socage. It was a ceremonial token used to establish lordship and
legal superiority without demanding costly military or labour services.
Sir Urian de Sancto Petro, also anglicised to Sir Urian de St.
Pierre or Sampier, was a prominent Marcher
Lord, and landowner whose family held extensive estates in Cheshire,
Shropshire, and the Welsh Marches. He
lived from roughly 1216 until his death in early 1294. Urian
had elevated his family's status considerably by marrying Idonea de Malpas before
1257, one of the co-heiresses to the vast Barony of Malpas. Through this
marriage, Urian gained jure uxoris, a one-quarter share of the barony,
including the lands, saltpits, and customary rights
mentioned in your original inquiry.
1297
Robert de Hemmington and William Dujn, parsons, each shared a
moiety of the church of Malpas (Patent Rolls of the reign of Edward I, 1292
to 1301, pages 285,
286).
Hugh de Busshey was ordered to keep the lands that were held
directly from the king under royal control, but to immediately stop interfering
with the rented town plots and salt-pans, leaving them
for the heir. To Hugh de Busshey, escheator in co. Chester. Whereas the king
learns by inquisition taken by the escheator that Urian de Sancto Petro, who
held at his death certain lands of the king in chief in that bailiwick, held
therein … of Richard de Sutton two burgages in Malpas (in Malo Passu) and two
salt-pans in Fulwick (in Fidwico)
by the service of 21d and a pair of gloves, yearly for all services, and that
Urian son of John de Sancto Petro is the nearest heir of Urian and is aged
seventeen years ; wherefore the custody of the lands aforesaid that are held in
socage ought not to pertain to the king according to the law and custom of
those parts. The king therefore orders the escheator to retain in the king's
hands the lands that are held of the king, and not to intermeddle further with
the other lands that are held in socage, if they are in the king's hands solely
by reason of Urian's death. (Close Rolls of the reign of Edward I, 1296
to 1302, page 10).
1316
Urian de Sancto Petro held in chief of the
king on the day of his death a quarter of the barony of Malpas of the yearly
value of £12 by the service of 1 ½ knight's fees; a sixth of the barony of Schipbrouk of the yearly value of £6 by the service of half
a fee; an eighteenth of the barony of Nantwich of the yearly value of £4 by the
service of half a fee; he also held of the king a moiety of the serjeanty of the
peace of the yearly value of £4, finding 10 Serjeants to keep the peace in that
county, receiving yearly from the Chester exchequer for cloaks for the said
Serjeants 30s; he also held of the king in chief the manor of Alderton of the
yearly value of £6 in free socage, rendering at the Chester exchequer 1 pound
of pepper yearly; also the ferry of Torperlegh and Keleshale
of the yearly value of 18d, finding a man to keep the roads at the time of Chester
fair. Margaret, late the wife of the said Urian, is dowered with tenements
extended at 10/. out of those before mentioned, by the king's order (Calendar of Miscellaneous Inquisitions (chancery), Volume
2, Edward I to Edward II, Folio 256).
1323
Edward II issued an order to the Justice of Chester regarding a legal
dispute over the appointment of a clergyman to a portion (moiety) of the church
of Malpas in Cheshire. The dispute arose during a court case between Edward,
Earl of Chester (the King's son) and John de Sutton. Because the case dragged
on past the six-month legal deadline, the former Bishop of Coventry and
Lichfield (Walter) exercised his standard right to appoint his own clerk to the
position. Later, the Earl won his case against Sutton based on lands he had seized
following the death of Sutton's father. The Earl then ordered Bishop Walter to
accept his chosen candidate instead. When the bishop refused, because he had
already filled the vacancy, the Earl sued him, claiming a royal prerogative
that legal deadlines did not apply to him in Cheshire. Bishop Walter died while
the lawsuit was pending, and the Earl continued the lawsuit against the new
bishop, Roger. Bishop Roger appealed to the King, arguing that only the King holds
such a royal prerogative, and that an Earl should not be allowed to claim it.
In response, the King commanded the Justice of Chester to handle the case with
extreme caution to ensure that the Earl did not wrongfully usurp the King's
unique royal privileges, and that the bishop is treated fairly.
To the justice of Chester of Edward, earl of
Chester, or to him who supplies his place. E. bishop of Coventry and Lichfield,
has shewn the king that whereas lately, whilst a plea
in the earl's court of Chester was pending between the earl and John de Sutton
that John should permit the earl to present a suitable person to a moiety of
the church of Malpas, in that county, the six months' (semestre)
time [for presentation] had lapsed, and Walter, the bishop's predecessor,
conferred the moiety, which pertained to him by lapse by common right, upon a
clerk of his, and the earl afterwards recovered his presentation to the said moiety
against the aforesaid John, by reason of a seisin that the earl took after the
death of Richard de Sutton, father of the aforesaid John, of the said Richard's
lands in that county, and ordered Walter, then bishop, to admit a person to the
moiety at the earl's presentation, notwithstanding the claim of the said John,
and because Walter did not admit the earl's clerk to the moiety aforesaid, the
earl, claiming the prerogative that no time ought to run against him in his
presentations to churches in that county, impleaded the said bishop Walter in
his court of Chester by his writ of quare non admisit,
and Walter died whilst the plea was pending, and the earl impleaded Roger, the
present bishop, before the justice of Chester in like manner, and although the
bishop asserted that he had done no wrong in this behalf, the justice has
compelled him to answer further to the prerogative aforesaid ; wherefore the
bishop has besought the king to provide a remedy as well for the king as for
himself, especially as such prerogative, it is said, ought to pertain to the
king and to no one else in the realm ; the king, therefore, orders the justice
to conduct himself circumspectly in the matter, so that prejudice or wrong may
not be done to the king, or wrong to the bishop in this matter. (Close Rolls of the reign of Edward II, 1323 to 1327, page 44).
1327
The ill fate of the Sutton
family when they met the politics of the Despenser overthrow of Edward II
John de Sutton had been an ally of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, who
rebelled against Edward II. When the rebellion failed, the King’s corrupt
favourites, the Despensers, threw John de Sutton into the Tower of London. To
secure his freedom, Sutton was forced to sign over his most valuable assets, including
Dudley Castle (his wife's inheritance), to Hugh Despenser the Younger. Joan
Botetourt (the primary creditor) was heavily tied to the Despenser and royal
circles. When Edward II was overthrown in late 1326, Sutton got his lands back,
but he was saddled with this massive £6,000 recognisance to iron out the
competing legal claims over the estates. In fact, Parliament met in January
1327, and Edward II was forced to abdicate just days later (on 20-25 January).
On 18 January 1327, John de Sutton acknowledged debts totalling
£9,000 (£6,000 to Joan Boutetourt and partners, and £3,000 to John de
Cherlton). In the 14th century, £9,000 was an astronomical fortune, equivalent
to millions today and easily exceeding the annual income of many top-tier
earls. Queen Isabella and Roger Mortimer had just invaded England to
overthrow King Edward II. John son of
Richard de Sutton, lord of Malepas, acknowledges that
he owes to Joan, late the wife of Thomas Boutetourt, Roger de Aylesbury, and
Roger Hillary, £6,000; to be levied, in default of payment, of his lands and
chattels in co. Stafford and John son of
Richard de Sutton, lord of Malepas, acknowledges that
he owes to John de Cherlton, lord of Powys, £3,000; to be levied, in default of
payment, of his lands and chattels in co. Stafford. (Close Rolls of the
reign of Edward II, 1323
to 1327, page 659, 660).
Freshly
released from the political wilderness and restored to Dudley Castle, John de
Sutton was using the legal mechanism of the Close Rolls to formally settle
colossal inheritance, familial, and political obligations with his peers as a
new regime took power.
John, son of Richard de Sutton, was granted royal
permission to transfer several properties held directly from the King, held
in chief. The properties were the castle of Malpas; the manor of Shokkelach, Shocklach; the
advowson (right to appoint the priest, of Malpas church; and the
reversionary right to the manor of Yayton, so that
ownership would transfer after the death of the current life tenant, Robert de
Sutton. To secure the family's long-term inheritance, John uses a common
medieval legal loophole called enfeoffment to uses by transferring the
properties through intermediaries. Licence for John son of Richard de Sutton
to enfeoff Henry de Warrewyk, chaplain, and Thomas de Hampstede, of the castle
of Malpas, the manor of Shokkelach and the advowson
of the church of Malpas, held in chief, and the reversion of the manor of Yayton, also held in chief, after the death of Robert de
Sutton, the tenant for life ; and for the said feoffees, after seisin had, and
upon attornment by the said Robert, to re-grant the premises to the said John
and Margaret, his wife, for their lives, with remainder in fee tail to John son
of John son of Richard de Sutton, and Isabella, his wife, daughter of John de
Cherletoii, and ultimate remainder to the right heirs of the said John son of
Richard de Sutton (Patent Rolls of the reign of Edward III, 1327
to 1330, page 97).
Sir Richard de Sutton (c 1266 to c 1346) was originally a prominent
landowner in Nottinghamshire, holding the manors of Warsop, Sutton, Eakring, and Cotham. However, his status expanded
dramatically into Cheshire through his marriage in 1284 to Isabel Patrick.
Isabel was the daughter of William Patrick and Beatrice de Malpas. Through her
mother, Isabel was the co-heir to the ancient and powerful Barony of Malpas. By
1300, Richard was recorded by the Crown as holding a significant portion of
Malpas and Shocklach. He laid the foundation for the family's
immense wealth by consolidating these strategic Cheshire lands, which he later
passed down to his son, John.
Sir John de Sutton I (c 1286 to 1338) was
the son of Richard and Isabel. He inherited the Malpas and Shocklach
estates from his mother's side, but he gained further power through his own
marriage to Margaret de Someri. Margaret
was the sister and sole co-heir of John de Someri, the last Baron Someri. When her brother died without children in 1321, Margaret
inherited vast estates, most notably Dudley Castle in Staffordshire. In her
right, John became the Lord of Dudley Castle. John lived
through the chaotic reign of King Edward II. He was an ally of his
brother-in-law, John de Someri, and was heavily involved in the Scottish Wars.
However, he was accused of backing the rebellion of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster,
against Edward II. Because of this, he was imprisoned in the Tower of London and
extorted into signing away his rights to Dudley Castle. When Edward II was
deposed and Edward III took the throne in 1327, John was freed, and his stolen
lands were completely restored to him.
This patent roll entry from 1327 captures John at
the moment of his political restoration. Fresh out of prison and with
his lands secured under the new king, he immediately set about executing the enfeoffment
process to legally lock down his family’s inheritance for his wife Margaret, his
son (John II), and his daughter-in-law Isabella de Cherleton.
The Dod family, who resided at Edge Hall
just two miles north of Malpas, were part of the bedrock of the local
community. By contrast, the de Suttons were their newly elevated, high-status
feudal superiors who held the actual Barony of Malpas. The patent roll entry
records that John de Sutton held the castle and manor of Malpas in chief,
directly from the King. Edge was nestled inside the broader parish and Barony
of Malpas, so the Dods would have legally held their estates at Edge under the
ultimate feudal lordship of the Barons of Malpas. When John de Sutton or his
bailiffs held the local manorial courts or demanded feudal dues, the Dods would
have been required to show their allegiance, attend the courts, or provide
localised military service. Roger Dod of Edge,
who married Mabel Mere around 1324, was the head of the Dod family at this
time. Edge was a
township in the parish of Malpas (see for instance Malpas, the National Gazetteer of Great Britain and Ireland,
1868). The Dod family worshipped, baptised their children, and were
buried at the church of St Oswald's in Malpas.
The Dods were fiercely local. They were an ancient, native
Anglo-Saxon line, descended from Cadwgan Dot or Hova Dod,
who managed to survive the Norman Conquest and clung stubbornly to their small
estate at Edge. They were deeply rooted in the soil of Cheshire. The de Suttons
were broad-horizon aristocrats. While Sir Richard de Sutton had acquired the
Malpas lands by marrying the Cheshire heiress, Isabel Patrick, the family’s
focus was rapidly shifting. Because John de Sutton married the Someri heiress and inherited Dudley Castle in
Staffordshire, the de Suttons were becoming national politicians and Marcher barons. They spent very little
time at Malpas Castle, leaving the day-to-day management of the area to local
families like the Dods.
Just months before the 1327 patent roll entry, England experienced
a historic coup. Roger Mortimer, the ultimate Marcher Lord of Wigmore and
Ludlow, had escaped from the Tower of London, teamed up with King Edward II’s
estranged wife, Queen Isabella, and launched a successful invasion of England. In
January 1327, they forced King Edward II to abdicate the throne in favour of
his 14-year-old son, Edward III. Because Mortimer and Isabella became the de
facto rulers of England, the Welsh Marches became an important centre of
national power. Local lords who had previously been imprisoned or stripped of
their lands by Edward II, including John de Sutton, were suddenly released,
vindicated, and given their properties back.
The deposed King Edward II. He was moved around various Marcher fortresses
before being imprisoned at Berkeley Castle, just down the River Severn from
Chester and the Marches. On 21 September 1327, it was announced to the public
that the former king had died in captivity. Some chronicles claimed he died of a
broken heart; others spread the legend that he was assassinated with a red-hot
poker. Modern historians even debate whether his death was faked by Marcher
lords, sparking local underground plots by local knights trying to break him
out of prison. For families like the Suttons and the Dods, the ghost of the old
king was dominating local gossip.
On 23 December 1327 Joan, late the wife of Thomas Butetourt,
Roger de Aylesbury, and Roger Hillary put in their places John de Norton and
John da Langeton, clerks, to prosecute the execution of a recognisance for
£6,000 made to them in chancery by John son of Richard de Sutton, lord of Malepas (Close Rolls of the
reign of Edward III, 1327
to 1330, page 241).
John de Sutton had previously entered into a
recognisance in the royal Chancery (see above). This was a formal, written
acknowledgment of a debt bound before the King's officials. If the debtor
failed to pay by the agreed date, the creditors had the immediate right to seize
his lands and goods without needing a full, lengthy court trial. The
creditors were putting in their places two clerks named John de Norton
and John da Langeton. Because the wealthy creditors did not want to travel to
court or physically chase down the money themselves, they were authorising
these two professional clerks to act as their legal agents and to prosecute
the execution, meaning to formally trigger the legal process of seizing
John de Sutton's property to force him to pay back the £6,000.
John de Stuuon’s debt heavily altered the fortunes of the Sutton
family and forced them to sell off chunks of their inheritance. John de Sutton
was the Lord of Malpas. In the decades following 1327, records show the Sutton
family steadily losing, granting, or selling off their shares of the barony of
Malpas. While the Suttons managed to retain their primary seat at Dudley
Castle, where they eventually dropped the name Sutton and just called themselves
the Lords Dudley, their grip on the Cheshire lands like Malpas was permanently
weakened. John's son and grandson routinely sold off pieces of Malpas to fund
their military careers and clear lingering family encumbrances.
1328
The in the following year, on 10 May 1323, Licence
for John son of Richard de Sutton to enfeoff Master John de Hildesleye, clerk,
and Peter de Rythre, clerk, of the castle of Malpas and manor of Shokkelath, and of the advowson of the church of Malpas, held
in chief, and to grant to them his reversion in fee simple to the manor of Yeyton, held in chief, which Robert de Sutton holds for
life of the inheritance of the said John son of Richard : and licence to John
de Hildesleye and Peter de Rythre, upon seisin and attornment, to grant them to
John son of Richard and Margaret, his wife, for their lives, with remainder to
John son of John son of Richard de Sutton and Isabella, his wife, daughter of
John de Cherleton, in tail, with remainder, if they should die without issue,
to the right heirs of John son of Richard. Changed, because at another time
sealed by writ of privy seal. and Licence for John son of Richard de
Satton to enfeoff Master John de Hildesleye, clerk, and Peter de Rythre, clerk,
of the castle and hundred of Malpas, and the manors
of Shokkelach, Bradeley, Ageton, a moiety of the manor of Chirchecristelton,
of three parts of the manors of Overesolwych and Nethersolwych, a moiety of the third part of the mill of
Barton, a fourth part of the manor of Rowecristelton,
and the serjeanty of the peace of Malpas, co. Chester, and of three parts of
the advowson of the church of Malpas, held in chief, and to grant them his
reversion in fee simple to the manor of Teyton, of which Robert de Sutton is
tenant for life, of the inheritance of John son of Richard ; and licence for
John and Peter to grant the first named premises to John de Gherleton, for life,
with remainder to John son of John son of Richard de Satton and Isabella,
daughter of John de Cherleton, in fee tail, with remainder, if they die without
issue, to the right heirs of John de Cherleton ; and the manor of Yeyton, when they have received attornment of Robert de
Sutton, to John de Cherleton in fee simple. and a similar entry Altered
because sealed at another time. (Patent Rolls of the reign of Edward III, 1327
to 1330, pages 269,
273,
331,
332).
1344
On 27 April 1344 in the church of Friars Preachers at
Rothelan, Sir Richard de Sutton did fealty and homage
for the barony of Malpas (Patent Rolls of the reign of Edward III, 1343
to 1345, page 231).
The church of the Friars Preachers referred to the Dominicans in
Rhuddlan, Denbighshire, in North Wales; Rothelan
was an Anglo-Norman spelling for Rhuddlan. Medieval religious houses
in the Welsh Marches served as neutral grounds
for legal, military, and political administration. Because the Malpas lands
straddled the volatile English and Welsh border, performing feudal ceremonies
including homage and fealty inside a respected, royal-sanctioned religious
house like Rhuddlan Friary provided a mutually agreeable, sacred, and legally
binding environment.
1347
The Breretons
of Malpas
The Brereton family
inherited their share of the Barony of Malpas through a strategic marriage, followed
by a bitter legal battle that successfully overturned a rival branch's claim to
the estate. The foundation of the inheritance was laid when Sir William
Brereton (the grandfather of the William mentioned in the patent roll) married
Elena (or Ellen) de Egerton in about 1347 to 1349. Elena was the daughter of
Philip de Egerton and, crucially, the sister and eventual co-heiress of David
de Egerton, who held a moiety (a half-share) of the ancient Norman Barony of
Malpas. Egerton died without any children
of his own. His legal heirs were his two sisters, Elena (who married Brereton)
and Isabella (who married Sir John de Delves). The inheritance was not
straightforward. A rival claimant, David de Malpas, historically known in legal
records as David the Bastard (see entry for 1252 above), had seized control of
the Malpas lands. Elena's sister, Isabella Delves, launched a fierce legal
challenge to wrest the estates back from David the Bastard's descendants. She
was successful, and because Isabella died without children, her entire share reverted back to her nephew, the younger Sir William
Brereton, the chivaler" who died in 1425 (4
Henry VI).
Through this dual descent,
the Breretons secured a significant portion of the
Malpas estates, establishing two prominent lines. The Breretons
of Brereton Hall were the senior line, descending from Sir William’s first
wife, Elena Egerton, and they retained the core manor lands. The Breretons of Malpas were a highly influential junior branch
founded by Sir Randal Brereton, the son of Sir William's second marriage, who
established a seat at Malpas Castle and went on to serve as high-ranking royal
courtiers to Henry VII and Henry VIII. (Brereton, John (1919), Brereton,
A Family History, San Francisco).
c 1350 to 1400
With the Welsh borders gradually stabilising, the military role of
Malpas Castle ebbed. Malpas Castle was largely obsolete by the late medieval
period and fell into ruin by the sixteenth century.
By the nineteenth century, The Castle of Malpas, the original
head of the barony, as well as the later castle of Shocklach,
has long been destroyed. Like all the other Cheshire fortresses on the Welsh
border, it was situated immediately adjacent to the church, which it most
probably comprehended within its antient works. The only remains consist of the
circular mound of the keep on the north side of the church, measuring about 40
yards in diameter on the summit, and considerably elevated above the level of
the church-yard. In some recent alterations, the ditch
was traced to a considerable depth by the variation between the natural soil
and the mud which has accumulated in it for centuries. (Ormerod, George (1882 revision) History of the County
Palatine and City of Chester, Volume 2, page
330).
In the second half of the fourteenth century, construction began
on the grand, red sandstone Church of St. Oswald. It was built directly
adjacent to, and partially over, the old castle earthworks, probably
incorporating the footprint of the original castle chapel.
1351
The Black Prince’s interest
The Black Prince rewarded Sir Richard Destafford for his service
in Gascony with a reward of 500 marks, in part to be paid from sums out of the
proceeds of the sale of the wood of Bikelegh, (The Black Prince’s Register, Part IV (1351 to 1365), Page 232). The
medieval wood of Bikelegh is
located in Bickley, which immediately southeast of Malpas. Edward the
Black Prince held a powerful and direct interest in the Malpas area through his
position as the Earl of Chester. In medieval England, Cheshire operated as a
semi-autonomous county palatine. This meant the Black Prince ruled the region
with near-royal authority, using its vast resources, land revenues, and timber
to fund his expensive military campaigns during the Hundred Years' War.
The Barony of Malpas was historically divided into moieties
(shares) plagued by complex inheritance disputes. One shareholder, Sir John de
St. Pierre, held portions of Malpas, Peckforton, and
the manor of Bickley (Bikelegh). To secure a
stable base and consolidate power, Sir John St. Pierre exchanged his Cheshire
lands with the Black Prince in return for property in Anglesey. This
transaction brought Malpas and Bickley directly into the Prince's
hands.
Timber was a vital and lucrative commodity, and the Black Prince aggressively
stripped his newly acquired Cheshire estates. The sale of the wood of Bikelegh to reward veterans like Sir Richard Destafford for
their services in Gascony was a common practice. He similarly stripped the
nearby forest park of Peckforton of its timber to
help finance his legendary victory at the Battle of Poitiers (1356).
1378
On 24 October 1378 at Gloucester, there was recorded the
Ratification of the estate of Master John de Cudyngton as parson of a moiety of
the church of Malpas, co. Chester (Patent
Rolls of the reign of Richard II, 1377
to 1381, page 278).
1389
On 2 October 1389 at Westminster there was recorded the Presentation
of William Cristendome, king's clerk, to a mediety of the church of Malpas in
the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield. (Patent
Rolls of the reign of Richard II, 1388
to 1392, page 111).
1390
On 18 May 1390 it was recorded at Westminster that John de
Halsham and Philippa, his wife, staying in England, have letters nominating
James Boteler, earl of Ormonde, and Nicholas Perfet, their attorneys in Ireland
for one year. Hugh, parson of Malpas, received the attorneys by writ. (Patent Rolls of the
reign of Richard II, 1388
to 1392, page 247).
The wealth and power of the rectory
Thomas de Delves, late parson of Malpas was the rector or parson
of Malpas prior to 1390. In medieval Malpas, the rectory was divided into two
shares (moieties), the Higher Rectory and the Lower Rectory. Each lord of the divided
barony held the advowson, the highly lucrative legal right to nominate (present)
a priest to their respective half of the church.
On 10 June 1390, there was an order relating to other properties
regarding Henry de Coton late parson of Cubbeley
and Henry de Delves, brother and heir of John de Delves knight and of Thomas de
Delves late parson of Malpas, to the king and his heir (Close Rolls of the
reign of Richard II, 1389
to 1392, page 188).
On 17 June 1390 at Westminster it was recorded that Whereas
Henry de Coton, late parson of Cubbeley, has long
sued for restitution of the manor of Aber in North Wales and the advowson
thereof, showing how Thomas de Delves, late parson of Malpas, and he, by fine,
acquired it from Walter Manny, knight, to hold to them and the heirs of the said
Thomas, by virtue of which fine they continued their estate therein all the
life of the said Thomas, and after his death the said Henry his estate until
after the death of John Delves, knight, it was seized into the hands of the
late prince, the king's father, by virtue of an inquisition taken before Hugh
Coly, escheator in North Wales, by which office it was found that the said John
died seised thereof and held it of the prince in chief,
whereas he never held it in demesne but only at the will of the said Thomas and
Henry ; the said Thomas dying without heir of his body, the manor descended to
the said John as his brother and heir, and the said John dying without heir of
his body, it descended to Henry de Delves, his surviving brother and heir, and
is now by special grant of the king queen Anne's for life ; the king,
considering the right claimed by the said Henry de Coton, by advice of the Great
Council, has granted to him, for life, the manor of Walton upon Trent, co.
Derby, with its appurtenances, the advowson of its church, with knights' fees,
wardships, marriages, relief, escheats, franchises and liberties, and all other
things belonging to the manor, with remainder, in fee simple, to Henry de
Delves, in recompense for the aforesaid manor of Aber, and in return the said
Henry de Coton and Henry de Delves, brother and heir of the said John, have released
and quit-claimed to the king all their interest in the manor of Aber and in the
towns of Penmayn and Lassemayn
in North Wales, with knights' fees, advowsons, fairs, markets and warrens and
all other appurtenances, the raglorship and woodwardship of Arthelewak Ughap and la Frith of Nantmawan, Nanheskele and Ycras with the avowries (hauotriis) of Meuryn, Nanteracadrac and all
else thereto belonging; and because the manor of Walton is charged with 10 marks
a year to Thomas Sy and William Gold, yeomen of the king, payable to each of
them for their lives, the king wills, with the same assent, that whilst it is
so charged full compensation in some suitable place be made to them and the
heirs of Henry de Delves (Patent Rolls of the reign of Richard II, 1388
to 1392, page 263). Thomas
de Delves was not just a local priest; he was a well-connected landowner acting
in partnership with high-ranking figures like the prominent military commander
Walter Manny. The Delves family were major landowners in Cheshire and
surrounding areas, including the manor of Doddington, and had immense wealth
and regional influence. Thomas de Delves held the rights to the manor of Aber
in North Wales, with the property set to inherit through his personal heirs.
Because Thomas died without children (without heir of his body), his
estate, including these external properties, descended to his brother, John
Delves, knight, and subsequently to their surviving brother, Henry de Delves.
This illustrates how the wealth generated or held by Malpas’s
clergy often fed directly back into the estates of powerful Cheshire gentry
families.
The entry connects Malpas to the highest levels of government in
fourteenth-century England. The dispute over the lands involved King Richard II,
his consort Queen Anne (of Bohemia), and the Great Council at Westminster. The
rector of Malpas was operating in a sphere of elite real estate transactions
that required royal intervention, land swaps (such as receiving Walton upon
Trent in Derbyshire as compensation), and formal quit-claims to settle crown
disputes.
A Dispute with the King, 1390 to 1392
On 28 April 1390, To the justice and the chamberlain of Cestre, and to their representatives. Order by writs, commissions
etc. to command all those to be arrested who with the strong' hand have thrust
out the king's clerk William Cristendome from a
mediety of the church of Malpas to which in right of the crown the king
presented him, being then void and in the king's gift, and all those who
scheming to impair the king's right have made and procured inhibitions,
citations, appeals, processes and notices thereof, notarial instruments etc. to
the prejudice of the king and the crown, or have commanded the execution thereof,
whereby the king's right may be impugned, or the said William disturbed
touching his possession of the said mediety, and to cause them to come before
the king and council from time to time with such instruments etc. found upon
them, to answer touching their dealings in that behalf, so behaving in the
execution of the premises that by their default the rights of the crown be not
lost; as with concurrence of them who were in law required the said "William
was admitted, instituted and inducted; and the king's will is to maintain the
rights of the crown, and the laws and customs of the realm, as by his
coronation oath he is bound to do, coercing such as impugn the same (Close Rolls of the
reign of Richard II, 1389
to 1392, page 128).
Prior to the dispute, John de Hynkeley had been formally presented
as the priest of Malpas on 10 September 1384 by Lord John de Sutton, the lord
of Malpas. In the late fourteenth century, the Barony of Malpas was fractioned,
with families like the Suttons, Egertons, and later
the Breretons holding or claiming multi-quarter
stakes in the local manor lands and church patronages. The right of advowson
was treated as a valuable property asset because it allowed the patron to award
a lucrative ecclesiastical living, complete with local tithes and land
revenues, to a preferred candidate. Between 1390 and 1392, Richard II attempted
to intrude upon this regional patronage by challenging the traditional rights
of the local lords and asserting the Crown's right to present its own royal
clerks to the Malpas benefice. This was part of a broader political strategy by
Richard II to consolidate royal authority in Cheshire,
a region he heavily relied upon for personal power and military support. The
local community, including the incumbent priest John de Hynkeley and local
landowners, fiercely resisted the Crown's intervention. Such disputes
frequently escalated. Under laws established since the reign of Henry II,
disputes over advowsons were handled in secular courts rather than
church courts. This allowed the King's bench to heavily pressure local gentry. The
people of Malpas and their regional lords wished to maintain a priest from
their immediate community rather than a crown-appointed clerk who might act
primarily as a royal tax collector or absentee official. While Richard II
frequently attempted to override local feoffees during his reign, local
families in Malpas systematically used legal manoeuvring, land feoffments, and
marital alliances to continuously shield and recover their traditional stakes
in the parish church from royal overreach.
On 26 November 1390 there was granted Commission to the justice
and chamberlains of Chester, and the persons supplying their places, to arrest
and imprison until further order all impugners of the king's right to present
William Cristendome to a moiety of the church of
Malpas, he having been duly admitted, instituted and inducted, but prevented
from collecting the emoluments thereof, and all who so disturb his possession
of the same ; and of this they are to make public proclamation at Malpas and elsewhere
in the county, as they deem fit. (Patent
Rolls of the reign of Richard II, 1388
to 1392, page 351).
By October 1389, Richard II had stepped in to assert a royal right
to fill a vacancy in one of the moieties at Malpas, appointing a clerk named
William Cristendome. While Cristendome had gone through
all the formal legal and religious ceremonies (he was admitted, instituted
and inducted), he had faced immediate, aggressive local resistance. He was prevented
from collecting the emoluments thereof. In the fourteenth century, being a
rector was a major source of wealth derived from tithes, local
agricultural taxes, land rents, and fees. Local factions or rival claimants to
the barony were physically or financially blocking Cristendome
from receiving this income, likely arguing that the King had overstepped his
bounds and usurped their traditional right to name the priest. Because
Malpas sat within the Palatinate of Chester, a region with its own distinct
legal system under the Crown, the King took drastic measures to enforce his
will. Instead of letting the matter wind through slow ecclesiastical courts,
the King issued a direct military and judicial mandate to his principal
regional enforcers: the Justice and Chamberlains of Chester. They were granted
sweeping powers to arrest and imprison indefinitely impugners who
questioned the King's appointment or harassed Cristendome.
They were also to make public proclamations at the Malpas market cross and
throughout the county to publicly shame the opposition and loudly re-assert
that the Crown controlled the church.
In short, Malpas was experiencing a localised but high-stakes
standoff where the Crown used the threat of imprisonment to crush local gentry resistance
over church revenues and patronage power. This occurred before Ricjhatrd II’s tyranny (1397 to 1399), during a period when
the king was still reigning through moderation and cooperation. Yet medieval
kings viewed Cheshire as a Royal Palatinate as essentially the King's personal
domain. Even during his quiet period, Richard was actively
building up Cheshire as a hyper-loyal military stronghold, cultivating local
gentry and creating a private army of Cheshire archers who wore his personal
badge, the White Hart. When locals in Malpas dared to resist the King's
appointment of William Cristendome, they weren't just defying an abstract law;
they were defying the King in his own backyard. Richard’s fierce reaction in
1390 was not a symptom of the paranoia that characterised his later tyranny; it
was a firm, calculated reminder to the people of Cheshire that the Crown expected
total, unquestioning obedience in exchange for the local privileges they
enjoyed.
1392
On 29 May 1392 at Stamford and on 16 October 1392 at York, there
was recorded the Ratification of the estate of Thomas Hilton as parson of a
mediety of the parish church of Malpas in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield
(Patent Rolls
of the reign of Richard II, 1391
to 1396, page 66,
183).
Then on 26 February 1394 at Westminster there was a record of the Presentation
to R. bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, of Thomas de Hilton, for admission to a
mediety of the church of Malepas in his diocese,
lately recovered in the King's Bench against John de Hynkeley. (Patent Rolls of
the reign of Richard II, 1391
to 1396, page 373).
The last entry reveals that a dispute had arisen over who actually owned the right to appoint the priest (advowson).
The King’s lawyers sued a local figure, John de Hynkeley, in the Court of
King's Bench. The King won the lawsuit and recovered the right,
stripping Hynkeley of the appointment power and allowing
the King to present Thomas de Hilton instead.
1397
On 26 May 1397 at Westminster there was recorded the Ratification
of the estate of Richard Conyngston as parson of a mediety of the church of
Malpas (Patent Rolls of the reign of Richard II, 1396
to 1399, page 138).
1400
Revolution against Henry IV
On 22 May 1400 there was a
general pardon by Henry IV, following his usurpation of the Crown from Richard
II, to all the king’s lieges of the county of Chester for all treasons,
insurrections, felonies, rebellions and trespasses committed by them from
Christmas last to the Purification, except murders and rapes, but a number
of men were excluded from this general pardon including John Davidson leche
of Malpas; David Dodde; John del Malpas; Thomas de Grene of Malpas; Robert de
Sutton of Frodesham; and David Dodde of Egge. (Patent Rolls of the reign of Henry IV, 1399
to 1401, page
285 to 286).
This general pardon on 22
May 1400 was granted by Henry IV to suppress anti-Lancastrian unrest in the
County of Chester following the Epiphany Rising. The named individuals,
including John Davidson, David Dodde, and Robert de Sutton, were excepted because
they were identified as die-hard Ricardian loyalists, former members of Richard
II’s private Cheshire
Guard, or primary instigators of the local revolt who were forced to
sue for individual pardons.
When Henry Bolingbroke
usurped the throne from Richard II in autumn 1399 to become Henry IV, he
inherited a deeply unstable kingdom. No region was more hostile to his new
regime than Cheshire. Richard II had elevated Cheshire to a principality, showered
its gentry with titles and annuities, and recruited his infamous, highly loyal
personal bodyguard, the Cheshire Guard,
directly from the county. When Henry's invading forces marched through Cheshire
in 1399, they subjected the area to harsh retribution and violence.
In January 1400, a
conspiracy of counter-revolutionary nobles launched the Epiphany Rising to
assassinate Henry IV and restore Richard II. Simultaneously, an anti-Lancastrian
rebellion flared within Cheshire itself. Rebels attacked Chester Castle and
attempted to hold the county for the deposed king. The rebellion failed, and
Richard II died mysteriously, likely starved on Henry’s orders, at Pontefract
Castle in February 1400 to eliminate him as a focal point for future revolts.
By May 1400, Henry IV used a mix of tactical leniency and intimidation to
pacify the county: a general pardon designed to sweep up the lesser offenders,
restore basic legal order, and prevent Cheshire from remaining an open hotbed
of insurrection.
The Calendar of the Patent
Rolls lists over 100 men explicitly excluded from this blanket mercy. They were
isolated for three primary reasons. Some were core ringleaders and activists.
Rather than giving a free pass to the ringleaders who orchestrated the attacks
on Chester Castle, Henry's government singled them out to prevent immediate immunity.
Many of those excepted were former retainers, archers, and loyalist elements of
Richard II’s military affinity. Men from Malpas, Frodsham, and Edge belonged to
prominent local families that had heavily benefited from Richard II's
patronage. For example, the Suttons and Doddes were
deeply embedded in the county’s military structures. Being excepted from
a general pardon did not necessarily mean immediate execution. Instead, it
meant these men were compelled to sue for individual pardons.
By forcing men like John
Davidson, David Dodde, and Robert de Sutton to surrender independently, the
Crown achieved two goals. It forced them to formally acknowledge Henry IV's
legitimacy, and it required them to find financial sureties, large
monetary bonds, from their neighbours to guarantee their future good behaviour.
See McNiven, Peter, The
Cheshire Rising of 1400.
1428
On 15 September 1428 there
was a Presentation of Adam Irland, chaplain, to the parish church of Malpas in
the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, void by the death of William Baxter,
late rector of the same (Patent Rolls of the reign of Henry VI, 1422
to 1429, page 501).
1431
By an agreement dated 30
November 1431, formally acknowledged on 10 January 1431, Nicholas Wetton,
parson of Malpas, bound himself in a recognisance of £200 to a clerk, Richard Selby,
secured against his property and church goods in Shropshire. Following this,
the Prior and Convent of St James, Dudley granted Selby an indented gift of a
£10 annual rent for the duration of Wetton's life.
Nicholas
Wetton parson of a mediety of Malpas in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield
to Richard Selby clerk. Recocgnisance for £200, to be
levied etc in his lands and chattels and church goods in Salop. Then John prior of the
house of St. James Duddeley co. Stafford and the convent to Richard Selby
clerk. Gift indented of a yearly rent of £10 payable at the house of Converted
[Jews] in the suburb of London to him or his attorney upon receipt of an
acquittance there dated during the life of Nicholas Wetton parson of a mediety
of the church of Malpas in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, and covenant
to pay with the arrears 100s. in name of a pain as often as there shall be
default of payment for one month, and 10 marks for every date at which they
shall allege in their discharge an acquittance bearing date elsewhere, such
acquittance being void. Proviso that if the said Richard shall die in the life time of the said Nicholas the
said rent shall cease. Dated the chapter house Duddeley,
30 November 9 Henry VI. Memorandum of acknowledgment in the chapter house of
the said priory 10 January before John Harper, by virtue of a dedimus potestatem which is on the chancery file. (Close Rolls of the reign of Henry VI, 1429
to 1435, pages 102,
108).
1438
William de Brereton,
grandson of Sir William de Brereton, chivaler or
knight raised a petition. When
the grandfather died around 1426, an official inquiry (inquisition) correctly
found that he held massive estates in Cheshire, but a clerk's mistake recorded
the grandson's birthdate incorrectly as 1425 (4 Henry VI) instead of 1423 (2
Henry VI). This error made the grandson look like an underage minor (12 years
old) when he was actually older. Because the records stated
he was a minor, the King seized the lands into royal custody (wardship) and
collected all the estate profits, amounting to a massive £438 6s, until a later
inquiry proved William was actually over 21 years old
and entitled to his inheritance. William petitioned the King at Windsor Castle
regarding the error. King Henry VI accepted the proof of his real age, granted
him official possession (livery) of his lands, and issued a royal pardon
forgiving any administrative issues or unlawful entries regarding the estate
and its past profits.
On 18 February 1438 there
was a petition presented at Windsor Castle by William de Brerton, son of de Brerton, son of William de Brerton, ‘chivaler,’
it appears that inquisition taken before John Wetenhale of Wiche Malbank, escb the county of
Chester, on a writ of diem clausit extremum, it was
that the said William de Brerton, ‘chivaler,' died seised in his (as of fee of a fourth part of a moiety and
of a moiety of a fourth moiety of the manor of Malpas, and of a third part of
the Pikton, worth £40 a year, and of 11 messuages
with lands a in Wordhull worth £40 a year, 8
messuages with lands adja Croweton, worth 64s 2d a
year, a messuage and 40 acres of Wyrehall, worth 30s.
a year, and a ‘wychehous,’ in Northwich yearly value
beyond the reprises ; and that he died on Sunday St. Dunstan, 4 Henry VI, and
that petitioner was his next heir a 12 years at the Nativity of the Virgin. 4
Henry VI ; and thereupon premises were taken into the king's hands, who had the
profits amounting to £438 6s. until 18 September, 18 Henry VI, when was issued
to the escheator of the said county to prove the age of William, on which it was
found by inquisition that he was 21 years and more, having been born on the
nativity of St. Mary, 2 Henry VI; by a clerk's mistake he was returned as
having been born on Wed the nativity of the Virgin, 4 Henry VI, by an
inquisition of eleven and by the former inquisition he obtained livery of his
lands; that on his petition, pardons him any entries made by him into them 18
October, 18 Henry VI, with the mesne profits. (Patent Rolls of the reign of Henry VI, 1436
to 1441, page 138).
The Breretons
of Malpas in the Tudor Court
1476
On 16 November 1476 there was granted at Westminster a
Pardon to Ranulph Brereton, knight, of Malpas, co. Chester, late sheriff of
Stafford, of all offences committed by him and all fines, amercements, issues,
debts, accounts and arrears due from him to the king by reason of his office
(Patent Rolls of the reign of Edward
IV and Henry IV, 1467
to 1477, page 604).
In fifteenth century England, serving as a county
Sheriff such as the Sheriff of Staffordshire was a precarious and expensive
duty. Sheriffs were responsible for collecting the Crown's local revenues, tax
arrears, and court fines. If they failed to collect the full amounts due, or if
their accounting records were disputed during the strict audits at the King's
Exchequer, they became personally liable for the debts, amercements
(judicial fines), and arrears. A royal pardon of all offences,
fines, and arrears did not necessarily mean Sir Ranulph committed a crime.
Instead, it functioned as a vital official discharge. It cleared his personal
ledger with the Crown at the end of his term, ensuring the King could not seize
his lands or imprison him for outstanding administrative debts.
The Breretons
of Malpas, Cheshire, were one of the most powerful and influential gentry
families in the region. By successfully securing this discharge, Sir Ranulph
protected his ancestral estate in Malpas. Sir Ranulph's immediate successor, Sir
Randolph Brereton, used the family's protected wealth and growing court
influence to fund extensive, late fifteenth century renovations to St Oswald's
Church, Malpas. This included building the magnificent Brereton Chantry Chapel
inside the church, where several generations of the family are buried.
The landowners of Malpas
were not merely isolated border lords. They were powerful administrators
operating across county lines, from Cheshire to Staffordshire, and commanding direct
legal influence at the royal court in Westminster.
1480 to 1500
The church of St Oswald underwent extensive reconstruction; side
walls of the nave were demolished down to the windowsills to install much
larger windows, a clerestory was added, and the famous timber panelled roof
with gilded bosses and carved angels was installed alongside unique
misericords.
The Church of Malpas is a handsome specimen of
the enriched Gothic of the later part of the reign of Henry VII, and consists
of a low tower, nave, chancel, and side aisles, which terminate in two chancels
erected by the Cholmondeleys of Cholmondeley, and Breretons of Shocklach and Malpas
Hall. The windows are large and well calculated for a brilliant display of that
essential accompaniment of Gothic architecture, with which the taste and piety
of earlier ages decorated the Cheshire churches in profusion. They are,
however, too large to be filled, as they now are, with common glass, and cast a
cold and cheerless air of nakedness on the whitewashed walls. (Ormerod, George (1882 revision) History of the County
Palatine and City of Chester, Volume 2, page
343).
1495
In February 1495, Sir William Stanley, the exceptionally wealthy
and powerful Lord of Holt Castle, located near the Welsh border and Cheshire,
was executed for his role in supporting the Yorkist pretender Perkin Warbeck.
Malpas is located just a few miles away from Holt Castle (south of Farndon), at
the epicentre of the 1495 treason investigations. Stanley's execution sent
shockwaves through the region. Because Stanley had been the dominant regional
magnate in Cheshire and North Wales, Henry VII immediately cracked down on the
local gentry who had been within Stanley’s sphere of influence or political
network. To ensure their loyalty, Henry VII used the system of fiscal feudalism,
binding local elites to the Crown through very large bonds and recognisances.
On 5 December 1495 and obligation was taken concerning Rowland
Bulkeley, esquire of Bewmaris, Thomas Salesbury of
Denby, Walter Griffith of Carnarvan, North Wales, and
Ranulph Brereton of Malpas, Co Chester, esquire, to the king. Bond in £500,
payable at Christmas, to be avoided if the said Rowland maintain his allegiance
to his highness and depart not more than ten miles from London without the king’s
licence. (Close Rolls of the reign of Henry VII, 1485
to 1500, Folio 916).
Rowland Bulkeley was politically suspect; he was effectively
placed under house arrest" in London. To guarantee his compliance, three
major regional figures from North Wales and Cheshire, Thomas Salesbury, Walter
Griffith, and Ranulph Brereton, were forced to act as sureties, risking an very large £500 fine (worth millions today) if Bulkeley
broke his allegiance.
Malpas was home to one of the most trusted and influential gentry
families in the County Palatine of Chester. The Breretons
were climbing rapidly into royal favour. Because they possessed the financial
wealth and local muscle to back a £500 bond, the Crown relied on them to police
their neighbours.
Malpas sat at the geographic intersection of Cheshire, Shropshire,
Denbighshire, and Flintshire. The composition of this bond illustrates how
Malpas functioned as a gateway connecting the English palatinate to North
Wales. The men listed form a strategic network spanning Anglesey/Beaumaris
(Bulkeley), Denbigh (Salesbury), Caernarfon (Griffith), and Malpas (Brereton).
1504
Ralph Brereton was required to pay 400 marks yearly out of the
revenues of the county of Chester. This payment was to be made over and above
regular outgoings to King Henry VII or his second son, Prince Henry (the future
King Henry VIII). This strict, aggressive enforcement of debts
and heavy financial bonds was characteristic of Henry VII’s reign. He used the
legal system and harsh financial penalties to secure royal revenue and
systematically break the independent power of local nobility and officials.
Ralph Brereton of Malpas, for £1,000; Randolph
(sic) to pay 400 m. yearly above outlay (ultra misas
(over and above expenses/outgoings)) to the king or his second son prince
Henry from the issues of the county of Chester, so long as he is deputy
chamberlain, into the hands of Thomas Lyoun receiver general and to allow no
sums due from officers of the county on the determination of their accounts to
be paid to others till this sum has been delivered and to cause defaulting
accountants to be committed to the king's prison of Chester and there detained absque ballio, bast[one] seu manucapcione custodis (without bail, mainprise, or surety of a
keeper/guardian", meaning the defaulters were to be imprisoned without
being released on bail or surety until the debts were recovered) till their
debts have been levied from their goods and chattels or those of their sureties
and pledges (Close Rolls of the reign of Henry VII, 1500
to 1509, Folio 377
(ix)).
1505
On 5 April 1505 there was Recognizance to the king for £1,000
by Randolph Brereton of Malpasse and John Warberton
of Harley, both co. Chester, and Richard Cholmley of Cothynghame
co. York, knights, and Peter Dutton of Hatton co. Chester, esquire. Condition : Randolph to account faithfully as chamberlain of
Chester and Flint, paying 40 marks a year for rents etc. to John Heron or other
receiver appointed by the king, besides all moneys received by him from
sheriffs, escheators, bailiffs errant, ringilds and
other subordinate officials. (Close Rolls of the reign of Henry VII, 1500
to 1509, Folio 490).
1506
There was a sale of the manors of Oldcastle, a moiety of Malpas (Close Rolls of the
reign of Henry VII, 1500
to 1509, Folio 965).
1520
Roger Brereton, of Westminster, alias of Malpasse, Cheshire was granted a Pardon for the
murder of Richard Tilston at Westminster, delivered in Westminster on 25 April
12 Henry VIII (Public Records of the reign of
Henry VIII, Volume 3, Part 1, Folio 779).
Roger Brereton was a member of the powerful Brereton family, the fourth son of
Sir Randle Brereton, who served as Chamberlain of Chester. Roger held positions
at court and later became an influential figure in Welsh Marches and Cheshire
administration. Richard Tilston was a member of another
prominent Cheshire gentry family from Huxley/Hatton, closely interconnected
with local landholdings.
The murder took place around 1518 before the altar of a chapel
inside the Palace of Westminster. Committing an act of violence or murder
inside a royal chapel, particularly at the altar, was a severe breach of both
the King's peace and religious sanctuary, carrying deep sacrilegious weight.
Despite
the shocking nature of a murder at a Westminster altar, Brereton’s status,
court connections, and his family’s immense influence under Henry VIII allowed him
to secure a formal royal pardon. Rather than ruining him, he went on to hold
several prominent regional offices, including serving as a Member of Parliament
and Sheriff later in life.
1532
There was a royal pardon and ratification issued by King Henry
VIII in September 1532 to the high-ranking clergyman, Master John Brereton
which legalised his right to simultaneously hold multiple lucrative church
offices, including the parish church of Malpas, despite strict legal
restrictions against doing so.
Master John Brereton, canon of London, doctor of decrees. Pardon
for having obtained a bull, dated at St Peter’s, Rome in 1531 authorising
him, if the mastership or custody of the St Augustine
hospital of St Bartholemew, in West Smythfeld, near
and against the walls of London, should be committed to him (which mastership or custody was lately held in commendam by Edward Staple, bishop of Meath, by Apostolic
dispensation, and is now void), to hold the same in commendam,
along with other incompatible benefices, the said John being then priest and
chaplain of King Henry VIII, canon and prebendary pf St Paul’s London, and St
Stephen’s, London, and having obtained by dispensation the parish churches of
Malpas and Cristelton, Coventry and Lichfield
diocese. This patent also ratifies the bull and allows the said John to publish
the same, and put it into execution. (Public Records of the reign of Henry VIII, Volume
5, Folio g
1370 (13)).
John Brereton’s ability to secure the wealthy living of Malpas,
alongside his high status in London and the King's court, evidences
how the Brereton family leveraged church appointments to consolidate their
wealth and regional influence. Because Brereton was heavily active in London
as a canon, doctor of decrees, and royal chaplain, it he will have been an
absentee rector for Malpas. He likely lived in London, collected the tithes and
financial yields from Malpas, and paid a poorly compensated local curate to
handle the actual spiritual duties in the parish.
In 1532, Henry VIII was in the middle of his dispute with Rome
over his annulment from Catherine of Aragon. Only a year or two later, Henry
would completely break from the Catholic Church, pass the Act of Supremacy, and
ban all Papal Bulls entirely. This record shows that in late 1532, the old
system was still functioning. English priests were still buying dispensations
from Rome, and the King was still willing to ratify them for his favoured court
chaplains.
1536
The Lands, &c. of William Brereton, Esquire in the Account
for the year ended Michaelmas last 27 Henry VIII, included gift of Sir
Randall Brereton, his father, lands in Malpas, &c., of the annuity of
William Brereton Esq 64s 1d. (Public Records of
the reign of Henry VIII, Volume
10, Folio 878
iii).
1543
Wm. Hill, clerk, King's chaplain. Presentation
to a moiety of the rectory of Malpas, Chester diocese, void by the death of
John Brerton and in the King's gift by grant of Sir Rowland Hill of London and
Wm. Breerton of Breerton,
Cheshire, the patrons. (Public Records
of the reign of Henry VIII, Volume 18 – Part 1 Folio 226
(13)).
1545
On 17 April 1545 in a letter from Shrewsbury to the Commissioners
of Musters of Cheshire, he wrote, Whereas the King's ancient enemies, both
Scots and Frenchmen, of their insatiable and deadly malice, intend to annoy
this realm both by land and sea, and as the certificates of musters lately
taken before you do not set forth to whom the men therein certified belong, the
King commands you, within your hundreds and divisions, to put ready the said
men to the number of 3,000, as many as possible to be horsemen, so horsed as to
be able to serve when they reach the Borders, and the rest footmen, archers and
billmen (arms described), to be ready before 12 May next. You are not to
meddle with servants or tenants of the earl of Derby, who is appointed to serve
in person. Those appointed to lead the men included Sir Randall
Manwaryng, Sir John Massy, Sir Hugh Cholmondeley, Sir Urien Brereton, Sir Roger
Brereton, Sir Richard Egerton, Sir William Brereton, Sir Hugh Claveley, Randall
Brereton of Malpas and others. (Public Records of
the reign of Henry VIII, Volume 20 – Part 1 Folio 538).
Bibliography
Crossley, Fred H, and Wolley Dod, JC (1949), An Architectural
History of the Church of Malpas in the County of Cheshire.
Hayns, David (2016), Malpas: Cheshire’s Town in the Marches.
Kenyon, William (First published 1895; 3rd edition 1914; facsimile
reprint by Malpas Field Club, 1995), Malpas: Parish, Town and Church.
Ormerod, George (1882 revision) History of the County Palatine
and City of Chester, Volume 2, pages
328 to 347.
Further research
For detail on land transactions, Calendar
of Fines, counties of Chester and Flint, Edward I, 1280
to 1307, search for Malpas.