What Were the Freeman of Grimsby Like ? A Look at an Old Case
What were the Freeman of the Borough of Great Grimsby like in Medieval Times ?
Well, being one, not quite medieval I hasten to add, I’d have to say a fine upstanding lot no doubt - however . . .
A fabulous piece of historicl research put together by Neville Sisson suggests even the Freemen’s Apple Barrel may have contained . . .
I hand you over now the Neville Sisson for a fabulous guest article he has kindly contributed
In late mediaeval times, English law was fairly well established and there were a series of courts to deal with matters, ranging from the manor courts which dealt with most minor local issues, to hearings before Justices of the Peace who dealt with more serious accusations of crimes such as theft, rape and murder. The justices would either mete out the punishment, defer the case until a second hearing or, if warranted, refer the case to the next visit of the King’s Bench to the county.
While studying The Peace Rolls of Lincolnshire; in particular, the Lindsey Roll, I found a series of case hearings in which a name kept recurring.
Having read and re-read the issues I thought that it would make a nice little vignette of a real-life situation affecting quite ordinary Lincolnshire people of the 14th. century. I have taken the facts as recorded in the original Latin together with English summaries and have hopefully woven together, a cogent yet fascinating story:
Robert Taverner alias Robert de Eynsham
On 20th June 1387 at the court sitting at Lincoln before Justice William de Skipwyth, it was asserted that, on the last Sunday before the feast of St. Barnaby the Apostle, Robert Tavern’ of Grimsby was at Barton and that during the night he stole two chests belonging to Sir Ade Fraunceys and that the chests contained one hundred marks in gold together with precious stones and other valuables worth one hundred pounds.
Taverner failed to appear before the court to face his indictment and he was therefore put in exigend, meaning that a writ was issued to the Sheriff to command Taverner to appear before the King’s Bench.
On the 10th. July 1387, this time at the court of Justice Robert de Wylughby convened at Louth, it was reported that Robert, now named as ‘Robert de Eynsham, taverner’, had seemingly been captured by the Sheriff and put in Grimsby Gaol, only to escape on Sunday, the Feast of the Translation of Saint Thomas with the assistance of Emma de Darby, his servant, and Brothers Thomas de Barton and Thomas Mason of the Order of Augustinian Canons of Grimsby!
Emma de Darby, Thomas de Barton and Thomas Mason are now also ordered to appear before the Kings Bench.
It seems that Emma had facilitated Robert’s escape and he had entered St James’ Church in order to seek sanctuary which would have rendered him invulnerable to the law as long as he stayed there. It appears that Brothers Thomas de Barton’s and Thomas Mason’s involvement was that they granted him sanctuary.
Robert must have thought he was safe as long as he remained in the church but he didn’t count on the next turn of events!
On 24th.July 1387, the same Justice Robert de Wylughby, convened a court at Caistor where it was reported that when Robert Taverner, prisoner, took sanctuary in ‘ the church of the Augustinian canons at Grimsby’, Gilbert Smyth and William Davidson of Grimsby forcibly entered the church and assaulted Robert Taverner, beating him, dragging him by the hair, and desecrating the church! For this infringement they were each fined one mark. ‘And so they should be’ you might be thinking, but here’s the rub, it turns out at the subsequent hearing that Gilbert and William were the Grimsby Bailiffs; the equivalent of today’s Boys-in-Blue!
‘The plot thickens’ as they say, but there is one final twist to the tale….
At the same sitting of Robert de Willughby, convened at Caistor that day; the original indictment of Robert Taverner is reiterated, but, the actual wording is significant :
……”Item dicunt quod Robertus Tauern’ et burgensis de Grimesby…..” translated – ‘Item, it is said that Robert, taverner and Burgess of Grimsby….
So it seems that his name was in fact Robert de Eynsham and that he was not only a taverner but indeed a Burgess, or Freeman of Grimsby doing ‘a moonlight’ robbing knights in Barton!
The Roll then goes on to say that he ‘at Barton-on-Humber, at night feloniously broke into the close and chamber of Joan, widow of William Davit of Barton and stole 
£100 in money and valuables and other goods valued at £200 from Sir Ade Fraunces of London; he fled to Grimsby and was arrested by Gilbert Smith and William Davidson, bailiffs of Grimsby.
There is no indication as to what happened to the accused in the meantime, except that he remained in exigend, (i.e.an outlaw), and was ordered to appear before the King’s Bench for trial when it was next due to sit at Lincoln. Unfortunately for Robert, who was presumably back in Grimsby gaol, the next sitting at Lincoln was due at Hilary Term, 1396 so it was going to be a long wait for justice!
I don’t know what the ultimate consequence was for our Robert but there are questions arising from this case. In the sequel to this tale I shall elaborate some of my ideas which suggest that this was tied into a most significant event……
Rod said,
August 9, 2010 @ 6:35 pm
Neville,
this is superb, many thanks for all the hard work, research and meticulous preparation - I’m sure it will be appreciated not just by me but many others as well, not only now but long into the future.
I’ve read it twice and am looking forward to more - it really is a cracking tale - history coming to life.
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
August 9, 2010 @ 9:53 pm
Rod,
Thanks for that. I’ve just got in from a meeting - Local history Society of course. Its been busy on here while I’ve been out hasn’t it - good to see!
I’m too tired to start on the sequel tonight but will get it done tomorrow.
Regards,
Neville
Amiguru said,
August 10, 2010 @ 6:21 pm
Part Two
Doing research such as the above is not only fascinating in itself, but at every turn it seems to raise questions and lead off down unexpected avenues of enquiry. The following is an account of the issues that have stirred me to look further, and the conclusions and potential answers I came up with. Hopefully, facts will be evident and my speculations clearly identified. While allowing my imagination some rein, I hope that all of my suggestions are plausible.
1387 was a most significant year in the history of England as the authority of the king, Richard II, and
his policies were being challenged by a faction know as the Lords Appellant who were a group of barons whose main complaint was that the king had made peace with the French. The situation was getting so dire that the 20 year-old king went on a traverse around the country mustering support for the storm that was evidently brewing. He even secretly sent an urgent message to one of his leading generals, Robert de Vere, Duke of Ireland, to return in haste.
These proceedings may well impinge on our local story in that the king had progressed as far as Lincoln, no doubt conferring with his close confidante and advisor, Sir John Bussy, thrice Sherriff of Lincoln. I am guessing that Sir Ade Fraunceys may well have been an agent of the king and on a mission to Hull, or indeed, the whole of the East Riding of Yorkshire to raise support for the king’s cause.
My questions are these regarding Sir Ade: Who was he? What was he, a Londoner, doing in Barton-upon-Humber? Why was he travelling in North Lincolnshire with such a fortune?
Modern spelling of his name would be Sir Adam Francis and it turns out that he was a rather significant person, having been Mayor of London in 1352-53‡ and, although he didn’t know it yet, he was a Great-great-great-great-grandfather of Ann Boleyn!
Why he was in Barton carrying “one hundred marks* in gold together with precious stones and other valuables worth one hundred pounds”? That amounts to £166 13s 4d, (£166.66), in total. Not a lot of money today but to give a yardstick of value, a quality horse in that period could be bought for £1! I would speculate that he was staying in Barton overnight awaiting a ferry crossing on the following day. If he was to have hired the ferry, it would most probably have been the one owned by Richard Earl of Arundel, and Eleanor his wife, as they had successfully petitioned the king in 1371 that Thomas Crispin who was colluding with the Abbot of Thornton to run a ferry from Barrow should cease as they were losing 10 marks per annum.
My questions regarding Robert de Eynesham are these: Was the ‘loot’ recovered? How was he able to escape? Did he know about Sir Ade’s presence in Barton?
If Robert got away for long enough, which is quite likely since communication with the Sheriff of Lincoln would take some time, he may well have split up and hidden some of the fortune. Perhaps his servant, Emma, used some of this to bribe the gaoler to turn a ‘blind eye’ or assist in some way in Robert’s escape; or maybe she used her ‘feminine charms’ to effect his release! Robert may well have been in Barton on legitimate business but as a taverner, he could have heard of the movements of Sir Ade through the county and took advantage of the opportunity.
Here my speculations must end for the time being, but just to tie up a few loose ends – the king didn’t choose his
generals well, as when his forces did engage with the Lords Appellant’s troops at the Battle of Radcot Bridge, their leader, Robert de Vere (q.v.) fled and the kings troops, leaderless, were subjected to an ignominious surrender. As a consequence, the king’s authority waxed and waned over most of the following decade culminating in his imprisonment in the Tower of London in 1399 where he effectively conceded the crown to Henry Percy who became Henry IV. Richard died, still in captivity in 1400 in mysterious circumstances. As was the norm in the middle ages, Richard’s supporters were either executed or, if they had fled the country, condemned to die should they be subsequently captured. The first to be executed by beheading was Sir John Bussy for “treason against the Kingdom”.
Who would have thought so much could be gleaned from a few scribblings in Latin on some old sheepskins? I am more than encouraged and no doubt lots more will follow, but worry not, I know that too much at once is a bad thing.
It is probably true that Robert de Eynsham, Sir Ade Fraunceys, Emma de Darby, Thomas de Barton, Thomas Mason, Gilbert Smyth, William Davidson, Joan Davit and all the Justices mentioned could not have dreamed that their exploits would have been under consideration 623 years later and that the whole world could know of it in the blink of an eye!
* On a technical note: a Mark was a value of two thirds of a pound, (13 shillings and 4 pence). There was no such coin, nor was there a pound coin; the gold currency of the day was the Noble worth 6 shillings and 8 pence, i.e. one third of a pound. Apologies if this is confusing for those raised on decimal currency!
‡ Liber Albus
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
August 10, 2010 @ 6:31 pm
Neville,
that’s a work of genius that, I hope everybody has read it.
Wonderful, I’ve read it twice over, even switched Sabaton off whilst doing so - that’s a compliment
Can’t thank you enough - not only for the article but for a masterclass in how to put something together
In appreciation
Rod
Chris Keyworth said,
August 10, 2010 @ 6:43 pm
so where is the treasure ?
is it buried localy?
or was it recovered?
Im sick of searching for King Johns Treasure in the Wash my wellies cant cope with that sort of mud
give me a Treasure in the Wolds to search for Barton to Grimsby its a narrow Corridor to search …. Any Takers..
Regards
Chris
well done Nev Great Add….