THE BATTLE OF CASTLEFORD.

xi.

THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE BATTLE OF CASTLEFORD.

ACCORDING to the SAXON CHRONICLE, King Eadmund was murdered on St. Augustine's mass day, May 26, 946. Eadred, his successor, came to Taddenes Scylf the following year and received the fealty of Wulstân, the archbishop, and of the Northumbrian Witan, bnt "within a little space they belied it all, both pledges and also oaths," so that in 948 Eadred harried over all Northumberland, and burnt Ripon. On his return homeward the army within York overtook his rear at Chesterford, and made great slaughter.

FLORENCE OF WORCESTER is even more definite in his way of reckoning the date. He says that Eadred, the new king, was crowned at Kingston by Odo, on Sunday, the 7th of the Kalends of September (16 Aug., 946), and that the date of the murder of his predecessor, at Pucklechurch was Tuesday, May 26, 7th of the Kalends of June. He, however, allows three years to elapse before the King's visit to Tanshelf, which brings the date of the battle to 950. He calls the place

Casterford.

SIMEON OF DURHAM also gives the date of the murder at Pucklechurch, as Tuesday, the 7th of the Kalends of June (26 May), makes Edred receive the fealty of the Northumbrians at Taddene's Cliff, in 949, and the devastation of Northumbria and burning of Ripon, to take place in 950. He names the place of the battle Catesford.

JOHN WALLINGFORD, or at least the history which goes by his name, gives the following version, in which the site is not named, though described with a circumstantial particularity; "When he was about to return to South Anglia, fearing the enemy might lay in ambush for him, he appointed a rear-guard for the protection of his army; but almost all the men composing it were cut off by the Northumbrians, who had lain in wait for it in a pass, wherein much damage might easily be inflicted.". -This pass was evidently the ford of the Aire, at Castra-, Chester-, Cates-ford, according to the various early spellings; Osele (pron Ossel) according to Domesday; and Castleford according to the moderns.

The battle of Castleford is of importance, as it was the last struggle of the Northumbrians for independence. Its issue was that the Northumbrian Kingdom was finally and completely merged in that of the Angles.

* Tanshelf (See page 7).

The following is all that is really known or asserted of Thomas of Castleford. The first is from Leland Commentaries. (Commentarii de Scriptoribus Britannicis; Auctore Johanne Lelando, Londinate. OXONII M. DCC. IX.) The extract is from page 33, Cap. CCCXL., (Brit. Mus. 2510 ccc). The second is from John Bale, (Basle M.D. LVII. 1380) (Brit. Mus 819 b18. It is the hundredth of the 4th Centu ria, i.e. the 400th, but adds nothing to what we learn from Leland.

I. De Thomo Castellofordo. Thomas Castellofordus, monachus cœnobii Pontisfracti, impensius antiquæ rerum Anglicarum studebat cognitioni. Cumque in eo felicissime pedem promovisset opere, huc animum intendebat totum, ut Pontisfracti, quo ego emporium olim ab Antonino Legiolium dictum crediderim, gloriam modis exornaret omnibus. Aggressus igitur opus præclarum, historiam ab Ascheo Saxone, nobili possessore loci, deduxit usque ad declinationem nominis Laceiorum quo tempore hæreditas ad comites pervenit Mediolanenses. Addidit & eadem cura res gestas sui cænobii. Tantum ego ex illius libro didici quantum vix sperare licuit: id quod ostendam in libro de Civili Historia.

II. Thomas Castelforde, terræ Eboracensis, ac Benedictina professionis ad Pontem fractum, seu in Ponfretensi cœnobio monachus. Ab adolescentia ipsa prole educatus, & literis instructus fuit. Quæ illi honesta educatio, postea tam bene cessit, ut ex assidua diligentia atqu industria, quas studijs impendebat, & monasterio comodum & sibijpsi splendorem attulerit. Impensius quidem post uariarum artium exercitia, ut scribit Lelandus, antiquæ rerum Anglicarum studebat ille cognitioni. Cumqu: in eo (inquit) fælicissimè laborasset opere, huc animum intendebat_totum, ut Ponfreti, quod ego emporium olim ab Antonino Legiolium dictum credederim, gloriam modis exornaret omnibus. Aggressus igitur opus preclarum illud ab Askeo Saxone, nobili possessore loci deduxit, usqu ad declinatione nominis Laceyorum, quo tempore hæreditas ad Lancastrienses peruenit comites. Et opus hoc præclarum Castelfordius uocabat Historiam Ponfreti Lib I. Gesta sui cœnobij Lib I. Atq alia plura congessit. Tantum se ex hujus libris dedicisse fatetur Lelandus, quantum uix sperare licuit id: quod in libro de Civili historia, se patefacturum promittebat. His temporibus & ipsum claruisse puto.

DECEM SCRIPTORES.

xiii.

EXTRACTS FROM DECEM SCRIPTORES,
REFERRING TO PONTEFRACT.

THE FOLLOWING are the passages from DECEM SCRIPTORES, referred to at pp. 24, &c. :

HIST........ Ricardi PRIORIS Hagustaldensis ECCLESIÆ, De Gestis regis Stephani & de bello Standardii.

An. Dni.

Anno Verbi incarnati M.Cxxxv.........Unde statim justitia & pax, quæ cum eo diu regnaverant, 1135. in Normannia & Anglia pariter cum illo occubuerunt. Et justitiæ patrocinante quod solum tunc ubique regnabat, violentiæ & rapinæ, cædes & deprædationes, inauditæ crudelitates & innumera calamitates, loco pacis ac justitiæ suam tyrannidem latenter & patenter exercuerunt. Hæc autem omnia mala post mortem ejus tanto exuberantius & vehementius prævaluerunt, quanto majori potentia & districtiori justitia in vita sua plures depresserat, aggravaverat, spoliaverat, exhæreditaverat, exhiliaverat. Unde nacti occasionem quam ardenter desideraverant, singuli se vindicare festinabant, dum quicquid mali agere poterant eis impune facere licebat. Ea tempestate Willielmus cognomento Transversus qui honorem Fracti pontis (sic enim quoddam oppidum nominatur) ex dono Henrici regis habuerat, à quodam milite homine suo Pagano nomine, apud ipsum oppidum letali vulnere percussus, post triduum in habitu monachili mortuus est. Et quem patri suo Roberto de Lesci rex Henricus abstulerat, Ilbertus de Lesceio filius ejus mox eundem honorem recuperavit.- Edit. 1652, col. 309. [Thick large folio, double columns, the latter numbered instead of the pages.]

Simeonis Dunelmensis Historia continuata per Johannem Priorem Hagustaldensem.

Rex

Mortuo rege, Willielmum Transversum qui ex Stephanus datione regis Honori scilicet Pontifracto præsedit, An. Dni. miles quidam_Paganus de Honore illo occidit, & 1138. iste Ilbertus Honorem jure patrimonii possedit.Id. col. 262.

Stephanus

Turstinus

memorque voti sui Rex. quod juvenis apud Cluniacum fecerat, ad monachos 1141. Cluniaca professionis apud Pontemfractum pro

An. Dni.

fectus est.-Id. col. 267.

POPE NICHOLAS'S TAXATION.

BESIDES THE NONE ROLLS, (p33) there was a very important "Rate Book" kept, by which ecclesiastical taxation-like all others paid directly-was governed. Its history was as follows:-Pope Innocent the twenty-second, to whose predecessors in the See of Rome, the First Fruits and Tenths of all Ecclesiastical Benefices had for a long time been paid, gave the same in 1253 to King Henry the Third for three years, which occasioned a Taxation the following year, sometimes called the Norwich Taxation, and sometimes Pope Innocent's Valor.

In the year 1288, Pope Nicholas the Fourth granted the Tenths to King Edward the First for six years, towards defraying the expense of an Expedition to the Holy Land: and that they might be collected to their full value, a Taxation by the King's Precept was begun in that year, and finished as to the Province of Canterbury in 1291, and as to that of York in the following year; the whole being under the direction of John, Bishop of Winchester, and Oliver, Bishop of Lincoln.

A Third Taxation entitled Nova Taxatio was made as to some part of the Province of York in 1318 (Edward II.), by virtue of a Royal Mandate directed to the Bishop of Carlisle; chiefly on account of the Invasion of the Scots, by which the Clergy of those Border Countries were rendered unable to pay the former tax.

The Taxation of Pope Nicholas was for nearly three centuries, to use a modern term, the "Rateable Value" for all ecclesiastical Taxation, until 26 Henry VIII.

A copy of it was published in the early part of this century, from which we extract the following two particulars relating to Pontefract :

I. Capella Castri de Pontefr' divisa est in quatuor p'bend'.

-pp 298b & 323.

The above is from the antiq' tax', but there is a memorandum to some corresponding entries that they had been cancelled for the "reason noted on a memorandum of the 28th of Edward III. (t'cij) Easter term."

POPE NICHOLAS'S TAXATION.

XV.

II. S'm'a tax' hospital'm S'ci Nich'i Pontisfracti, S'ci Mich'is de Folsnap' 10 m'rc & de Alv'ton infra 10 0 0 & ad 10 m'rc & infra, taxator' 13 11 8. Inde S'ma tax' non excedent' octo marcas 0 5 0 & 6 mar' 0 5 0. S'ma tax' porc'o'is custodis Altar S'ci Mich'is in Eccl'ia Ebor' infra tax 10 0 0, 10 marc', 8 m'rc, 100s & 6 marcar' taxate 3 0 0.—p. 334.

From another part of the volume (p. 340), we obtain a key to the above which otherwise would be rather obscure. From it we learn that those concerned in making the levy had a similar memorandum referring to each place in order to shew how much a tax would raise according to different ways of levying it. Reduced into tabular form, this memorandum inform us that the rateable value of the small ecclesiastical rents of Pontefract was £13 11s. 8d., thus subdivided in different ways:

£ s. d.

This is interesting as showing how taxation was levied in the thirteenth and following centuries. A tax on values above £10, or on values above 10 marks (£6 13s. 4d.), or on values above 100s. (£5), was practically an exemption of all the small property; while if the tax was on values above 8 marks (£5 6s. 8d.), or above 6 marks (£4), it subjected £13 6s. 8d. to the tax-gatherer. This is almost exactly the principle of the Income Tax as at present levied; then as the produce being required mainly for the support of the army; then as now the private royal revenues supporting most of the other expenses of the crown; then as now, the smaller incomes being exempt.

now,

A ninth seems a singular proportion to grant to the King; but almost universally throughout the kingdom, the lords had granted a tenth part of all the produce of their estates to ecclesiastical purposes, so that when the property changed hands or was let to sub-tenants, only nine-tenths of the product passed under the lease. The king receiving a ninth of these nine-tenths, received a tenth of the whole.