Late Continued Demesne Farming at Otford

LATE-CONTINUED DEMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD By F. R. H. DL BOLLAY, M.A, F.R.Hist.S. As it is not very usual to find a demesne continuously exploited by its lord as late as the mid-fifteenth century, with detaUed accounts of the process, the manor of Otford is worth a short paper to show how an attenuated cultivation by the archbishop was carried on untU 1444. The numerous demesnes of the archbishopric, mostly lying in Kent, Sussex and Surrey, had with few exceptions been leased out by 1422 when a surviving valor gives a fairly comprehensive view of the estates.1 The Cathedral Priory had gone over to rents as a matter of policy in the 1390's, and it is not unlikely that the archbishop's councU had the same policy in train. The fact that a few widely-spaced manors like Tarring, Stoneham and possibly Wadhurst in Sussex, Otford, Wingham Barton, and possibly Teynham in Kent were stUl directly exploited, in whole or in part, as late as 1422 strengthens the impression that the supply of the archbishop's itinerant household was one reason for continued demesne-farming on selected manors. I t should be noted at the outset, however, that the demesne lands on the archbishop's manors were often rather smaU in comparison with the lands of the tenants. To put it another way, the major part of the archbishop's income from land, throughout the medieval period, was from rents. So the interest of his demesne exploitation derives less from watching a "high-farming" policy like that of certain monasteries than from the information its records give us about farming methods and, indeed, the local communities. In the thirteenth century the issues of Otford demesne and the rents of tenants were jointly answered for by a baUiff and a reeve in one great undifferentiated account.2 Accounts of the same sort survive from 1315-16 and 1322-3, where the accounting officer is caUed aserjeant(semews),andfrom 1355-6 where he is caUed reeve (prepositus)3 But from 1382-3, when something like a consecutive series begins again, the demesne is always left to the serjeant,4 the coUection of the tenants' rents to the reeve.5 This process of differentiating accounts is con- 1 Lambeth Palace Library, Cartas Miscellanea, vol. xi, no. 89. It is hoped to discuss the whole problems of farming the demesnes in a forthcoming book on the archbishop's estates in the middle ages. 2 Brit. Mus. Add MS 29,794 (account of 1273-4) j Lambeth Court Roll collection (abbreviated L.R.) no. 831 (account of 129G-7). 3 L.R. 832-4. 4 L.R., 835-6, 838, 841, 846, 846a, 849, 850, 863, 857-8,860, 863, 865, 868, 871. 0 L.R., 839, 842, 844-845a, 847, 854, 854a, 859, 861, 864, 866, 869-70, 872, 874. 116 LATE-CONTINUED DESMENSE FARMING AT OTFORD tinued and emphasized in the fifteenth century. We have a series of parker's accounts from 1400.1 After the demesne is whoUy leased out in 1444 we have not only the farmer's account, but a continued Serjeant's account, answering for the profits of the leased demesne and for the residence at Otford which the archbishop retained and used. And then, from about 1450, the large manor of Otford was broken up into a number of separately-accounting coUectorates : the borgha of Otford under its reeve, the borgha of Shoreham, and the once-dependent settlements at Chevenhig, Sevenoaks and Weald, each under its collector (usuaUy styled reeve), and Whitley (Whytclyff) woods under a forester. AU these accounts continue with few important breaks tUl Cranmer's time.2 The present concern is with the extent of the demesne and with what the Serjeants' accounts teU of its cultivation. The Domesday survey simply says that the manor of Otford was assessed at eight sulungs, that there was tenant-land for forty-two ploughs and demesne for six. The bare statement of Domesday is borne out and vastly amplified by two detaUed medieval descriptions of the demesne. A custumal of c. 1284 shows some 665 acres of arable scattered in fourteen parcels, ranging in size from 1 to 153 acres, about 55 acres of meadow in twelve parcels, and an indeterminate amount of wood, park and pasture land. The demesne description in this custumal is set out here in translation :3 In ' La Combe' 68 acres ; by the sheepfold 1 acre 1 virgate ; sub orto Pycard 23a. ; in ' Wycham ' 26a. 3v. ; in ' Northfield ' 153a. 3v. ; in ' Estfeld ' 83a. 3v. ; in the croft of' Wenlagh ' la. 3v. ; in ' Tylefeld' 12a. 3v. ; in the field by Preston 58a. 2v. ; in the field on the north and east side of Shoreham church 55a. |v. ; in the field by the sheepfold and vUl of Shoreham 26a. f v. ; a t ' Wodelond ' 34a. ; at ' Halstede ' 80a. ; in ' Morelegh ' 40a. preter Alvetum. Pasture in' Robeloteslond' 25a. besides Alvetum; a park and some other woods there ; in ' Gevelmed ' 6a. ; in ' Littelmed ' la. 2v. ; by the house of John Planez 3a. ; in ' Meleton ' 11a. ; in the same meadow 4a. 2v. ; in ' Rodbrok ' 9a. 2v. ; in ' La More ' 6a. 2v. ; at ' Southmell' la. 3v. ; between the course of two streams (aquarum) 3a ; in ' Redon ' and water 2a. 2v. ; in ' Stywmed ' 6a. ; in ' La Wore' la. A description of the demesnes as they were in 1515-16 has also 1 L.R., 847, etc. 2 The numerous later accounts, mostly in Lambeth Palace and the Public Record Office, need not be referred to here. 3 Dean and Chapter of Canterbury MSS, E24, fo. 69v. This is a copy, probably of the late fifteenth century, of a custumal and rental remade under Archbishop Pecham from a roll of Blias of Dereham, archbishop's steward c. 1207-14, covering almost all the archbishop's estates. 117 12 LATE-CONTINUED DESMENSE FARMING AT OTFORD chanced to survive on the parchment cover of an Otford court-roll belonging to Elizabeth's reign.1 It is a hasty scrawl, but provides a comparison interesting enough to reproduce here : A mesurement of the demeanes of Otteforde anno vij° H.viij. In Estfeld lyeng frome the lompytt and the path way leding frome Otteforde to Seale uppon the hUl ward, 62 acres 8 dayworks 3 perches. In Northfeld in one pece caUed the Eighteen acre there is [sic] 18 acres 18| dayw. In a nother feld caUed the 14 acres there is 14 a. and no mow. In WhythiU there is . . . £ a. 3 dayw. 3 p. In the Faston there is 43a. 7 dayw. 1 p. In a feld caUed the Combe and that half (?) to the hUl there is in one pece lieng in le[n]ght toward Shorham 66£ a. 6£ dayw. In a nother pece lyeng in the bottom under Coridlebushe (?) there is 10 a. 15£ dayw. Item in the fosse UndergrenhUl caUed the Drowwaye [Droveway] for the farmershope there is 2 a. 3 dayw. Item in a nother pece that is the hanger and side of the Mydlehill and so compasse [sic] the side of Stomblebussh and the Shotte above Cradlebushe there is 25 a. 12 dayw. Item in 2 peces mowe that lyeth at the Foxe . . . and Blackbushe, and boundith to the Highways leding from Ottford toward Woodland there is 15 a., and 1 a. lyeng between the parsons 3 a. and Mr. Palmer. The sum of acres with the Combe 120| a. 7 dayw., beside 31 a. that I cannott caUe to mynd. Item there is in Oxenlease 10| a. Item there is in Little Newe Park as to met him [measure it?] square 26 a. 18 dayw. Item there is in Gret New Park as we met him in 2 parts without the diche of the mede called Multon 60| a. 14| dayw. Item there is taken into the mede that was Gret Nupark 3 a. and 5 the . . . of the 2 nuparks and Oxenlease is 100 a. 3 r[ods] 2 dayw. Item there is in Wickham 24 a. 3 r. 5 dayw. 7 p. Item there is in the medes caUed the Blosse medes 1\ a. 8 dayw. and thereof in 2 parks . . . must have one . . . and then hath the lond in Redbrok 3 r. 6 dayw. Item there is in Mylton mede as far . . . now within the diche 16f a., and thereof the tenants hath one acre. Item there is in the . . . mede 8 a., and the tenants have 1 a. 15 dayw. Although this description is in places obscure or defective, a general comparison with the description of the thirteenth century is possible. 1 De L'Isle and Dudley MSS, Roll 478. I am indebted to Viscount De LTsle, V.C., for his kind permission to make use of his family papers. 118 LATE-CONTINUED DESMENSE FARMING AT OTFORD Of the thirteenth-century demesne fields, only four can be readily identified in 1515. Of these, the Combe and Wickham remain much the same, but North field and East field have been to a greater or lesser extent split up. The entirely changed nomenclature of the other fields cannot disguise the fact that some further splitting up has taken place. Names of demesne fields sown with various crops in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are given in the Serjeants' accounts, and some of these do not appear in either of the lists printed here. From an inspection of aU these sources, one must conclude that North field, East field, the Combe and Wickham had a continued identity from Edward I's day to that of Henry VIII, and that the field of 50-60 acres at Shoreham lasted through the fourteenth century, though all of these were liable to a certain morcellation while retaining their names. But the other parcels changed their names, and probably their boundaries, much more freely. In addition, meadow land and park land could in the later middle ages be cropped, whUe portions of supposedly arable land seem to pass out of cultivation altogether. I t is hard to calculate the nominal size of the demesne in 1515, but it seems a little smaller than it had been in 1284. A very different question is how much of the demesnes were actually laid under crop during the period of the archbishop's demesne exploitation. The situation is set out concisely in the Table. This shows that even in the thirteenth and early fourteenth century a much smaUer proportion of the demesne was cultivated than can be accounted for by fallow, and that even this amount contracts strUungly in the second quarter of the fourteenth century. From the middle of the fourteenth century to the middle of the fifteenth the contraction of the cropped area goes on, with ups and downs in particular years. From 1419 onwards the serjeant even seems to become self-conscious about the total area cropped, for he develops the habit of comparing the current acreage with that of the previous year. ParaUel with the contraction of the cropped acreage went the reduction in the number of fuU-time ploughmen employed by the lord. Domesday said there were six ploughs on the demesne, and six famuli caruce we find in the accounts until about 1393. Thereafter the number is four. The Table also shows the relative importance of the different crops. Wheat production was predominant, and of this a high proportion was sold on the local market or delivered to the archbishop's household. Production of oats declined steadUy from 1418, but the stabUity of spring barley cultivation is remarkable. The sowing of legumes was of minor importance, and by 1432 had almost ceased. The whole picture is one of an attenuated but viable economy lasting out the near-century 1355 to 1444, and kept going more to supply the 119 LATE-CONTINUED DESMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD household in London or north-west Kent than for any other ostensible reason. TABLE ACBEAGES OP DEMESNE SOWN Year 1273-42 1315-16 1322-3 1355-6 1382-3 1391-2 1399- 1400 1405-6 1410-11 1413-14 1417-183 1418-19 1422-3 1426-7 1427-8 1428-9 1430-1 1431-2 1436-7 1437-8 1438-9 1439-40 1440-1 1443-4 Wheat 94* 135 108 66 88 694 704 704 69 694 87 734 714 64£ 654 54J 64 71 63 Barley1 42J 24+28 17 + 23 15f+30 8 +32 5 +28 8i+254 8J+284 8J+364 6 +25 5 +20 4 +19 35 30 434 44 48 444 57 Oats 118 113 125 58 604 44 4m0 554 534 594 34 33 48 434 33 28 30 27 Peas 7 9 2 7 12 11 6 4 6 44 4 8 8 — — 12 12 8 5 Vetches 15£ 64 7 154 12 11 104 8 1n2 864 8 84 — — — — Beans — — «* — — — 2 — — — — — — — — — Total 277 3154 282 1984 2124 1684 168J 159i 184 J 1704 187 182 1564 163 1554 1424 151| 1524 136 143J 143i 152 1534 1494 Fifteen accounts over the period specify what crops were sown on particular fields. This is not enough to demonstrate a particular rotation technique, though clearly some sort of alternation was practised in the larger fields, while some of the marginal pieces seem only to have been laid under oats. Looldng at a cropping table over the available years, the most striking fact is the way in which the larger fields were themselves divided among different crops in any one year, and also were liable to have only a smaU proportion of their area cropped in any particular year. East Field was the most continuously and fully cropped one. In 1284 we are told it contained about 84 acres. From 1315 to 1440 it can be seen at intervals, now whoUy under wheat, or wheat and winter barley, now under spring barley, 1. Where two figures are given under barley, the first signifies winter, the second spring, barley. Note decline of winter barley cultivation. 2 Calculated this year from amounts of seed sown (Add MS 29,794). 3 Total acreage of years where crops are not specified is known through the account for the subsequent year. 1 All destroyed by flood. 120 LATE-CONTINUED DESMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD oats and legumes in some unpredictable combination, occasionally under barley alone. Although there are one or two years when the field was whoUy blank, it was, in recorded years, rarely cropped over less than 60 to 80 acres. But East Field was the exception. North Field was in operation over the whole period, yet after 1322 never more than about 40 of its supposed 154 acres were sown ; during the later middle ages some 20 to 40 acres of its surface were generally sown with blocks of wheat, spring barley and, occasionaUy, oats. In 1432 it was specified that 26a in the south of the field were under wheat, 18a in the northern part under barley.1 Roughly the same things could be said of the Combe, though this was cropped a little more fuUy. The big field in Shoreham was quite fuUy cropped tUl 1391, after which no record of cropping exists at ah. Other fields seem only occasionaUy and marginally cropped, though a demesne field at MUton was considerably used in the fifteenth century. If, as is apparent, the demesne arable was increasingly underexploited from the mid-fourteenth century onwards, what was happening to it ? The evidence is fragmentary, but there may be two or three complementary explanations. SmaU portions of the demesne fields were being let off to tenants by court-roll, for rent.2 Also, some demesne land, like some tenant-land, was going out of cultivation for lack of people willing or able to cultivate it.3 FinaUy, it is possible that some of the demesne went out of cultivation because the soU was not good and was easUy abandoned during a period of economic recession.* The leasing process is visible in a smaU way at least by the early years of the fifteenth century. Decayed rents and land left in the lord's hand are more apparent in the second quarter of the fifteenth century. But they are also concurrent processes. This tale of diminishing tillage is only one aspect of the archbishop's demesne economy at Otford. It is necessary to look briefly at the proceeds and expenses of demesne farming. 1 L.R., 860. 2 E.g., in 1404-5 the assized rents are swollen by a number of "new" rents (not necessarily new that year), including Is. 44d. from William and John, sons of Adam Sweyneslond, for 2a. 3r. lying in North Field and the Combe, let to them by court roll, and 4 dayworks by the sheepfold let to Adam Sweyneslond and his heirs forever for 4d. and the service of supplying lime to Otford manor whenever necessary (L.R., 839). 3 E.g., in 1437-8 some 23a. of demesne land in Shoreham was let to various persons at 8d. an acre. But all other demesne lands and pastures there brought in nothing for lack of a conductor, and were occupied by the lord's sheep (L.R., 863). 4 There seems to be an analogy in an Inquisition post mortem (vol. xi, no. 363), where an estate in Ickham is described in 1362 as consisting of " a capital messuage and 120 acres of arable, dry and sandy, of which 80 acres may be sown every year, but this year only 31 acres are sown, and of these 8 acres are sown with beans, peas and vetches." 121 LATE-CONTINUED DESMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD Demesne income is clearly set out in the Serjeant's accounts. It consisted first and foremost of the proceeds from seUing corn (indifferently to the archbishop's household or on the local market), livestock and the wool and woolfells of the lord's flock of 200 to 300 sheep. After these things in order of value came the misceUaneous group which the account-rolls caU " Issues of the manor ", and which include rents from hiring out the archbishop's pastures and his carts, and seUing pannage, brushwood from his copses, pigeons from his dovecote, and so on. Up to c. 1428 the sale of corn and stock accounts for about two-thirds of demesne proceeds, but thereafter only for a half or less, because in 1428 the annual fee-farm of Sundridge, worth £22 12s. and for long leased to the Isley family, was brought on to the Serjeant's account. The general truth about demesne proceeds is that they fluctuated considerably from year to year, according to the abundance and price of corn, but that no clear trend upward or downward is discernible. Demesne costs in the fifteenth century likewise fluctuated. For instance, nearly £14 were spent in 1382-3 in repairing the manorial buildings used for the archbishop's registrar, clerks and esquires. In 1402 a further £20 were spent on building repairs, and about £20 on buying sheep. On this side of the account, however, a marked trend can be observed in the rising cost of labour. Up to c. 1428 the annual labour bUl was rarely near £10. From then untU 1444 it was always weU over £10, and in the last year of demesne farming amounted to nearly £23. That year the lord's surveyor had to make new agreements with the famuli for their wages. When the buUdings were repaired, the workers paid, and the fields tiUed, the lord should have something to show for it, and this something consisted in the money and provisions supphed to the household, at Lambeth or elsewhere. WhUe reeve and serjeant each to some extent paid over both cash and kind, the vast bulk of the reeves' liveries were in money, the Serjeants' in wheat, oats, meat, ale, hay and wood. Such deliveries, whether victualia or pecunia numerata, are always entered on the " discharge " side of the account, but must, of course, be distinguished from expenses. When the archbishop's household took supplies, it normaUy purchased at, or aUowed the serjeant, current market prices. In some ways the year-by-year dehvery to the lord is a good index of the estate's profitability, especially if the arrears are inconsiderable and the capital investment reckoned in, for such payments represent a physical flow of wealth more certain and calculable than the " charge " side of accounts, which were simply statements of what was in theory owing. The Otford Serjeants certainly supphed their lord steadUy right up to the end of demesne farming. 122 LATE-CONTINUED DESMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD The difficulty of striking a modern balance with a medieval account, or even appreciating a medieval account with medieval eyes, has often enough been remarked. It is not possible to point to a clear accounting reason why the lord leased off his whole demesne in 1444. Several developments may have played a part in the decision. Archbishop Stafford succeeded Chichele in 1443, and the arrival of a new lord was sometimes the occasion for a new start by the financial organization. Secondly, the cost of working the demesne was undoubtedly becoming high. Thirdly, there were men ready to take on the demesne-lands, work themselves, pay a regular rent to the lord, and go on supplying his household with provisions against cash when required. The questions of labour and of the new farmers may, in conclusion, be briefly discussed. The rising cost of labour has aheady been alluded to. In 1443-4 the surveyor, William Stevens, had not only to convert the corn liveries of the famuli to money at a rate favourable to them, but had to arrange for the serjeant to be subsidized by payments from outside super husbondriam faciendam.1 Even though the standing labour force had been reduced since the earher fourteenth century, and now stood at four ploughmen, a carter and a shepherd,2 they came expensive when their wages and hveries were added up. Nor was the difficulty one of commanding customary services, as it was in other parts of England, since the customary services of tenants on these west Kentish manors of the archbishop did not count for very much. On the analogy of Wrotham and Bexley, it was more difficult in the later middle ages to keep the Kentish famulus sweet.3 Labour-services at Otford, such as they were, came to an end with the final leasing of the demesne. Portions of the demesne were being let out before the complete leasing of 1444. The first farmer who comes to notice was the then serjeant, Thomas Brounswayn, who in 1402-3 took the demesne lands and pastures with 9 acres of meadow in Shoreham for seven years at £3 6s. 8d. per annum* In 1414 he was holding them for term of life,5 but by 1418 they had passed to a member of the weU-to-do Otford famUy of Dorkynghole,6 and by 1427 to Robert Tymberden,7 whose family were also local tenants of 1 L.R., 871, 872. 2 L.R., 853. 3 E.g., at Bexley in 1350 the bailiff reported that the value of liveries claimed by the famuli must be allowed, et famuli aliter non potuerunt haberi (L.R., 240) j at Wrotham in 1401 extra pay was allowed in rewardo facto omnibus famulis manerii ut melius se haberent in servicio domini (L.R., 1142), * L.R., 838. 6 L.R., 850, 6 L.R., 853. That this family was of some financial standing is indicated in Early Cliancery Proceedings (PubUc Record Office, Class CI), Pile 24, no, 258 (1464). I owe this reference to my former pupil, Miss Margaret Avery, ' L.R., 857. 123 LATE-CONTINUED DESMESNE FARMING AT OTFORD long standing. In 1437-8, a bad year, only 23 acres of the Shorham demesnes could be leased, and those were taken up by various persons for a short term at 8d. the acre.1 But in 1439 the Shoreham demesnes were all let again, by court roll, at £3 per annum, to four men who continued to hold them severaUy for some time : John Sepham, John Reeve, butcher, Thomas Blakenham and Thomas Lane.2 At the same time John Multon took up an acre of the Otford demesne which lay next to property of his own for Is. p.a. In 1440 an acre of North Field was rented at 6d. a year to Thomas Court, whose own lands lay adjacent.3 Finally, in 1444, the whole demesne of Otford (less Shoreham, which by now was considered separate) was let to one Richard Clerk, clerk, for eight years at £15 6s. 8d. p.a., on condition that the archbishop should maintain the buUdings belonging to the husbandry unless the farmer himself, his servants or animals were responsible for the damage.* Major leases like this were made not by court roU but by private indenture between the parties. Henceforward, the Otford demesnes, less the smaU pieces previously leased off, were held by a single farmer, who took over the whole stock, including the demense sheep, which was priced at £20. The farmer held the outer court of the manor, with buUdings including the " BaUeychamber". The palace remained to the archbishop, to be used and coveted by the Tudors.5 The hidden strength of the early farmers, whose story does not concern us here, is suggested as well by place-names as in any other way. There is a Multon meadow in the demesne survey of 1515. Multons were again farming the demesne in 1536, and George Multon,6 the father-in-law of Lambarde, was by then styled " gentleman ". As for the other first farmers, the one-inch O.S. map perpetuates two of their names in Timberden Bottom and Sepham Farm. The latter is a patronymic traceable back to the thirteenth century. 1 L.R., 863. 2 L.R., 865. 3 L.R., 868. 4 P.R.O. Ministers' Accounts (S.C.6), 1129/1. 6 See a paper by the present writer in English Historical Review, lxvii, 20. 0 Westminster Abbey Muniments, no. 14303 ; cf. Prerog. Court of Canterbury, Will Register " Thower " quire 20 (will of Robert Multon of Otford, 1632). 124