motte 9

Page Ten

So the bishop got the lot and gave it to a hospital.

This was a strange deal, in my opinion, and a principle for understanding such deviousness is to 'follow the money'. However, Hugh de Puiset was very rich and I think we should follow the land.

Nichols (1846-58) has a more detailed account of the wager of battle, viz. "Ralph, son of Paulinus of York, gives to the leprous brethren of the hospital of St. Lazarus and St. Mary in Sherburn , a third part of the vill of Garmondsway, which he gained by the issue of judicial combat between Peter de Ketleby and Roger de Alvestan, the former being the the champion of Ralph., on condition that they pay to him and his heirs 4 marks annually.

The instrument 'of land transfer' specifies that he assigned to Bishop Pudsey the remaining two parts of the vill of Garmondsway on the consideration of the Bishop paying him 64 marks and defraying the expenses of the combat, in order that the Bishop should give them also to the hospital." Nichols cites another document indicating that the claimants against whom Ralph successfully maintained the combat of his deputy were Ingebram de Kilton, Walter de Garmondsway and Ralph de Garmondsway 'another one!'.

So what happened was this:

Ralph, son of Paulinus of York (also referred to as Ralph or Radulf de Garmondsway), owned two thirds of the vill of Garmondsway. He was in dispute over the other third with three others, two of whom, Walter and Ralph, are described as 'de Garmondsway'. Bishop Hugh, always a generous benefactor to the clergy, wishes to endow a hospital with land and, thereby, income. Ralph, having won his case could not pay the costs so he gives his newly won third of the vill to the hospital, via the Bishop; but from this gift the hospital in turn must pay Ralph and his heirs four marks annually. The court costs are still not fully paid so Bishop Hugh, who wants the remainder of the village, offers Ralph a pension in exchange for the remaining costs and the rest of the land; and he now has the vill.

The acquisition of Garmondsway was perhaps of that order of proceeding which so incensed William of Newburgh; his comment was"ex parte minus honesta largitione construxit; alieni quippe juris non modicum huic devotioni per potentiam applicans, dum propria sufficienter impendere gravaretur"

For the economics of this affair we should consider the mark which was both a measure of monetary value and of weight, but never a minted coin. 1 mark = 13s. 4p. (= 2/3 of 1pounds; old style money) so 64 marks =42pounds 13s 4p. Remember that the 5 bovates under cultivation at Garmondsway in 1183 yielded annually 16s. 8p., or 1 marks. So Ralph has been given a yearly income equivalent to the monetary yield (tax to the Bishop) from 256 cultivated bovates. He is not rich but is financially secure.

The available records pertaining to the loss of the vill to Hugh de Puiset are confusing. There are promises, money and land floating around and, of course, Ralph is no match for de Puiset.

So what happened next?

Surtees (1823) cites from the Foundation Charter of Sherburn, viz. "Bishop Pudsey's endowment of his house of Sherburn includes ïthe vill of Garmundsway, which we purchased, charged with four annual marks issuing out of the third part of the vill, to Ralph, son of Paulinus of York, and his heirs;Í ƒ" The bishop is saying publicly that he "bought" the vill! One is tempted to call his bluff and ask to see the receipt. Whatever the truth of all this, Sherburn Hospital at Durham was endowed with the vill of Garmondsway and they hold it still.