Siston,
Gloucestershire: c.1086 to c.1220
Niall
C.E.J. O’Brien
Introduction
Siston is a small
village and parish at the southern end of the County of Gloucestershire which contains
1,827 acres.[1]
It is situated about 7 miles east of Bristol Castle, ancient centre of Bristol.
The village lies at the confluence of the two sources of the Siston Brook, a
tributary of the River Avon. The village consists of a number of cottages and
farms centred on St Anne's Church, and the grand Tudor manor house of Siston
Court.
Domesday
Book
The manor of Siston was
anciently part of the Forest of Kingswood which ran eastwards from Bristol. The
manor was situated in the hundred of Pucklechurch. Anne held Siston at the time
of King Edward the Confessor.[2]
The parish church of Siston is dedicated to St. Anne, mother of the Blessed
Virgin Mary.[3]
Was this dedication made for Anne of Siston in the time of King Edward?
Anne of Siston was said
to be the widow of Serlo and that she later married Hugh de Stratton.[4]
The authority for this information is unknown and the facts questionable.
In the early years of
the Norman conquest of England a knight called Roger acquired the manor of
Siston and other land in Gloucestershire. Following his acquisition of the
Honor of Berkeley Roger took that place as his family name and thus became
Roger de Berkeley. In 1086 Roger de Berkeley held Siston in the Domesday Book.
The manor was taxed at five hides and paid 100 shillings yearly as it did in
the reign of King Edward.
Within the manor of
Siston there were two plough teams belonging to the lord and four teams
belonging to the tenants. Of the land, 720 acres was cultivated while 8 acres
was in meadow. There was no mill on the manor in 1086 while most of the other
manors in the hundred had a mill or two. Among the local people there were 8
villani (villeins), 10 bordadh (bordars) and 4 servi (serfs) which gave an
adult male population of 22. Siston was third out of the six divisions in the
Pucklechurch hundred in terms of population.[5]
Roger
de Berchelai (Berkeley)
Across Gloucestershire
Roger de Berkeley held eighteen hides one virgate and four acres according to
the general index of lay landowners compiled by Charles Taylor. This was not a
big estate but about the average among the lay landowners.[6]
But if you examine the
individual properties held in Gloucestershire by Roger de Berkeley you get a
different picture. These other properties of Roger de Berkeley included Corberly
in Rapsgate hundred (10 hides); part of Berkeley hundred (11 hides) and the
lordship of the hundred (he held the title of provost of Berkeley); part of
Dodintone manor in Grumbold’s Ash hundred (3 hides 16 acres) which he held
under the Bishop of Coutances and Etloe in Blidsloe hundred (third part of 7 hides)
which he rented from the king. Between the Wye and the Usk rivers Roger de Berkeley
held two carucates of land at Strigoielg.[7]
This was newly conquered land and thus was valued in the Norman carucate rather
than the English hide.[8]
In the town of Gloucester,
Roger de Berkeley held a house and one fishery.[9]
The most important
property of Roger de Berkeley was the land held in the Berkeley hundred and
from which he took his name and that of his descendants. The hundred was
ancient crown land and dominated the ancient county of Gloucester as the
Berkeley estate did throughout history. In 1872 the Berkeley estate was still
the largest in the county.[10]
Roger de Berkeley was made provost of Berkeley sometime between 1068 and 1071
by Earl William Fitz Osbern who was granted the title shortly after the
Conquest. King William confirmed Roger with the title in 1080.[11]
Roger de Berkeley held
land in other counties such as that of Foxeledge in Wiltshire.[12]
Roger’s brother Ralph de Berkeley also held land in Gloucestershire and other
counties such as Somerset.[13]
As was customary for
the new Norman landlords, Roger de Berkeley founded religious abbeys to pray
for their soul in the afterlife while they conquered in this life. Roger’s
abbey was that of the Priory of Stanley St. Leonard. To the new priory Roger de
Berkeley gave churches of Ozleworth, Coaley, Aringham, Uley and Slimbridge.[14] Roger
de Berkeley and his wife, Rissa, were among the early benefactors of the Church
of St. Martin at Auchy (now Aumale, France).[15]
Following on from the
example of other Norman conquers in England, and later in Ireland, Roger de
Berkeley joined a religious house becoming a monk of St. Peter’s Abbey,
Gloucester in 1091.[16] Roger
de Berkeley died in 1093.[17]
Berkeley
of Dursley successors
Roger de Berkeley was
succeeded by his son Roger de Berkeley, junior, of Dursley. The manor of
Dursley was part of the great Berkeley hundred. Roger de Berkeley, junior,
began building Berkeley Castle in 1117 and died before Michaelmas 1131. Roger
de Berkeley, junior, had a younger brother called Eustace of Nympesfield.[18] Nympesfield
was part of the Honor of Berkeley and was held by Nicholas son of Roger in
1262.[19]
Roger de Berkeley,
junior, was succeeded by his eldest son, Roger III de Berkeley. This Roger
completed Berkeley Castle.[20]
Roger III de Berkeley and his family were firm supporters of King Stephen in
the civil war against Empress Maud. In 1147 they were dispossessed of the
lordship of Berkeley. This was granted to Robert FitzHarding in 1166.[21]
The two families disputed the lordship of Berkeley from that time.
Siston
and Glastonbury Abbey
The civil war and the
Berkeley involvement also impacted on Siston. In January 1138 King Stephen
described Siston as the rightful property of Glastonbury Abbey by ancient
possession. It is said that in 1127 Siston was occupied by a person called Racendis,
who was possibly the widow of Roger II (died 1127) de Berkeley. She attempted
to bequeath it to Glastonbury Abbey, which held neighbouring Pucklechurch,
seemingly to deprive her nephew William of control of it. The Abbot sent
knights and monks to Siston to visit Racendis on her death bed to remind her of
her promise, only to find monks already in attendance from another Abbey, also
claiming her body and property. Following a public hearing and the payment of
40 marks by Henry of Blois, Abbot of Glastonbury, to Racendis, probably to go
to the other claimant house as compensation, the manor subsequently was
recognised as being held from Glastonbury, still however tenanted by the
Berkeleys.[22]
This position was said
to be formalised by a then lost charter from King Henry I (1100–1135), uncle to
Abbot Henry. A further charter of confirmation was granted by King Stephen
(1135–1154) in January 1138 which described Siston as rightfully held by
Glastonbury. Yet the element of doubt appears in the whole story when we see
that King Stephen was the brother of Abbot Henry.[23]
It would appear most likely that King Stephen and his brother invented the
whole story about the wife of Roger II de Berkeley gifting Siston to
Glastonbury. We saw earlier how the Berkeleys backed the Empress Matilda in the
war and lost the Honor of Dursley as a result. The granting of Siston to
Glastonbury was part of the battle between King Stephen and the Berkeleys.
By about 1153 Siston
was “restored” to the Berkeley family even if they never truthfully lost it. As
part of the settlement deal the Berkeley family recognised Glastonbury as
overlord with a payment of knight’s service. In 1218 Siston was given by
Glastonbury to the Bishop of Bath and Wells who held claim until the
dissolution.
Siston
and the Bishop of Bath and Wells
Yet there are few
references to Siston among the records of the Bishop of Bath and Wells. On 11th
April 1268 the dean and chapter of Wells granted a wood in Pucklechurch, beside
the park, to Robert Waleraund to be added to the park. This wood was formerly
held by Robert de Siston from Bishop Walter of Wells.[24]
In the fourteenth
century we find the Bishop of Bath and Wells using the position of Siston in
Gloucestershire and the Diocese of Worcester to avoid honouring tax claims by
the government. On 14th July 1333 the government issued a writ to
the Bishop of Bath and Wells to collect the levy on ecclesiastical goods and other
taxes. The writ was a repeat of previous writs issued and not replied to. One
of these levies was from Ralph de Subbury, clerk, for the farm of the manors of
Siston and Frompton which amount was £1,408. Bishop Ralph de Shrewsbury replied
that he collected no levies because Ralph de Subbery, and the others in arrears
of tax, held no benefice in the Diocese of Bath and Wells.[25]
Church of St. Ann at Siston
A few years before, in October
1326, Ralph de Subbury (spelt as Sobbury) was appointed attorney for Robert,
the Prior of Bath, for the following two years with Nicholas de Weston.[26] This
would point to an association by Ralph de Subbury with Somerset which was near coterminous
with the Diocese of Bath and Wells. Many years earlier, about 1200, another
Robert, Prior of Bath, gave seven marks from the church of Siston to William
the chaplain in repayment a loan given by William to the priory. Later in 1201
William gave another loan to the priory which was again repayable on Siston
church.[27]
This gives another association between Siston and the Diocese of Bath and
Wells.
Possibly because of
this association the government did not accept the Bishop’s excuse and sent another
writ to Bishop Ralph to collect the £1,408 due from Ralph de Subbury and from
the other clerks who owed tax. The Bishop again replied that as the clerks didn’t
have any benefice in the diocese, the Bishop wasn’t going to collect any tax
due. The government again sent another writ on 12th April 1334 to
collect the due money and Bishop Ralph gave the government the same reply.[28]
There appears to be no further attempt made by the government to collect the
levy on Siston through the Bishop of Bath and Wells. They may have tried
through other channels but I have not found any references.
Siston
“restored” to the Berkeley family
Meanwhile back in the twelfth
century, the “restoration” of Siston was followed with the restoration of the
Honor of Dursley to Roger III de Berkeley sometime after 1152. The family kept
Dursley for eight generations until Nicholas de Berkeley of Dursley died
without male issue in 1382. By the death of Nicholas de Berkeley of Coberley,
Gloucestershire, the male issue of Roger de Berkeley became extinct.[29]
In about 1165, an
agreement was made in the house of Robert FitzHarding at Bristol to settle
their disagreements by a double marriage. Robert’s son Maurice would married
Alice, daughter of Roger III de Berkeley of Dursley with the manor of
Slimbridge as her dowry while Roger’s son, Roger IV de Berkeley would marry
Robert’s daughter, Helen with the manor of Siston as her dowry.[30]
Roger III de Berkeley
died about 1170.[31]
Roger IV de Berkeley
and Helen Fitz Robert had at least four children and many descendants of which
Henry de Berkeley of Dursley was a great-great-grandson. In 1278 Henry de
Berkeley received £200 from Maurice de Berkeley, great-grandson of FitzHarding,
for a quitclaim of the lordship of Berkeley.[32]
A daughter of Roger IV
de Berkeley was called Isabel. She first married Thomas de Rochford and brought
the manor of Ozleworth to her husband. In about 1200 Thomas de Rochford granted
the manor to his brother, Robert de Rochford. Thomas de Rochford died about
1205 leaving a daughter Alice who married Andrew de la Bere. After 1205 Isabel
de Berkeley married William Waleraund.[33] Roger
IV de Berkeley died in 1191.
In 1196-7, Roger V de
Berkeley of Dursley, eldest son of Roger and Helen, paid 60 marks for the
marriage of Hawise, widow of John de Somery, and sister and heir of Gervase
Paynel. Roger had two brothers, Eustace and Oliver, as noted in a land deed of
c.1197-1209.[34]
A deed of 1220 records Letuaria, wife of the late Roger de Berkeley of Dursley
claiming her dower lands from Henry de Berkeley, her possible son.[35]
It is not clear if this is Roger the fifth or another Roger de Berkeley.
The later history of
Siston and its owners will form part of a future post.
=========================
End of post
========================
[1]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire (Bristol & Gloucestershire
Archaeological Society, 1889), p. 305
[2]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire (Bristol & Gloucestershire
Archaeological Society, 1889), p. 304
[3] W.J.
Robinson, West Country Churches
(Bristol, 1915), Vol. III, p. 155
[4]
W.J. Robinson, West Country Churches
(Bristol, 1915), Vol. III, p. 154
[5]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, pp. 192, 304-7; W.J. Robinson, West Country Churches (Bristol, 1915),
Vol. III, p. 154
[6]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, pp. 222, 304
[7]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, pp. 21, 190, 212, 268, 270, 297-8, 300,
302, 321-2
[8]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, p. 54
[9]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, p. 127
[10]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, p. 182
[11]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[12]
William Henry Jones (ed.), Domesday for
Wiltshire (Bath, 1865), p. 114
[13]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, pp. 222, 292, 304; Rev. E.W. Eyton
(ed.), Domesday Studies: an analysis and
digest of the Somerset survey and of the Somerset gheld inquest of A.D. 1084
(Reeves & Turner, London, 1880), Vol. 1, pp. 68, 102-3, Vol. 2, p. 13
[14]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, p. 104
[15]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. 1, p. 351, note d, Vol. II,
p. 124, note b
[16]
William Henry Jones (ed.), Domesday for
Wiltshire (Bath, 1865), p. 114, note 2; George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete Peerage (Alan Sutton,
Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[17]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[18]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[19]
Charles S. Taylor, An analysis of the
Domesday Survey of Gloucestershire, pp. 183, 297; Sidney J. Madge (ed.), Abstracts of inquisitions post mortem for
Gloucestershire, part IV, 1236-1300 (British Record Society, 1903), p. 27
[20]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[21]
Bridget Wells-Furby (ed.), A catalogue of
the medieval muniments at Berkeley Castle (2 vols. Bristol &
Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 2004), Vol. 1, p. xxii
[22]
Dom Aelred Watkin (ed.), The Great
Chartulary of Glastonbury, vol. 1 (Somerset Record Society, vol. 59, 1947),
no. 174
[24]
J.A. Bennett (ed.), Report on the
Manuscripts of Wells Cathedral (Historical Manuscripts Commission, 1885),
p. 52
[25] Thomas
Scott Holmes (ed.), The Register of Ralph
of Shrewsbury, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1329-1363 (Somerset Record Society,
vol. IX, 1896), pp. 218, 219
[26] Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Edward II, 1324-1327,
p. 325
[27] William
Hunt (ed.), Two chartularies of the
Priory of St. Peter at Bath (Somerset Record Society, vol. 7, 1893), part
2, no. 22
[28] Thomas
Scott Holmes (ed.), The Register of Ralph
of Shrewsbury, Bishop of Bath and Wells, pp. 223, 224, 226
[29]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124, note c
[30]
Bridget Wells-Furby (ed.), A catalogue of
the medieval muniments at Berkeley Castle, Vol. 1, pp. xxii, 281
[31]
George Edward Cokayne (ed.), The Complete
Peerage (Alan Sutton, Gloucester, 1987), Vol. II, p. 124
[32]
Bridget Wells-Furby (ed.), A catalogue of
the medieval muniments at Berkeley Castle, Vol. 1, p. xxii
[33]
Bridget Wells-Furby (ed.), A catalogue of
the medieval muniments at Berkeley Castle, Vol. 2, p. 865
[34]
Bridget Wells-Furby (ed.), A catalogue of
the medieval muniments at Berkeley Castle, Vol. 1, pp. xxiii, 293
[35]
C.R. Elrington (ed.), Abstracts of feet
of fines relating to Gloucestershire 1199-1299 (Bristol &
Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 2003), no. 82
