Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:39:10.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Knights, Esquires and the Origins of Social Gradation in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Peter Coss
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the abiding characteristics of the English gentry has been its system of social gradation. And yet the origins of this system have received relatively little attention from historians. Of course, we are well used to describing a local society of knights and esquires in the fourteenth century and of accommodating the addition of gentlemen, albeit with some hesitancy, in the fifteenth. Historians have highlighted the sumptuary legislation of 1363, which points to the gentility of the esquire, and the Statute of Additions of 1413 which gives legal recognition to the mere gentleman. We may understand that neither piece of legislation is to be taken entirely at face value. Nevertheless they are recognised to be significant markers in the evolution of a graded gentry.

Type
From Knighthood to Country Gentry, 1050–1400?
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 5 , December 1995 , pp. 155 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The most important recent study has been Saul, Nigel, Knights and Esquires: The Gloucestershire Gentry in the Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1981), ch. iGoogle Scholar.

2 K. Faulkner, ‘The Transformation of Knighthood in Early Thirteenth-Century England’, English Historical Review (forthcoming).

3 For the present state of knowledge on the subject see Coss, P. R., The Knight in Medieval England (Stroud, 1993), pp. 70–1, 82–5Google Scholar.

4 Ibid. p. 129.

5 For a recent summary of the French evidence see Crouch, David, The Image of Aristocracy in Britain, 1000–1300 (London and New York, 1992), p. 169–70Google Scholar. As he points out, English society ceased to be international, except at its highest levels, and this may help to explain the differences.

6 On this subject see, especially, Prestwich, Michael, War, Politics and Finance under Edward I (1972), ch. 3Google Scholar.

7 The sheriffs' returns are published in Parliamentary Writs, ed. Palgrave, F, 2 vols. in 4 (1827–1834), vol. ii, div. 2, pp. 288–90Google Scholar, drawing on BL MSS Harley 1192 fo. 8b and Cott. Claud. C.II fo. 56.

8 Government departments, for example, differed from one another in their employment of terminology to describe men-at-arms (Saul, , Knights and Esquires, p. 15Google Scholar).

9 See, for example, Parliamentary Writs, i, pp. 53–4; ii. 2, pp. 408, 501, 738.

10 See, in particular, Bennett, Matthew, ‘The Status of the Squire: the Northern Evidence’, in The Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood, i, ed. Harper-Bill, C. and Harvey, R. (Woodbridge, 1986), pp. 1–11Google Scholar.

11 The Early Records of Medieval Coventry, ed. Coss, P. R., British Academy Records of Social and Economic History, n.s., 11 (Oxford, 1986), p. 355Google Scholar.

12 See Barker, Juliet R. V., The Tournament in England, 1100–1400 (Woodbridge, 1986), pp. 57–60Google Scholar.

13 For armigeri and esquiers in households see Mertes, Kate, The English Noble Household (Oxford, 1988), p. 26Google Scholarand Household Accounts from Medieval England, ed. Woolgar, C. M., British Academy Records of Social and Economic History, n.s., 17–18 (Oxford, 1992–1993), part 2, no. 25Google Scholar. See also Denholm-Young, N., Seignorial Administration in England (Oxford, 1937), p. 25Google Scholar and Holmes, G. A., The Estates of the Higher Nobility in Fourteenth-Century England (Cambridge, 1957), pp. 58–9Google Scholar. According to Mertes, however, the word most often employed for honourable service in the household from around 1300 was generosus, meaning noble or gentle man.

14 For what follows I am indebted to Jean Birrell who is working on hunting and the royal forests. See, for example, ‘Who Poached the King's Deer?’, Midland History, vii (1982), pp. 9–25Google Scholar and ‘A Great Thirteenth-Century Hunter: John Giffard of Brimpsfield’, Medieval Prosopography (1994), pp. 37–66Google Scholar.

15 P.R.O. E32/76 m. 13 and E32/132 m. 16. Many such examples could be cited.

16 P.R.O. E32/30 m. 14.

17 Private Indentures For Life Service In Peace And War 1278–1476, ed. Jones, Michael and Walker, Simon, in Camden Society Miscellany xxxii, Camden Fifth Series volume 3 (Royal Historical Society, 1994), no. 4Google Scholar. The timely appearance of this volume, shortly after the presentation of the paper, has allowed me to be sparing in my citations. Unless otherwise indicated, the full text and references are to be found there.

18 Indentures For Life, no. 5. The text is in Denholm-Young, , Seignorial Administration, pp. 167–8Google Scholar.

19 Indentures For life, no. 11. For a recent discussion of the early indentures of retainer see also Bean, J. M. W., From Lord to Patron: Lordship in Late Medieval England (Manchester, 1989), ch.iiGoogle Scholar.

20 Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, pp. 540, 542, 545, 586.

21 Ibid. pp. 586–95. Original returns survive as PRO C47/1/9.

22 This is readily understandable, for in a sense all these were men-at-arms. On 24 June 1322 the sheriff of Northants. received a writ ordering him to send the names of the men-at-arms in his county via William la Zouch of Harringworth. He duly returned an undifferentiated list (Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, p. 596).

23 Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, p. 593.

24 For the Abberburys see Walker, Simon, ‘Sir Richard Abberbury (c. 1330–99) and His Kinsmen: the Rise and Fall of a Gentry Family’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 34 (1990), pp. 113–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Ralph des Préaux and his ancestors see VCH Oxfordshire, xi, p. 229.

25 Andrew de Hautot seems to have been the son of a knight. He was lord of West or Great Shenford which had been acquired by Sir Richard de Hautot in 1274. Richard de Coleshill, lord of Coleshill, was probably the grandson of a knight. The family had held Coleshill at fee farm of the abbess of Winchester since the late twelfth century. They were, in fact, something of a professional family, having produced sheriffs of several counties over generations. Aimery Feteplace, of North Denchworth and Padworth, was the son of a knight. Philip Feteplace had been MP in 1302. Peter le Botiler, of Basildon and elsewhere, was the younger son of a knight who had succeeded his brother in 1318. His brother, Thomas, had been MP for Gloucs. in 1305. Peter le Botiler himself was returned as MP for Berks, in 1325 but in loco militis. Richard de Coleshill and Peter le Botiler had recently succeeded to their estates and could have been considered as candidates for knighthood as much as the armigeri, if this had been the criterion for the higher status. For the family histories see VCH Berkshire, iii, pp. 415, 459; iv, pp. 239, 290; 519–20. See also the relevant entries in Moor, C., Knights of Edward I, i–iv (Harleian Society, vols. 80–84, 1929–1932)Google Scholar.

26 Philip's family had held at Englefield since die twelfth century. He had recently succeeded Roger de Englefield, MP in 1307 and 1312, who had been living in 1316 (VCH Berkshire, iii, pp. 405–6). Robert was the grandson of Sir Oliver Punchardon who had married one of the two heiresses to Stanford Bingley and had died in 1282. Robert had succeeded his father, another Oliver, only recently (VCH Berkshire, iv, pp. 111—2). Oliver Punchardon, junior, and Roger de Englefield had been summoned to military service by Edward I on a property qualification, but then so had Richard de Coleshill senior and Thomas le Botiler. See Parliamentary Writs, i, pp. 485, 544, 583, 795.

27 The Pluckenets had held at Chipping Lambourn since die twelfth century. William had succeeded his father in 1311 and had proved his age in 1319 (VCH Berkshire, iv, p. 253). They may have been related to the illustrious knight, Sir Alan Pluckenet, whose landholding stretched across seven counties. Peter de la Huse certainly had a wealdiier relative, in Sir John de la Huse. He had land in Hampshire as well as at Finchampstead in Berkshire where Peter's father and John had married the two heiresses, daughters of William Banister, by 1299. Peter had succeeded his father back in 1306 (VCH Berkshire, iii, pp. 243–4). See also the relevant entries in Moor, Knights of Edward I.

28 Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, pp. 656–7, where they are given solely, but incorrectly under Berks.

29 The writs and the sheriffs' returns are printed in Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, pp.636–657. The originals survive as PRO C47/1/10.

30 The sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, however, returned for both of his counties lists of armigeri ad arma and lists of other men-at-arms.

31 Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, p. 687.

32 Ibid. p. 689. For the hobelars see Morgan, Philip, War and Society in Medieval Cheshire 1277–1403 (Manchester, 1987), pp. 38–48Google Scholar.

33 Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, pp. 594–5.

34 John was lord of Wittlebury while Robert held a manor at Whissendine (VCH Rutland, ii, pp. 158, 160).

35 This, for example, was the sum Aymer de Valence contracted to provide for life for John Darcy from his manor of Gainsborough, Lines., in their indenture of 1309. See below p. 165. The other three named armigeri were Richard de Harington of Whissendine, who is said to be infirm and unable to work, John de Bussy, lord of Thistleton, and Bernard son of John de Bras of Exton. Richard de Harington was the son of Sir John de Harington, lord of Glaston, (VCH Rutland, ii, p. 183)Google Scholar. Also included in the sheriffs return, he was said to be over eighty.

36 They are Edmund de Passelewe, the royal justice who was lord of Empingham, and two barons of parliament, John la Ware, lord of Woodhead and Great Chasterton, and John de Crombwell, lord of Essendine. The latter, the sheriff tells us, was serving in the royal retinue. Ralph Basset, Edmund de Passelewe and John la Ware were all summoned to the Great Council from Rutland as knights in 1324 (Parliamentary Writs, ii. 2, p. 649).

37 Brice held the manor of Tickencote, (VCH Rutland, ii, p. 276)Google Scholar.

38 Thomas is said to hold around £10 land in Ketton. His father had died in 1316 and his wardship was eventually sold to Bishop Roger de Northburgh who married him to Alice, daughter of Roger de Sulgrave of Helpston, Northants. Thomas, obtained seisin, in fact, in 1322 (VCH Rutland, ii, p. 256)Google Scholar.

39 Richard is said to have around £15 land in Seaton and to be in the retinue of Sir John de Segrave. He had succeeded his father William, by the summer of 1321 (VCH Rutland, ii, p. 215)Google Scholar. The others without designation were: Walter de Yarmouth, said to hold £10 land in Cottesmore and to be in the retinue of Bernard de Bras (lord of Exton); John Hacluyt, said to be in the royal retinue, who held the manors of Braunston and Leighfield in Oakham and was keeper of the forest of Rutland, (VCH Rutland, i, p. 254, ii, pp. 16, 33)Google Scholar; and John de Boyvill who held the manor of Ayston, (VCH Rutland, ii, p. 59)Google Scholar.

40 The problem is compounded by the translation of valet as yeoman in calendars and the tendency for historians to follow suit.

41 Indentures For Life, no.7.

42 Indentures For Life, no. 15. See also no. 17.

43 The Darcy situation does not appear to have been in any way unusual. Sir Bartholomew de Enfield who contracted with the earl of Hereford in 1307, had made a previous agreement with him before he became a knight and by which he received a life-interest in an estate. See Bean, , From Lord to Patron, p. 67 note 14Google Scholar, citing CPR 1292–1301, p. 84.

44 Printed in Holmes, , Estates of the Higher Nobility, pp. 140–1Google Scholar.

45 Indentures For Life, no. 19.

46 Indentures For Life, no. 29.

47 Baldwin, J. F., ‘The Household Administration of Henry Lacy and Thomas of Lancaster’, EHR, xlii (1927), pp. 198–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Homes, , Estates of the Higher Mobility, p.71Google Scholar; Maddicott, J. R., Thomas of Lancaster 1307–22: A Study in the Reign of Edward II (Oxford, 1970), pp. 14, 21Google Scholar.

49 Indentures For Life, no.35.

50 Indentures For Life, no. 30. See also Prestwich, M. C., ‘An Indenture between Ralph, lord Basset of Drayton, and Philip de Chetwynd, 4 March 1319’, Stafford Historical and Civic Society, Transactions (1971–1973), pp. 18–21Google Scholar. I am most grateful to Professor Prestwich for supplying me with a copy of this publication.

51 Indentures For Life, no. 29.

52 Indentures For life, no. 4.

53 Indentures For life, no. 33.

54 For a letter of receipt by de Merdesfen, Roger, valletus of de Valence, Aymer, dated 7 06 1303Google Scholar, see PRO E213/13. I owe this reference to the kindness of Mr Adrian Ailes.

55 Crouch, , The Image of Aristocracy in Britain, pp. 164–6Google Scholar.

56 See, for example, Jacob, E. F., Studies in the Period of Baronial Reform and Relellion, 1258–67, Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History, viii (Oxford, 1925), pp. 127–8Google Scholar, citing CPR 1266–72, pp 146–7.

57 Crown Pleas of the Wiltshire Eyre, ed. Meekings, C. A. F., Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, xvi (Devizes, 1961), pp. 31, 38–9Google Scholar, Cam, Helen, Liberties and Communities in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1944), p. 239Google Scholar.

58 Indentures For Life, no. 31. The text is in Holmes, , Estates of the Higher Nobility, pp. 122–3Google Scholar.

59 Indentures For Life, nos. 24, 27.

60 Indentures For Life, no. 32.

61 See, for example, Prestwich, M. C., ‘Cavalry Service in Early Fourteenth-Century England’, in War and Government in the Middle Ages: Essays in Honour of J. 0. Prestwkh, ed. Gillingham, J. and Holt, J. C. (Bury St Edmunds, 1984), pp. 156–7Google Scholar.

62 Denholm-Young, N., Country Gentry in the Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1969), p. 5Google Scholar.

63 See Saul, , Knights and Esquires, pp. 20–3Google Scholar.

64 Thomas was living in 1408 and the date of the brass is thought to be c. 1410. See Lack, W., Stuchfield, M. and Whittemore, Philip, The Monumental Brasses of Berkshire, Monumental Brass Society (1993), p. 86Google Scholar. See also VCH Berkshire, iv, p. 235.

65 PRO E179/192/23 & 24. I am most grateful to Professor R. H. Hilton for the loan of his transcript.

66 For the Bishopstons see VCH Wanvicks., iii, 261; iv, 223, and v, 80. Heads of this family had enjoyed knighthood from the early thirteenth century through to the time of Sir John, who was living in 1337. Whether Thomas himself became a knight is unclear. The line ended with Sir William who died in 1447.

67 They are: Edmund Compton of Stratford, Philip de Aylesbury [D(a)lusb(ur)y] of Lapworth, John Fulwode of Tanworth, Richard Kynton of Compton Wynyates, Richard Gay of Halford, John Bretford of Rugby and Thomas de Clifton of Stretton under Fosse. The preamble's statement that the esquires at this level were without land or rents should not be taken literally. Men who were presumably the forebears of Richard Gay and John Bretford contributed to the 1332 subsidy at Halford and Rugby respectively. The Fulwodes held a manor in Tanworth (see below), while Philip of Aylesbury was a member of the family who held a manor at Lapworth and may have been its head who bore that name (VCH Wanvicks., v, p. 110). The status of these men can hardly have been very different from that of the men who follow.

68 The sum paid by Robert Turvill is lost, but it was most probably 6s 8d.

69 This is almost certainly the man later known as John de Langley of Atherstone-upon-Stour. He was the grandson of Sir Edmund de Langley, and the head of a family no longer knight-producing and now in straightened circumstances. See Coss, P. R., The Langley Family and its Cartulary: A Study in late medieval ‘Gentry’, Dugdale Society Occasional Papers, 22 (1974), pp. 19–20Google Scholar.

70 His ancestor, William de Castello, had succeeded the knight Nicholas fitz Nicholas at Withybrook but had respite of knighthood himself in 1256 (Coss, P. R., Lordship, Knighthood and Locality: A Study in English Society c. 1180–c. 1280 (Cambridge, 1991), p. 263Google Scholar; VCH Wanvicks., vi, pp. 265–6. A later Sir William de Chastel appears on the Parliamentary Roll of Arms bearing goules a ii banes e un quarter en lun quarter un chastel de sable.

71 John de Clopton of Clopton in Stratford upon Avon was the son of Walter de Clopton, himself the son of Walter de Cockfield who had acquired the manor from the eponymous Cloptons. He may have been related to them, although the families bore different arms. Robert de Clopton had been a knight in the early 13th century, but the family (with a small manor) had ceased to be knight-bearing (VCH Wanvicks., iii, p. 262; Coss, , Lordship, Knighthood and Locality, pp. 236, 258Google Scholar).

72 This branch of the Turvill family, which had held at Wolston since 1240, was about to become extinct. Sir Richard de Turvill, who was described as of Wolston in 1309, may have been its only knight. In 1314 he was discharged of the office of coroner as infirm (VCH Wanvicks., vi, p. 275). According to the Parliamentary Roll of Arms he bore goules a iii cheverons de veer, while Sir Nicholas de Turvill of Pailton bore goules a ii cheverons de veer,

73 VCH Warvicks., vi, p. 158.

74 Coss, , Early Records of Medieval Coventry, pp. xl, xliiGoogle Scholar; Pelham, R. A., ‘The Early Wool Trade in Warwickshire and the Rise of the Merchant Middle Class’, Transactions of the Birmingham Archaeological Society, lxiii (1944), pp. 53–4Google Scholar; VCH Warwicks., vi, pp. 188–9.

75 His father was John de Hull of Flecknoe, two miles north of Catesby, which name he seems to have assumed. The family's rise was through the usual means of good marriage, legal training and administration. See Post, J. B., ‘Courts, councils and arbitrators in the Ladbroke Manor dispute, 1382–1400’, in Medieval Legal Records, ed. Hunnisett, R. F. and Post, J. B. (1978), pp. 290–1Google Scholar, and Alcock, N. W., ‘The Catesbys in Coventry: A Medieval Estate and its Archives’, Midland History, xv (1990), pp. 1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar. William, acquired his manor at Shuckburgh in 1353 (VCH Warwicks., vi, p. 217)Google Scholar.

76 He acquired property at Wootton Wawen through marriage, and was succeeded by his son whose effigy is in the church there. According to Dugdale, Roger was the brother of Harewell, John, bishop of Bath and Wells (VCH Warwicks., iii, p. 198Google Scholar;SirDugdale, William, The Antiquities of Warwickshire (1656Google Scholar), rev. W. Thomas (1730), ii, p. 809).

77 Clifford is Ruin Clifford near Stratford, but Henry's ancestry is obscure. He sealed heraldically in 1383 (Gregory Hood Deeds, Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, no. 479). His seal carried a saltire with a border engrailed.

78 Occasionally, the tax returns lapse into the vernacular so that Thomas Rich is described not as armiger but as squier. Similarly we find Thomas of Bishopston and John of Clopton.

79 Indentures Far life, no. 36.

80 Holmes, , Estates of the Higher Nobility, p. 58Google Scholar. See also ibid. pp. 68–70 for other examples from the Bohun estates.

81 Register of Edward the Black Prince, ed. Davies, M. C. B., 4 vols. (1930–1933) iii, pp. 475–6Google Scholar. See also Bean, , From Lord to Patron, p. 60Google Scholar.

82 Indentures For Life, no. 41. See also Register of the Black Prince, iv, p. 91, for Sir Edmund de Manchester who was similarly retained with an esquire two years before.

83 Indentures For Life, nos. 49, 51.

84 Indentures For Life, nos. 53, 62.

85 See the list in Bean, From Lord to Patron, appendix iii.

86 John of Gaunt's Register, 1372–6, 2 vols., Camden Society 3rd series, xx–xxi (1911), i, p. 35Google Scholar.

87 Ibid. i, pp. 31–5.

88 It was already travelling downwards, socially. See, for example, Saul, , Knights and Esquires, pp. 16–20Google Scholar.

89 Harvey, P. D. A., ‘Personal Seals in Thirteenth-Century England’, in Church and Chronicle in the Middle Ages: Essays presented to John Taylor, ed. Wood, Ian and Loud, G. A. (1991), pp. 117–127Google Scholar; Harvey, P. D. A. and McGuinness, A. F., A Guide To British Medieval Seals (1995)Google Scholar.

90 See Saul, , Knights and Esquires, pp. 20–22Google Scholar.

91 Calendar of Baddesley Clinton MSS, Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, nos. 11, 17. Two slightly later deeds, of 1318 and 1322, show him to have been lord of Baddesley Clinton. He died in 1323.

92 Gregory Hood Deeds, Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, no. 342.

93 For the Archers and for the history of the various manors in Tanworth see VCH Warwicks., v, pp. 168–71 and Dugdale, , Antiquities of Warwickshire, pp. 780–4Google Scholar.

94 Archer Deeds, Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, no. 416.

95 Archer Deeds no. 455. It carries the legend: FRATER THOM-E —CHER. The seal was Thomas's personal seal and not the seal of the order. On this point see King, E. J., The Seals of the Knights of St John of Jerusalem (1932), pp. 63, 99, 106–8Google Scholar and plates xvii and xviii. For the confused state of the order during his time as prior see The Knights Hospitallers in England, being the report of Prior Philip de Thome to the Grand Master Ely an de Villanova for A.D. 1338, ed. Larking, L. B. with an historical introduction by Kemble, J. M. (Camden Society, Old Series no. 65, 1857), pp. lvii, 215Google Scholar. By 1328 he had ceased to be prior. He died 28 Aug. 1329. Two other Archers, John le Archer senior and John le Archer junior, were preceptors of the order in 1338 (ibid., pp. n, 65, 208). I am most grateful to Dr. Anthony Luttrell for his help on these points.

96 These arms reappear in 1392 when Thomas le Archer granted his manors to four feoffees. The seal carries three arrows pointing downwards on a shield and bears the legend SIGILLUM TOME DE … CHER (Archer Deeds, no. 800). Meanwhile he, or an earlier Thomas, had sealed heraldically on four occasions between 1366 and 1385 but with borrowed arms (Archer Deeds, nos. 709, 734, 751, 772). However, another member of the family, Simon le Archer, who belonged to a collateral line, had sealed with a complex heraldic (or quasi-heraldic) device in 1328 and 1340: a lion rampant debruised by a shield with a martlet in chief, three scallops in fess and three arrowheads pointing down in base (Archer Deeds, nos. 462, 452). The seal was his own. John le Archer's widow, Margery le Tracy, had sealed in 1325 with three crosses on a fess between a bird and three arrowheads, the latter presumably reflecting her husband's arms (Archer Deeds, no. 452).

97 Archer Deeds, nos. 42, 47, 251, 283.

98 Archer Deeds, no. 268.

99 Archer Deeds, no. 659.

100 Archer Deeds, no. 557. The Crewenhale seal was also used by Robert de Bentforde of Tanworth in 1365 (Archer Deeds, no. 703).

101 Archer Deeds, no.704. We find him using the device again in 1383 and 1395; in the former case the legend once again says the seal is his. In these last cases, however, there are three crescents not two (Archer Deeds, no. 765, 811). Thomas le Archer had on one occasion used the Sidenhale seal.

102 According to Dugdale the Sidenhale manor passed to them by marriage in 1330, but this is clearly in error. John de Fulwode had license for a private oratory in 1395 and the family did well in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

103 Archer Deeds, nos. 706, 718, 720.

104 Archer Deeds, nos. 764, 823. A crusily is a variety of field semé, that is powdered with charges; in this case with crosslets.

105 One is an agreement between Robert de Fulwode, perpetual vicar of Tanworth and Simon son of Robert de Fulwode and his wife, while the other involves Ranulph son of Robert de Fulwode (Archer Deeds, nos. 635, 662). John's father, however, appears to have been William de Fulwode who had used a variety of non-heraldic devices during the 1340s, and possibly earlier (Archer Deeds, nos. 475, 516, 602, 603). The pedigree is unclear.

106 According to Dugdale, Thomas was an esquire of the earl of Warwick, at this time (Antiquities of Warwickshire, p. 780)Google Scholar. He may well be the man who is called Thomas Rich in the 1379 poll tax returns.

107 On this point and on the general question of territoriality see my recent essay, ‘The Formation of the English Gentry’, Past and Present, no. 147 (May, 1995).

108 See Coss, , The Knight in Medieval England, pp. 153–8Google Scholar and the essays cited there.

109 See Norris, M., Monumental Brasses: The Memorials, 2vols. (1977), i, pp. 55, 58 and iiGoogle Scholar, figure 67, and the same author's Monumental Brasses: The Craft (1978), figure 60.

109 See Kemp, Brian, ‘English Church Monuments during the Period of the Hundred Years War’, in Arms, Armies and Fortifications in the Hundred Years War, ed. Curry, Anne and Hughes, Michael (Woodbridge, 1994), p. 200 and plate xxxiGoogle Scholar. For the inscription see Dugdale, , Antiquities of Warwickshire, p. 987Google Scholar. I am extremely grateful to Professor Kemp for his advice and for saving me from error in these matters.

111 For recent confirmations of this, see Acheson, Eric, A Gentry Community: Leicestershire in the Fifteenth-Century c. 1422–c. 1485 (Cambridge, 1992), p. 34CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Carpenter, Christine, Lordship and Polity: A Study of Warwickshire Landed Society, 1401–1499 (Cambridge, 1992), p. 44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

112 Ibid., p. 48.

113 Archer Deeds, no. 802.