The manor at Haddenham, 1088 AD
William II grants the manor at Haddenham, held by Archbishop Lanfranc, to the church of St Andrew, Rochester, and its monastic community; 213r, Lanfranc sanctions this grant, 1088.1 Transcription and translation from Latin of Textus Roffensis, ff. 212r-213r by Jacob Scott. Edited with additional notes by Dr Christopher Monk.
Introduction
Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury (r. 1070-1089), held the manor of Haddenham in Buckinghamshire when King William I (r. 1066-1087),2 the father of King William II (r. 1087-1100),3 granted it to him around the time Lanfranc became archbishop. Haddenham is recorded in Domesday Book as held by Lanfranc in 1086.4
Subsequent to this, Lanfranc granted Haddenham for the living of the monks of St Andrew’s Priory (see Sharpe, p. 364). William II confirmed the grant to the Rochester monks in the summer of 1088 (Sharpe, p. 365); this is the charter transcribed and translated below. Haddenham was the most valuable manor held by the monks.
The witness list of the charter is, as Richard Sharpe points out, quite remarkable. Written in the Norman style, it begins with the king and Lanfranc and includes Thomas, archbishop of York (r. 1070-1100); five other bishops;5 an abbot;6 the king’s brother Henry (the future Henry I);7 Philip, son of the Count of Flanders;8 Alan, Count of Rennes;9 three earls;10 and seven other important laymen (Sharpe, p. 365).11
This charter relates directly to the narrative record on folios 173r-174v of Textus Roffensis, which is a re-telling by one of the monks of St Andrew’s Priory of the background story that led to William II’s grant. In short, Lanfranc requested, along with Bishop Gundulf of Rochester, that the new king confirm Lanfranc’s gift to the monks and, moreover, that he change the terms of his father’s original grant. The original had only allowed for Haddenham to be held by Lanfranc whilst the archbishop was alive. Now it was to become a perpetual grant, meaning the monks would hold Haddenham forever. The king agreed, but in return Gundulf had to build for him a new stone castle at Rochester.
You can read a fuller account of this along with the transcription and translation of the Haddenham narrative here .
Lanfranc’s sanction document, 123r
This document was appended to William II’s grant of Haddenham on a replacement folio. It is not in the hand of the principal Textus scribe, though it is quite similar and of the same period. Replacing the original folio also meant that the second half of the witness list had to be recopied.
The replacement of the folio may initially rouse suspicion, but it seems quite likely that there was nothing more iniquitous than an initial oversight on the part of the principal scribe, or that his exemplar at the time did not include Lanfranc’s sanction. Once its omission was evident, therefore, it made complete sense to incorporate it, even if that did mean replacing a page.
Even though other surviving acts of William II do not have sanctions like this, there is nothing inherently controversial in its contents. Moreover, as Sharpe points out, Lanfranc’s sanction of the king’s confirmation may be authenticated by comparison with the equally unique confirmation of Henry I for Rochester with its sanctions by both Archbishop Anselm and Gundulf. The latter survives as an original, complete with seals of the king, the archbishop, and the bishop (Sharpe, p. 365, note 5). As Sharpe observes, we may conjecture that the original act of William II likewise bore the seals of both king and archbishop (Sharpe, p. 365).
Anathema and grammar
Charters quite often contain an anathema, a warning of the consequences to one who contravenes the charter’s directives. Though William II’s grant does not include such, Lanfranc’s sanction does. In the anathema he not only declares that the judgement of the traitor Judas shall befall any who flout the king’s grant, but that he will personally excommunicate them.
At this point, the future perfect tense is used for the series of verbs relating to all those who may in the future take away or attempt to take away the manor of Haddenham from the church of St Andrew, Rochester, and who may receive and retain it. The future perfect tense is used in charters and deeds to describe a time in the future when the document will be read.12 By contrast, Lanfranc’s statement concerning his excommunicating of such theoretical persons is in the present tense. This juxtaposition of different tenses conveys the idea that Lanfranc’s illustrious spiritual presence would continue even after his death. He would, in effect, be still present to excommunicate the offenders!
Transcription
212r (select folio number to open facsimile)
De Hedenham; VVILLELMVS rex anglorum, archiepiscopis,
episcopis, abbatibus, comitibus, cęterisque
omnibus baronibus suis regni anglorum
salutem. Notum uobis omnibus esse uolo, quod
ego uuillelmus dei gratia rex anglorum filius
uuillelmi regis anglorum concedo ęcclesię
rofensi sancti andreę apostoli ad uictum mona-
chorum manerium quod uocatur hedenham
quod situm est in comitatu de bokingeham
quod tenuit lanfrancus archiepiscopus de patre
meo et de me, quod donat eidem rofensi ęc-
clesię pro salute animę patris mei et ma-
tris meae, et pro salute animae meae et animae
suę. Et ideo eius rogatu et amore hoc do-
num suum praedictę ęcclesię concedo et regali
auctoritate propria manu confirmo, ita
quiete tenendum iure perpetuo, sicut praedi-
ctus archiepiscopus de patre meo et de me illud
quiete tenuit usque in pręsentem diem.
+ Signum Willelmi regis anglorum. + Signum
lanfranci cantuariensis archiepiscopi. + Signum
thomę eboracensis archiepiscopi. + Signum Re-
migii lincoliensis episcopi. + Signum Walcelini
uuentoniensis episcopi. + Signum mauricii lun-
doniensis episcopi. + Signum osmundi serberien-
sis episcopi. + Signum Rodberti herefordensis episcopi.
+ Signum Baldeuuini abbatis sancti eadmundi.
+ Signum henrici fratris regis. + Signum philip-
pi filii rodberti comitis flandrię. + Signum
Alani comitis. + Signum hugonis comi-
tis. + Signum heinrici comitis. +
Signum Willelmi comitis. + Signum
eudonis dapifer. + Signum Rogerii bi-
gotis. + Signum Goffridi de magna
uilla. + Signum Rodberta filii haimo-
nis. + Signum hugonis de monte for-
ti. + Signum Gisleberta de tonebrig-
ge. + Signum hugonis de bello cam-
po. +; Confirmatio Lanfranci archiepiscopi. Ego Lanfrancus non meis meritis sed
gratia dei archiepiscopus, hoc donum
meum quod regia auctoritate confir-
matum est confirmo, et auctoritate
dei omnipotentis et omnium sanctorum
excommunico omnes illos qui prędictum
manerium de prędicta ęcclesia uel abstule-
rint, uel auferre temptauerint, uel abla-
tum ab aliis cognita ueritate receperint
uel retinuerint. Ęterna pęna cum
iuda proditore sit eis, nisi ad satisfacti-
onem uenerint.
Translation
Concerning Haddenham:
William, King of the English, to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and all the rest of his barons of the kingdom of the English. Greetings. I want it to be known to you all that I, William, by God’s grace, King of the English, son of William, King of the English, do grant to the church of Saint Andrew the Apostle, Rochester, for the living of the monks, the manor which is called Haddenham, which is situated in the county of Buckingham, which is held by Lanfranc, the archbishop of both my father and me, and which he now gives to the same church of Rochester for the salvation of the souls of my father and my mother, and for the salvation of my soul and his soul. And therefore, at his request and through love, this gift of his to the aforesaid church I grant, and with royal authority by means of my own hand I confirm it, thus to be held peacefully by right forever, just as the aforesaid archbishop of my father and of me has peacefully held it to this present day.
+ The sign of William, King of the English.
+ The sign of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury.
+ The sign of Thomas, Archbishop of York.
+ The sign of Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln.
The sign of Walkelin, Bishop of Winchester.
+ The sign of Maurice, Bishop of London.
The sign of Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury.
+ The sign of Robert, Bishop of Hereford.
+ The sign of Baldwin, Abbot of Saint Edmunds,
+ The sign of Henry, brother of the king.
+ The sign of Phillip, brother of Robert, Count of Flanders.
+ The sign of Count Alan.
+ The sign of Earl Hugh.
+ The sign of Earl Henry.
+ The sign of Earl William.
+ The sign of Eudo Dapifer.
+ The sign of Roger Bigod.
+ The sign of Geoffrey de Magnaville.
+ The sign of Robert fitz Haimo.
+ The sign of Hugh de Montfort.
+ The sign of Gilbert of Tonbridge
The sign of Hugh de Beauchamp.
+ [and others].
The confirmation of Archbishop Lanfranc: I, Lanfranc, not by my own merits but by the grace of God, Archbishop; this gift of mine, which was by royal authority confirmed, I confirm; and by the authority of God Almighty and all the saints I excommunicate all those who will have either taken away13 the aforesaid manor from the aforesaid church or attempted to take it away, or received what was taken away and, knowing the truth, retained it. Eternal punishment with Judas the traitor is for them, unless to repentance they come. Sharpe, Richard, ‘Doing Business with William Rufus: The Haddenham Narrative’, in Textus Roffensis: Law, Language, and Libraries in Early Medieval England, ed. Bruce O’Brien and Barbara Bombi (Brepols, 2015). Use your browsers 'back' button to jump back to the text. 1 Our grateful thanks to Elise Fleming for proofreading the English text; any mistakes remain our own.
2 Aka ‘the Conqueror’.
3 Aka William Rufus.
4 See Haddenham | Domesday Book (opendomesday.org)
5 These five are Remigius de Fécamp, bishop of Lincoln (r. 1067-1092); Walkelin, bishop of Winchester (r. 1070-1098); Maurice, bishop of London (r. 1085-1107); Osmund, bishop of Salisbury (r. 1078-1099); and Robert, bishop of Hereford (r. before 1079-1095).
6 Baldwin, abbot of St Edmunds (1065-1097/98).
7 Henry I, r.1100-1135.
8 Evidently, Philip of Loo, son of Robert the Frisian, Count of Flanders from 1071 to 1093.
9 Alan II, Count of Rennes (r. 1084-1112), also known as Alan Fergant; he was also Alan IV, Duke of Brittany (r.1072-1112).
10 These three are Hugh d’Avranches, Earl of Chester from 1071 to 1101; Henry de Beaumont, 1st Earl of Warwick from 1088 to 1102, and who is recorded as one of the two negotiators of the king in the Haddenham narrative document (see below); and William de Warenne, 2nd Earl of Surrey from 1088 to 1101 and 1103-1138. It seems unlikely that William de Warenne, 1st Earl of Surrey is meant, as he was mortally wounded in the Easter of 1088, though he evidently did not die until 24 June 1088 (see Sharpe, pp. 375-76).
11 These seven are Eudo Dapifer (d. 1120); Roger Bigod of Norfolk (d. 1107); Geoffrey de Magnaville, aka Geoffrey de Mandeville (d. c.1100), constable of the Tower of London; Robert fitz Haimo, or Fitzhamon (d. 1107), one of the king’s negotiators in the Haddenham narrative document (see below); Hugh de Montfort (d. c.1088); Gilbert of Tunbridge, aka Gilbert de Clare (d. c.1115); and Hugh de Beauchamp (d. after 1101), the sheriff of Buckinghamshire.
12 See The National Archives online: Lesson 4 - Future perfect tense - Latin (nationalarchives.gov.uk) [accessed 25 August 2022].
13 ‘will have either taken away’, translating ‘uel abstulerint’ of the following lines.
Cited work
Footnotes