Posts : 409
Join date : 2011-06-10
|Subject: Herefordshire, and Gloucestershire Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:59 pm|| |
In 1086, the Domesday Survey documents that while the majority of Urse's lands were in Worcestershire, he also held land in Warwickshire, Herefordshire, and Gloucestershire. His lands in Warwickshire were held directly from the king, as a tenant-in-chief, while others were held as an under-tenant of others who had their lands directly from the king. Urse's lands in Herefordshire likewise were held as a mixture of tenant-in-chief and sub-tenant, as was also the case in Gloucester. Of the lands that Urse held in Worcestershire, he held them both directly from the king and from the Bishop of Worcester. Domesday also records that the revenue that Urse was responsible for as sheriff was £128 and 4 shillings from Worcestershire. This was just the amount due for the royal estates in Worcester, as Urse was also responsible for payments of £23 and 5 shillings for the royal lands in the Borough of Worcester, £17 as profits on the shire and hundred courts with an additional £16 or a hunting hawk, specifically a "Norway hawk"; also due from the courts. Urse also had to pay the queen £5 plus £1 additional for a "sumpter horse". All of these payments were guaranteed by Urse, who had to make up any shortfall.
Domesday makes it obvious that Urse was the most powerful layman in Worcester, and the only person who could contest his power in the county was the Bishop of Worcester. The power struggle continued into the 12th century, as Urse's descendants still contested the bishops. Only one other layman is recorded as having a castle in Worcestershire in Domesday, and he held much less land than Urse.kebaya modernlysspejle